Is CM Punk too small?

[CmPunker]

I'm actually with dman1373 on this one. The comparison is relevant because if a smaller fighter can succeed in a legit fight, then it follows that a smaller fighter can succeed in a phony one. I fail to see the issue in making that comparison. Sure, wrestling isn't a real sport, but that makes it all the more likely that a smaller guy can beat much larger opponents.

and you cant use the perception of fighting skills in wrestling to be credible? I actually think wrestling can have a wider range of sizes than mma because of wrestlers being able to be run more, use top rope, rope breaks, and closed fists being illegal.

Cm Punk does not have the in ring skills or athleticism to make himself credible against bigger guys like Ryback.. he doesn't even do that many high flying moves, and it seems that the announcers always note his "strength" against fighting bigger guys instead of his technique and speed.. it just seems out of place when he performs the GTS on them. and his kicks are not well executed, neither are his punches. i don't see how cm punk's moveset would be able to take down someone like brock lesnar.

There is not a single main eventer that has the physique of cm punk's.. he is just sooo lightweight and fat at the same time. at least shawn michaels had some muscles and looked like he lifted. cm punk has actually been losing weight for the past few years, i don't know if i am the only one who noticed this.

Look at cm punk vs john laurinitis ( had a hard time taking punk seriously against LAURINITIS,, fucking LAURINITIS man!)

Cm Punk against ryback :

Cm Punk body fat :

 

[CmPunker]

No, I don't think CM Punk is too small. All that matters is that when he gets into the ring, does he make you believe he can stand toe to toe with the biggest and the baddest of the wrestling world? To me, every time I watch him, I truly believe he does. Not to say that I found all of his feuds enjoyable, i.e. the angle with Ryback I wasn't really sold on. But he did a great job as a heel outfoxing and outwitting him, again that's the heel's prerogative and Punk excelled with that. As a face, he was a very compelling underdog, his feud with JBL after winning his first World Title in 2008 showed just that. He's also held his own and done very well in his feuds with John Cena, Punk has a moveset and a heart whether as a fan favorite or rulebreaker that makes him a compelling character. Therefore, you can just throw size factor out the window.

After all, Shawn Michaels did an EXCELLENT job showcasing that quality in the mid-late 90s when he took on the likes of Vader, Undertaker, Sid, Diesel, Mankind and so on. Bret Hart did the same thing as well, his list of opponents such as Bam Bam Bigelow, Scott Hall, The Undertaker, and Diesel also show that like Shawn Michaels he excelled in David Vs Goliath battles. Therefore, in the event that Punk and Brock Lesnar ever do feud, I can very well see Punk utilizing those same attributes when it come to wrestling other behemoths in years past. Again, this is professional wrestling, there's always a storyline way to have Punk be able to overcome the insurmountable odds that would be placed against him in a match against Lesnar.

At the end of the day, I think that's the one thing we fans in the IWC as a whole tend to forget, that it doesn't always matter how big or small someone is, I will admit the bigger guys still make up a good segment of what WWE offers in the way of characters though. But if a character is compelling enough to make you believe in them, like a CM Punk has shown time and again, then the issue of size will not be relevant.

Seriously kid, did you not read my post about the comparison between Shawn Michaels and Cm Punk? HUGE difference between their physiques. Shawn michaels had muscles and definition.. cm punk doesn't.. hes all flabby and fat.

In addition, shawn michaels finisher can be hit out of nowhere and it won't matter what size they are.. its also super fast and well executed.. can't say the same for punk though.

Shawn michaels :

Cm Punk :

 

[Canadas Greatest]

Oh yes I'm glad someone else notices the differences in their bodies!!! CM Punk definitely does not have the body that Shawn has. Shawn's body just goes on for days and days with all that muscle definition. I don't know if he's smaller than Punk because Shawn's tights don't really show as much as Punk's do. You can tell Punk is adequate. I assume Shawn must be adequate if he had Vince's attention though. Vince only goes for real studs. Shawn is the real sexy boy for sure.

 

[One to Remember]

There are two reasons why this argument is completely irrelevant

1. If wwe wanted a realistic or even semi realistic showing of size every 99% of big show and henerys opponents would be hospitalized after one or two punches.

No... The Giant maybe, or the Big Show circa '99.. Henry maybe in 1998. There speed is so reduced to the point that it would hurt them in everything from a street fight to MMA. In a collegiate bout neither would probably be able to make it off the ground.. Show's punches are moot when they dont connect or arent likely too.. Someone like Kane, Swagger, or Ryback or Batista would do a lot more damage a few inches shorter and a few pounds lighter because they are in proportion and could be classified as stout..

2. Ok so he might not look strong but the likes of punk, bryan, jericho, micheals are some of the best workers in and out of the ring. It would just limit the amount of people they could use and wwe has the power to make or break anyone.

i think each of those men have 25 pounds on Punk..
The issue is a non issue if the big guys arent prominent enough to call attention to the fact that they arent champions even though they are bigger then most of the roster. Punk's issue would be a non issue if all of his opponents were the wrestlers you listed above. Punk's issue is a non issue when he isn't allowed to have a streak in which he runs over a bunch of big guys.. Punk has been givin that.. that is the point of contention here..

On a side now more then ever its not an issue because the wwe talent is as thin as all fuck, they need stars and cm punk along with cena are the only two big ones working full time, rybacks/sheamus/ del rio/ swags are pretty meh others like orton/bryan/ziggles have potential if used right but atm aren't much to sing about. So as they say beggars cant be chooses if you a top star at his point he's good regardless of size.

It doesn't matter if he's working full time when hes fed to publicity ****es on a PART TIME schedule.. Ryback has Goldberg appeal and a great aesthetic, del Rio can be a great heel if WWE has the balls to go with the anti Mexico angle, Sheamus is goofy af and an ethnic stereotype/cliche yet i still take him seriously for some reason. If Orton can stay heel and Bryan can continue to assert his independence and lack of shame in his indy rep.. WWE wouldnt collapse and we wouldn't leave over the roster just being the likes of them so how in the name of God are we beggers? I can hear you saying all of this in a Dora the Explorer voice also..

 

[One to Remember]

Seriously kid, did you not read my post about the comparison between Shawn Michaels and Cm Punk? HUGE difference between their physiques. Shawn michaels had muscles and definition.. cm punk doesn't.. hes all flabby and fat.

In addition, shawn michaels finisher can be hit out of nowhere and it won't matter what size they are.. its also super fast and well executed.. can't say the same for punk though.

Shawn michaels :

Cm Punk :

those are some great photos to compare and contrast but which one of the two is taller and who weighs more? Google says HBK is 6'1 and 225 while CM is 6'2 and 218. If CM Punk is 6'2 hes going to have to put on more weight just to be average as opposed to someone who is 5'9.. CM Punk should be able to get 235 or 240 and not look pudgy.

 

[CmPunker]

those are some great photos to compare and contrast but which one of the two is taller and who weighs more? Google says HBK is 6'1 and 225 while CM is 6'2 and 218. If CM Punk is 6'2 hes going to have to put on more weight just to be average as opposed to someone who is 5'9.. CM Punk should be able to get 235 or 240 and not look pudgy.

Cm punk is not 6 foot 2.. he is 6 foot 1 at most. John cena is 6 foot 1 and cm punk is at least half an inch shorter than him. so i would say cm punk is 6 foot and a half and shawn michaels is probably the same height as punk.

 

[One to Remember]

put them into google and see the stats provided by google. eitherway 235-40 is appropriate..

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I think we're long past the point in wrestling in which size is a huge determining factor in qualities that make a wrestler a main event level star. With so many of the best workers in wrestling that've been produced over the last decade or so being well under 250 lbs, certain attitudes towards size have had to change.

As far as Carlito's comments go...well...Carlito doesn't exactly look like he's a physical master of the universe himself. Last time I saw him, he was a somewhat pudgy 220 pounds; so I can't exactly see how his physical stature is any greater than that of guys like Ambrose, Rollins or Punk. Yet, if I remember correctly, Carlito has said in the past that he should have been a main eventer in WWE. At least, he said something along those lines not too long after he was released from WWE. So I can't help but wonder why he should poke fun or raise an issue over the size of wrestlers that are of the same stature as he is, yet not apply that perceived limitation upon himself.

As far as Punk's size goes, at the end of the day, what ultimately matters in pro wrestling is that Punk can deliver. He's got the ability inside the ring & on the mic, he's got the personality & charisma, millions of wrestling fans want to see & hear CM Punk do his thing and, most importantly, CM Punk helps draw a lot of money for WWE. Whether I was a fan of Punk or not, those qualities are what's made him a star and are essential to any wrestler being a genuinely big star in pro wrestling. Case closed as far as I'm concerned.

 

[BillAlfonso]

I think we're long past the point in wrestling in which size is a huge determining factor in qualities that make a wrestler a main event level star. With so many of the best workers in wrestling that've been produced over the last decade or so being well under 250 lbs, certain attitudes towards size have had to change.

As far as Carlito's comments go...well...Carlito doesn't exactly look like he's a physical master of the universe himself. Last time I saw him, he was a somewhat pudgy 220 pounds; so I can't exactly see how his physical stature is any greater than that of guys like Ambrose, Rollins or Punk. Yet, if I remember correctly, Carlito has said in the past that he should have been a main eventer in WWE. At least, he said something along those lines not too long after he was released from WWE. So I can't help but wonder why he should poke fun or raise an issue over the size of wrestlers that are of the same stature as he is, yet not apply that perceived limitation upon himself.

As far as Punk's size goes, at the end of the day, what ultimately matters in pro wrestling is that Punk can deliver. He's got the ability inside the ring & on the mic, he's got the personality & charisma, millions of wrestling fans want to see & hear CM Punk do his thing and, most importantly, CM Punk helps draw a lot of money for WWE. Whether I was a fan of Punk or not, those qualities are what's made him a star and are essential to any wrestler being a genuinely big star in pro wrestling. Case closed as far as I'm concerned.

I understand what you're saying but doesn't anyone notice that, when they started to use smaller guys as Heavyweight champions, the business started to decline.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

I understand what you're saying but doesn't anyone notice that, when they started to use smaller guys as Heavyweight champions, the business started to decline.

Like who? Guerrero and Benoit? Their reigns were very short.

Business was going down from the Attitude era because they lost the Rock and Austin. The 2000s were dominated by guys like Cena, Triple H, Batista, Orton, and Edge....not smaller guys at all.

 

[BillAlfonso]

Like who? Guerrero and Benoit? Their reigns were very short.

Business was going down from the Attitude era because they lost the Rock and Austin. The 2000s were dominated by guys like Cena, Triple H, Batista, Orton, and Edge....not smaller guys at all.

What about guys like Jericho, Mysterio, and even Punk had a few reigns before 2011. The fact that they started putting guys who weren't even borderline heavyweights into the heavyweight scene started to tarnish the Heavyweight championships. Now, all you do is make those guys you mentioned look weak since they either had to beat a smaller guy for the belt or be beaten for the smaller guy to get the belt.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

What about guys like Jericho, Mysterio, and even Punk had a few reigns before 2011. The fact that they started putting guys who weren't even borderline heavyweights into the heavyweight scene started to tarnish the Heavyweight championships. Now, all you do is make those guys you mentioned look weak since they either had to beat a smaller guy for the belt or be beaten for the smaller guy to get the belt.

Not much I can say there, other than I disagree. Most of those guys had great matches, and helped those other bigger guys shine. I don't think you can attribute the decline in PPV numbers to them, I think you're just indicating that your preference doesn't run towards the smaller wrestlers.

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

I made this to better illustrate my point. The simple answer is "no".

Some World Champions are small. Some are big. Do I need to get Dr. Seuss in here to teach us all how diversity is a good thing? For every Andre there's a Freddie Blassie. For every Hulk Hogan, a Randy Savage. For every Slaughter, there's a Flair, or a Michaels, or a Buddy Rogers.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

Here's the thing about Punk, is he the biggest guy in the roster? Nope he may even be one of the smaller guys. But realistically it's not hard to picture someone with Punk's size be able to beat up guys like Cena, Triple H, Orton etc. in a fight.

I think I used this example 100 times now but Jericho and Goldberg did have a backstage fight back in 2004. Obviously Jericho won't win in a straight on fist fight but was still able to choke Goldberg out.

If most people's arguments of guys like Punk's size shouldn't be world champions because it's not realistic, it has to be realistic if it can actually happen.

 

[Brahma_Bull9]

Blassie debuted in 1935. Flair and Savage are way bigger....

All those other guys are cut too in that pic... My only reason i don't believe Punk sometimes in the ring is because he is flabby. Maybe he'll come back in good shape though....

But yea if Punk wrestled in the 40's he would of been huge by the standards then

 

[MisterRob]

Yes.

CM Punk is too small to be taken serious in the main event picture.
He's too small to be a World champion seven times.
He's definitely too small to be one of the top stars in the company.

Oh, wait..

 

[CmPunker]

Yes.

CM Punk is too small to be taken serious in the main event picture.
He's too small to be a World champion seven times.
He's definitely too small to be one of the top stars in the company.

Oh, wait..

when was CM Punk world champion seven times? lol, you really need to get your facts straight.

he is only one of the top stars in the company because the roster is thin as fuck right now. if it was 6 years ago, he would be in the mid card. the difference between cm punk and other small people (shawn michaels, jericho, eddie guerrero, chris benoit) is that they all had a shitload of muscles in their prime. when you look at cm punk you immediately think that he doesnt lift, lol. i cant even think of one other main eventer that has a worse physique than punk.. and rey mysterio or daniel bryan or rvd dont count becaues they were transitional champions.

I made this to better illustrate my point. The simple answer is "no".

Some World Champions are small. Some are big. Do I need to get Dr. Seuss in here to teach us all how diversity is a good thing? For every Andre there's a Freddie Blassie. For every Hulk Hogan, a Randy Savage. For every Slaughter, there's a Flair, or a Michaels, or a Buddy Rogers.

Again, every one of those people had more muscle definition than cm punk. chris jericho and michaels also did when they were in their primes. only rey mysterio and daniel bryan have a worse physique than cm punk, and they were never at a level like randy orton or cm punk or even sheamus.

 

[Kidpolean]

CM Punk is the most overrated wrestler of all time but he only looks out matched against bigger guys. The problem with Punk is not so much his size but the fact that my little toe is more athletic than his entire body. The guy doesnt have a high vertical, is slow, and is clumsy as hell. Shawn Michaels made up for his size because he was an amazing athlete and the best athlete in the business at the time. HBK was smooth in the ring and rarely botched moves. Cm punk botches a lot of moves. Punk's size is not a huge problem right now because the top guys really arent that big. Cena isnt very tall just muscular and Ryback is a joke. I think Punk is a great wrestler but people overrate him because of how thin the roster is. Look at guys like Daniel Bryan, yea he is small, but his athleticism mixed with his intensity make it somewhat believable that he could beat bigger guys. Punk doesnt have those qualities. Punk is a master on the mic and is above average in the ring but he isnt nearly as good as people say he is

 

[Brahma_Bull9]

^^ I think you are spot on, though I don't know about most overrated of all time that would have to take some thought because people have always gotten big on certain guys over time. It is especially exaggerated with the internet.

 

[CmPunker]

I agree with both of u guys ^. Cm punk's in ring skills are not good enough to make up for his size.. this is the reason why when he was a face, he faced people close to his weight range, like ziggler, del rio, the miz, daniel bryan, chris jericho, etc.. yes, he did fight kane, but he needed interference from Aj to win. when he turned heel, he adopted the chickenshit gimmick, which allowed him to fight bigger men. yes, he did fight mark henry as a face, but he needed weapons to beat him. and also mark henry isnt as that tall.

 

[BillAlfonso]

Not much I can say there, other than I disagree. Most of those guys had great matches, and helped those other bigger guys shine. I don't think you can attribute the decline in PPV numbers to them, I think you're just indicating that your preference doesn't run towards the smaller wrestlers.

I like the smaller wrestlers, Bret Hart, Ric Flair, Brian Pillman, and RVD are some of my all time favorites but there's only so much disbelief that can be suspended. Guys like Bret, Flair, and RVD, could get away with it because they at least looked like they were heavyweights. I'm not saying that smaller wrestlers becoming heavyweight contenders only contributed to the decline in viewers, it's the "creative thinking" that was behind it putting those guys up front that caused it.

I made this to better illustrate my point. The simple answer is "no".

Some World Champions are small. Some are big. Do I need to get Dr. Seuss in here to teach us all how diversity is a good thing? For every Andre there's a Freddie Blassie. For every Hulk Hogan, a Randy Savage. For every Slaughter, there's a Flair, or a Michaels, or a Buddy Rogers.

I think you're missing the point, there have always been heavyweight champs that have been smaller but, in the past, they've always been big enough to look like they're in the heavyweight ranks. The guys that you highlighted also have qualities that allowed them to compete.

Bret Hart: Technique combined with just enough strength for you to believe that he can keep a submission hold on a bigger guy if he worked on a body part long enough.

Kurt Angle: Olympic gold medalist.

HBK: Speed combined with a moveset that can be hit out of nowhere.

Edge: A heavyweight.

The rest of the guys on this list should never have been considered for the heavyweight championship.

 

[LuckyLouie]

Size shouldent matter.
Just like in MMA if they are too big they are pretty much useless. Look at Khali. He is huge but he cant wrestle. And no, im sure the world doesnt want to see a bunch of skinny kids to flips all match. Which isnt bad, but sometimes you want to see more then that. Its more fun to see bigger wrestlers fly, its unique.
But, Punk is build like a normal man, just like Austin and many other stars that are and were huge. I as a person can relate to Punk or Jericho more so then Goldberg or Ryback.
But overall, he is a great wrestler and a talker, and he puts on a hell of a show. I think thats pretty much all that I want from a wrestler.

 

[One to Remember]

again we have people taking the anti CM Punk physique camp out of context on purpose.

We have this graphic featuring Bret Hart, HBK and Angle. Are we going off of Angle's TNA body which looks nothing like his 2001 body.. What weight class was he in at the olympics anyway? He was in the 90-100 kg weight class and probably gained more weight after he recovered from his injuries before the games. He is listed as 237 right now which is still over Punk..

HBK is 225 but is fit and 6'1.

The Hitman is 6'1 and 236..

Basically we have also heard a lot of talk about his being believable because smal people do and will win fights against larger opponents. THAT ONLY MATTERS HERE IF PUNK'S RING REPERTOIRE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE METHODS A SMALLER PERSON WOULD NEED TO CLOSE THE GAP. Just because a right hook from a lightweight can KO a heavyweight doesn't mean CM Punk can out wrestle a heavyweight like Ryback or Henry and thats due to the fact that CM Punk did not KO those guys nor do the rules of wrestling permit him to. So the only common denominator is the size discrepancy but its still an invalid comparison.

Another factor is the roster pool. If it has mostly crusierweights and a little above you can have certain guys like Punk dominate to a certain magnitude, ditto for Mysterio but if you have a mixed bag and I don't just mean one Andre the Giant but over 10 or so larger heavyweights on ur roster you can't marginalize them and they can only lose so much ground to smaller guys before credibility and perception become an issue.

As far as the heavyweight division is concerned, anybody, ANYBODY can compete in it, heavy guys just can't compete in lower divisions. Men like Mysterio having the WHC instead of the WWE title looks bad too. The belt itself is too big for some of the roster..


Jack Hammer I think we have to ask ourselves at what cost are we willing to make it look more realistic. The word "fix" in "fixed match" has negative attributes. Even if wrestling suffered as a business because of the demands were making here maybe that would bring wrestling closer to being real. Maybe that would make matches a bit more undetermined and maybe shoots would be real shoots?

If wrestling suffered that badly I would think as a last ditch effort they wouldn't bring in more Punks or luchadors but actually become a real sport. That would bring in actual sports fans into the mix and that would more then compensate for the loss of those who go on and on about being caught up in the magic and charisma and snappy mic work.

Id rather see fans like Lucky, BillAlfonso, Shooter McGavin, Lorenzo, put out in the cold if it meant replacing them with real fans of real sports. I honestly don't think thats at too great a cost. Its already sad enough to see young kids and every slobbering ****** i know a fan of this sport. Yeah I said..

 

[CmPunker]

Size shouldent matter.
Just like in MMA if they are too big they are pretty much useless. Look at Khali. He is huge but he cant wrestle. And no, im sure the world doesnt want to see a bunch of skinny kids to flips all match. Which isnt bad, but sometimes you want to see more then that. Its more fun to see bigger wrestlers fly, its unique.
But, Punk is build like a normal man, just like Austin and many other stars that are and were huge. I as a person can relate to Punk or Jericho more so then Goldberg or Ryback.
But overall, he is a great wrestler and a talker, and he puts on a hell of a show. I think thats pretty much all that I want from a wrestler.

Here we go again, the 1000th time with comparing MMA to scripted wrestling.. obviously since wrestling is scripted, ur abilities are more limited.. and u cant do as much. in MMA, u are free to show off your fighting abilities.. even if Punk was in MMA, his skills are not good enough to fight bigger men. he can't be compared to greats like Bret Hart and Shawn MIchaels, because he isnt as fast, athletic, smart, or as good in the ring as they are.. cm punk's in ring skills are not so good, he is clumsy, botchy, and somewhat slow.. shawn imchaels ran through the ring left and right, but cm punk seems to take long breaks and executes his punches badly.. he also executes his diving elbow awkwardly when compared to shawn michaels.

 

[One to Remember]

It sounds as if we agree but I'm unclear about this part, could you explain?

everytime something gets to ridiculous or unreasonable or illogical in wrestling there is this group of people that just start shouting at the top of their lungs about how its not a real sport anyway and how we should come to terms with that then rethink our questions or some bs about how none of that matters when your hearts raising and your caught up in the moment and how how you forget everything else in that moment. I mean put that in a hallmark. That group right there is the same group of people who also go out of their way to say wrestling is staged or talk nonchalant about the inner workings in some attempt to quickly one up some prick who was going to rag on them for watching a "fake" sport anyway. Its like a type of front, not only do they use it to fend off embarrassment from say MMA fans but they use it to justify an anything can slide mentality since wrestling has writers just like a hollywood screen play.

At this point id rather just eliminate all the predetermined bs and try to just have the wrestlers go at each other legit then try to sprinkle storylines on that or around that. I don't need a writer to tell CM Punk to lose to Ryback or Mark Henry when they can do it with brute force anyway. Samething with Cena taking Mysterio's title..

I think that would just eliminate a lot of infighting amongst the fanbase, bring in stable fans who watch because its a sport and not because a storyline is hot, and send these people who go on and on about charisma, mic skills, and blah blah to a place like a performance theater or something. Also on some real talk shit these guys on the indy's like in ROH and etc who cant even barely make a living could actually make money doing a sport they love if all this preference for hot storylines and charismatic displays if they could compete in legit wrestling feds who werew bolstered up by people who like legit combat sports and the uniqueness and flavor of wrestling. The core problem outright is that fans have too much power over what wrestlers should be or shouldn't, obviously the fans are going to keep a league or whatever a float but it seems to me that fans of wrestling demand things of wrestlers that other athletes in other sports dont have to put up with. When does that become inappropriate?