Is Punks "best in the world" gimmick getting lame?

[rge2010]

I know it's wrestling, and we shouldn't take everything as gospel but every week Punk tells us he is the best in the world. Punk the person still has a point, great talker, great in the ring etc etc but Punk the WWE superstar just looks stupid now.

Rock (x2). Cena. Taker. Lesnar. That is 5 high profile losses this year. It carries very little weight if you ask me.

 

[The Butcher]

It's a boast. Bret Hart didn't stop calling himself "the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be" after losses. Shawn Michaels is still "Mr. WrestleMania" despite going out on back-to-back 'Mania losses. Once Muhammad Ali's jaw healed from being broken by Ken Norton, he immediately resumed calling himself "The Greatest". The Raw Roulette promo is what got him over big, and in it he called himself "the best wrestler in the world." It caught on, WWE made a t-shirt, and now it's his calling card. Simple as that.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Nicknames are merely part of the hype that go along with a wrestler's persona.

For instance, Triple H calls himself the "King of Kings". Frankly, I'm surprised that any number of religious groups haven't taken offense to it as it's a moniker usually applied to Jesus Christ. Does it really carry any weight? After all, Triple H isn't a "king" of anything. Glen Jacobs, AKA Kane, really isn't "The Devil's Favorite Demon" nor was Hulkamania "The Most Powerful Force in the Universe".

As for "best in the world", there are any number of wrestlers throughout history who have some variation on that saying. There always will be, and not just in wrestling either. After all, was Muhammad Ali really "The Greatest"? I mean, wouldn't someone that is beyond a shadow of a doubt the absolute greatest there ever was at something ever get shown up or beaten? Ali was beaten 6 times in his professional boxing career. Michael Jordan is often said by many to be "the greatest basketball player of all time", but shouldn't that be an indicator that he never lost a game?

Realistically, there's no such thing as "the best in the world" at anything. Everyone is gonna come up short in some way, shape or form no matter what comes along. With Punk and all the other pro wrestlers who have called themselves "the best", it's hype. No doubt there are some that believe Punk is "the best in the world" because of the simple fact that they enjoy seeing & listening to him do what he does more than anyone else in the same business. That opinion will no doubt change for some as time goes by while I'm sure some will stand firm with Punk as their all time favorite pro wrestler.

To me, it's no more lame than Ric Flair's "Wooooooooo" or Stone Cold's "Gimme a Hell Yeah" or Taker's "Rest in Peace" or Shawn Michaels calling himself "The Showstopper". It's all part of who they are as characters and the fact that they make such grandiose, over the top statements is a central part of pro wrestling.

 

[rge2010]

It's a boast. Bret Hart didn't stop calling himself "the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be" after losses. Shawn Michaels is still "Mr. WrestleMania" despite going out on back-to-back 'Mania losses. Once Muhammad Ali's jaw healed from being broken by Ken Norton, he immediately resumed calling himself "The Greatest". The Raw Roulette promo is what got him over big, and in it he called himself "the best wrestler in the world." It caught on, WWE made a t-shirt, and now it's his calling card. Simple as that.

I dont ever remember Bret Hart having a year like CM Punk has though. There is no validity to Punks boast now. Using this calling card as a heel is understandable, you want people to disagree with you so you can draw heat but as a face it doesn't work for me though.

As for HBK's 'Mr Wrestlemania' thing, that was given for 5 the star matches he was involved in the twilight of his career after he had 'done it all'.

I think Punk needs to drop this until he is on top again because his PPV record is as bad as Rybacks who is called a glorified jobber time and time again!

 

[MayorMcCheese]

I know it's wrestling, and we shouldn't take everything as gospel but every week Punk tells us he is the best in the world. Punk the person still has a point, great talker, great in the ring etc etc but Punk the WWE superstar just looks stupid now.

Rock (x2). Cena. Taker. Lesnar. That is 5 high profile losses this year. It carries very little weight if you ask me.

welp, that's it, Punk sucks. I guess we need to re-package him! Maybe he can go jerk the curtain to start getting over again!

 

[The Butcher]

I dont ever remember Bret Hart having a year like CM Punk has though. There is no validity to Punks boast now. Using this calling card as a heel is understandable, you want people to disagree with you so you can draw heat but as a face it doesn't work for me though.

As for HBK's 'Mr Wrestlemania' thing, that was given for 5 the star matches he was involved in the twilight of his career after he had 'done it all'.

I think Punk needs to drop this until he is on top again because his PPV record is as bad as Rybacks who is called a glorified jobber time and time again!

Don't bring up what you do and don't remember. After that "what is TNA?" bullshit you pulled, I'm surprised you haven't been laughed off of the forum. And if you understand that HBK's "Mr. WrestleMania" nickname is based off of giving great performances, then you should understand that that was what Punk meant when he initially called himself "the best wrestler in the world." Wrestling isn't about wins and losses.

Jack-Hammer couldn't have spelled it out to you any better, though. These nicknames aren't literal. Do you also think Randy Orton should drop "The Viper" nickname since he isn't an actual snake? Like I said, it's a boast on Punk's behalf. For WWE, these monikers are used to build their Superstars into superhuman figures, to give people colorful ideas of who the wrestler is and what he's all about. He shouldn't get rid of it, and you should be embarrassed for making an issue of it.

 

[rge2010]

Don't bring up what you do and don't remember. After that "what is TNA?" bullshit you pulled, I'm surprised you haven't been laughed off of the forum. And if you understand that HBK's "Mr. WrestleMania" nickname is based off of giving great performances, then you should understand that that was what Punk meant when he initially called himself "the best wrestler in the world." Wrestling isn't about wins and losses.

Jack-Hammer couldn't have spelled it out to you any better, though. These nicknames aren't literal. Do you also think Randy Orton should drop "The Viper" nickname since he isn't an actual snake? Like I said, it's a boast on Punk's behalf. For WWE, these monikers are used to build their Superstars into superhuman figures, to give people colorful ideas of who the wrestler is and what he's all about. He shouldn't get rid of it, and you should be embarrassed for making an issue of it.

Making an issue out of it? I believe you have the made the issue. You seem upset with me?

I merely brought this to the forum for debate. I have an opinion on it and WZ Forums are a platform to allow me to debate it are they not???

Boast or not, it doesnt carry weight, far too many high profile losses this year to keep using the 'best in the world' stuff. He looks rather silly if you ask me and a top face shouldnt look silly.

I think the lines are blurry when we say it isnt about wins and losses. I think wins give a superstar a lot of swing with the fans when they are winning. Ryback was red hot last year and he was booked to lose at a number of PPV's which really ended him as a main eventer. He didnt even make the Summerslam card! Next you will tell me the Undertakers streak isnt about wins and losses....

 

[Wald]

As for HBK's 'Mr Wrestlemania' thing, that was given for 5 the star matches he was involved in the twilight of his career after he had 'done it all'.

No it wasn't. He was first called that after Wrestlemania 12 due to his 5 star matches against Razor Ramon and Bret Hart, his returning match against Chris Jericho was built on the fact he was Mr.Wrestlemania.

So that's two five star matches that earned him that title, which lets you know all you need to know about wrestler's nicknames and catchphrases

 

[Trill Co$by]

Since you're so caught up in wins and losses, I'm going to pull the card that matters most here. 434 Days. A reign that's lasted longer than Bret Hart, John Cena, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Diesel, Billy Graham, Ultimate Warrior, and even the almighty Hulk Hogan... What more does Punk need to prove? And let's not forget the names he beat to retain the WWE Championship... John Cena, Randy Orton, Kane, Daniel Bryan, Del Rio, and even Jerry Lawler [Lawler can still go, don't be stupid]. Again, what else does Punk need to prove?

 

[rge2010]

Since you're so caught up in wins and losses, I'm going to pull the card that matters most here. 434 Days. A reign that's lasted longer than Bret Hart, John Cena, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Diesel, Billy Graham, Ultimate Warrior, and even the almighty Hulk Hogan... What more does Punk need to prove? And let's not forget the names he beat to retain the WWE Championship... John Cena, Randy Orton, Kane, Daniel Bryan, Del Rio, and even Jerry Lawler [Lawler can still go, don't be stupid]. Again, what else does Punk need to prove?

That reign ended nearly 8 months ago. Sure, he had a right to use it then but since then he keeps losing...

And don't say I am so caught up in wins and losses because the majority of fans are. The majority of fans moan about Cena winning every match, or Lesnar looking weak since his return, or Takers streak...wins/losses do matter. Its what determines a solid main eventer and a jobber.

Also, the superstars you just mentioned are hardly Rock, Taker and Brock...

 

[Mustang Sally]

That reign ended nearly 8 months ago. Sure, he had a right to use it then but since then he keeps losing...

....and it could be that after his loss to Brock last night, he might be humbled enough to stop using the signature line, at least for a while.

Still, it's hard enough to come up with a line that's forceful-sounding, catchy, and easy for the fans to remember. As pointed out in several of the previous posts, numerous performers have had lines they've spoken attributed to them their entire careers. It's a function of a celebrity's ego (kayfabe) that enables them to keep using it even after the crown has seemingly been knocked off their heads.

Punk's signature line is completely consistent with the manner in which he started portraying himself after the Summer of Punk. No problem with him continuing to use it.

 

[Trill Co$by]

That reign ended nearly 8 months ago. Sure, he had a right to use it then but since then he keeps losing...

And yet, nobody since then's come even close to scratching that reign. Not to mention the fact that Jericho consistently reminds everybody that he was the first ever WWE Undisputed Champion. It's an accolade that, at this time, nobody can dispute. It's something that holds true to a fact. Why shouldn't that be the reason to call him the best? The Dallas Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl since 1995 and yet they still find a reason to call themselves "America's Team". Pittsburgh Steelers have won 6 Super Bowls, with their last victory coming in 2008, and yet they still call themselves the best. Brazil has won 5 FIFA World Cups, the most in history with their latest being in 2002, and they still call themselves the best.

These teams, and Punk, have the right to do so because of their achievements. It's not about when the last time they held the honors were, it's the milestones they've reached that nobody else has. It's why Andre is the greatest of all time because he transcended wrestling before anybody before his time. And not only that, but every match he's had with the guys who beat him have been near "5 star" worthy... so again, why not?

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

Look at yesterdays match. Just that tagline "The Best vs The Beast" was enough to sold it. Anyone with that kind of drawing with just the tagline "The Best in the World" is good enough and doesnt need change...

Rock (x2). Cena. Taker. Lesnar.

Out of that 5 matches you could argue that he could gone over in maybe just one or two. He gone over plenty over the years with Cena and didnt need to go over with Taker. They needed someone to feud with Taker so he was the best option and didnt need to go over Rock. Yesterday he could go over but have a feeling that we might get a rematch out of those two where he would...

And in any way any of those loses didnt hurt him that bad or might hurt him at all. He looked good after every last one.

 

[FiveTymeWCWChamp]

It is not a gimmick! It is who he is!

 

[Pepper Lewis]

I know it's wrestling, and we shouldn't take everything as gospel but every week Punk tells us he is the best in the world. Punk the person still has a point, great talker, great in the ring etc etc but Punk the WWE superstar just looks stupid now.

Rock (x2). Cena. Taker. Lesnar. That is 5 high profile losses this year. It carries very little weight if you ask me.

cm punk, has been a joke since day 1!!!!

-who is gonna believe this skinny, nothing happening guy is "best in the world"?
-Look at his wrestling, its very sloppy, and poorly executed!
-MIC SKILLS are BORING!

 

[Pepper Lewis]

And yet, nobody since then's come even close to scratching that reign. Not to mention the fact that Jericho consistently reminds everybody that he was the first ever WWE Undisputed Champion. It's an accolade that, at this time, nobody can dispute. It's something that holds true to a fact. Why shouldn't that be the reason to call him the best? The Dallas Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl since 1995 and yet they still find a reason to call themselves "America's Team". Pittsburgh Steelers have won 6 Super Bowls, with their last victory coming in 2008, and yet they still call themselves the best. Brazil has won 5 FIFA World Cups, the most in history with their latest being in 2002, and they still call themselves the best.

These teams, and Punk, have the right to do so because of their achievements. It's not about when the last time they held the honors were, it's the milestones they've reached that nobody else has. It's why Andre is the greatest of all time because he transcended wrestling before anybody before his time. And not only that, but every match he's had with the guys who beat him have been near "5 star" worthy... so again, why not?

***************************************************************BIGGEST DIFFERENCE IS: JERICHO is the 1st EVER undisputed CHAMPION

-The Dallas Cowboys are AMERICA's TEAM ( Ratings Show This) etc...

***NOW PAY CLOSE ATTENTION! cm punk, has NEVER BEEN "best in the world" cm punk, is not that good of a "wrestler" look at his sloppy moves, and execution!

cm punk copies everything! his mic work, kind reminds me of JERICHO! Try's to get HEAT, coping RIC FLAIR! His move set, well we all know, he copied them, from that Oriental Guy!

cm punk, NEVER has, NEVER Will be "best in the world!" cm punk is the most overrated guy in history! HE SUCKS

 

[Pepper Lewis]

Look at yesterdays match. Just that tagline "The Best vs The Beast" was enough to sold it. Anyone with that kind of drawing with just the tagline "The Best in the World" is good enough and doesnt need change...


Out of that 5 matches you could argue that he could gone over in maybe just one or two. He gone over plenty over the years with Cena and didnt need to go over with Taker. They needed someone to feud with Taker so he was the best option and didnt need to go over Rock. Yesterday he could go over but have a feeling that we might get a rematch out of those two where he would...

And in any way any of those loses didnt hurt him that bad or might hurt him at all. He looked good after every last one.

*** Are you STUPID? lol cm punk is weak, and has lost nearly every match in 2013 " SAY SOMETHING STUPID!"

 

[Deste003]

Some of the stuff I am reading here is just ridiculous.

Rock (x2). Cena. Taker. Lesnar. All five matches you can say Punk was the best one in the ring. Including against Brock and Taker that have a chance to not perform in the ring as well as they used to. Punk is named best in the world because its not about wins or loses but performance. I dont know where all this hate on Punk is coming from but unless you know nothing about the business Punk is the best right now. He is not sloppy and actually one of the best in building matches. Watch last nights match against Lesnar. He was calling it and he did fantastic. His mic skills are better than anyone's PERIOD! Since the pipe bomb a few years ago he has been the best on the mic.

He's called the Best in the World cause he is.

 

[Trill Co$by]

***************************************************************BIGGEST DIFFERENCE IS: JERICHO is the 1st EVER undisputed CHAMPION

-The Dallas Cowboys are AMERICA's TEAM ( Ratings Show This) etc...

***NOW PAY CLOSE ATTENTION! cm punk, has NEVER BEEN "best in the world" cm punk, is not that good of a "wrestler" look at his sloppy moves, and execution!

cm punk copies everything! his mic work, kind reminds me of JERICHO! Try's to get HEAT, coping RIC FLAIR! His move set, well we all know, he copied them, from that Oriental Guy!

cm punk, NEVER has, NEVER Will be "best in the world!" cm punk is the most overrated guy in history! HE SUCKS

Just shut up already because you're making yourself look more stupid than you already are.

Dallas Cowboys aren't America's team. In fact, majority of fans watching games featuring the Cowboys are generally waiting for Romo to fuck up so the other team can get a win. If anything, Steelers have the right to call themselves America's team for the fact that they have sold more merchandise than the Cowboys, and this is coming from a Ravens fan.

CM Punk's ring work is leaps and bound beyond the rest of the WWE roster. His matches against Cena, Ziggler, Jericho, Rock, Daniel Bryan, and Orton all prove this. His programs with Cena, Jericho, Laurinaitis, and Mysterio prove he can tell a story. And his promo years ago proves he can talk, and has every promo since then. As for his moves, so what? If we're really going to talk about people using stolen finishers, then we might as well call everybody else talentless because I've yet to see a match where a DDT wasn't used. Or better yet, next time someone does a Superplex, how about you start calling them Bob Orton wannabes since he popularized it as a finisher years ago?

In a real fighting sport scenario, any champion that holds a title for as long as Punk has without losing it, they would be considered the best. Why can't Punk be the same, if we're suspending belief?

But you know, since you want to deny Punk's abilities how about the facts listed via the two most credible Wrestling Awards out there.

Pro-Wrestling Illustrated
Feud of the Year w/ Cena - 2011
Match of the Year w/ Cena - 2011
Most Popular Wrestler of the Year - 2011
Most Hated Wrestler of the Year - 2012
Wrestler of the Year - 2011
Ranked #1 on PWI 500 - 2011

Wrestling Observer Newsletter
5 Star Match - 2004 [vs. Samoa Joe], 2011 [vs. John Cena]
Best Gimmick - 2009, 2011
Best on Interviews - 2011, 2012
Feud of the Year - 2009 [vs. Jeff Hardy], 2011 [vs. John Cena]
Match of the Year - 2011 [vs. John Cena]

Add to that the fact that you have people still talking about his time in ROH versus either Raven or Samoa Joe, people still talking about his WWE Summer of Punk, his merchandise selling leaps and bounds beyond any other star that wrestles full time not named Cena, the explosion of the interwebs when he showed up at an indy show years ago, or to NXT to face Ambrose... these are just mere examples of why he's the best. You can try all you want to debate it, but you'll be wrong.

 

[Jstrike]

Cm Punk lack's my interest i blame it on paul heyman ever since last year. with heyman being the voice of the voice of the voiceless i've lost interest in punk, he needs a major change up. i say cm punk should go to smackdown and feud maybe with alberto del rio.

 

[R.K.O]

And yet, nobody since then's come even close to scratching that reign. Not to mention the fact that Jericho consistently reminds everybody that he was the first ever WWE Undisputed Champion. It's an accolade that, at this time, nobody can dispute. It's something that holds true to a fact. Why shouldn't that be the reason to call him the best? The Dallas Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl since 1995 and yet they still find a reason to call themselves "America's Team". Pittsburgh Steelers have won 6 Super Bowls, with their last victory coming in 2008, and yet they still call themselves the best. Brazil has won 5 FIFA World Cups, the most in history with their latest being in 2002, and they still call themselves the best.

These teams, and Punk, have the right to do so because of their achievements. It's not about when the last time they held the honors were, it's the milestones they've reached that nobody else has. It's why Andre is the greatest of all time because he transcended wrestling before anybody before his time. And not only that, but every match he's had with the guys who beat him have been near "5 star" worthy... so again, why not?

Liverpool won the most trophies in the English leagues but everyone accuses them of "Living in the past". Bragging about your accomplishments is fine but when you don't win anything in recent times it makes the person look foolish.

As for Punk, he does have a bad run going now but WWE will surely build him back up in the near future as he's one of their biggest stars. He will be fine as the "Best in the World".

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

Steve Austin wasn't a rattlesnake.
The Rock wasn't a bull.
Mark Calloway isn't a dead man.
John Cena can be seen.

All these nicknames and/or catchphrases are memorable and add to the characters mythos. Punk is an arrogant and highly motivated guy, a more humble line would be terrible for him.

 

[Dysturbed]

I can see why people would think that the gimmick is lame cause he doesn't "look" like the best in the world if he keeps losing but how things look tends to be based on perception. CM Punk perceives himself to be a certain way, therefore making it fitting in the world of wrestling. To me it should probably be as simple as that.

Liverpool won the most trophies in the English leagues but everyone accuses them of "Living in the past".

Bragging about your accomplishments is fine but when you don't win anything in recent times it makes the person look foolish.

Generally speaking I agree that if someone's label or bragging is solely or mostly based on the past, it can be odd or even "foolish" though sometimes those labels are only a nickname and nothing to be taken beyond that. However, while the similarity between your example (and many other comparisons) and this one is noted, the difference shouldn't be ignored imo.

That difference is that, unlike in non scripted sports and most real life situations, one of the most commonly used concepts in wrestling (by wrestlers, announcers, and promotion) is exaggeration and that another is arrogance. Therefore, I think that some cases it can still be considered fitting to permanently label oneself based on the past, if it is still fitting of what the character is supposed to believe.

If Randy Orton were to still call himself the legend killer it wouldn't fit unless he portrays a similar gimmick again. The same can apply with many other examples. However, if Punk calls himself best in the world it is fitting imo because there is no reason to doubt that he believes it. Unless he starts getting squashed on a frequent basis, we have no reason to believe that his confidence or belief in how good he is has gone away.

Even if he keeps on losing big matches in the way that he has recently, we can see that he is presented as if he legitimately can almost every one, and not by a fluke. That doesn't factually make him the best of course, but does help show why he hasn't lost the belief that win or lose, he still is the best.

He will be fine as the "Best in the World"

Agreed

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Has CM Punk been playing up the motto (I'd call it a motto more than a catch phrase) since he returned and went clear face?

I kind of agree with the OP. I don't think Punk has an arrogant leg to stand on right now and his character should be focused on revenge and redemption. He may be my favorite in-ring performer right now but that doesn't mean he can't show some humility. Even HBK showed some humility.

 

[#tamale]

HBK even lost his smile. A couple of months later, he was back to his old self, with smile in tow.

I like the "Best in the World". It's a major part of his overall character, along with being counterculture, and a "pipe bomb" specialist. I think he will lay off this point in the next couple of months while he feuds with Paul Heyman guys in his quest for revenge against Heyman and Lesnar.