Cm punks title reign did what it was suppose to do build punk up and have it be a transitional run. Slyfox needs to realize is that his title reign was never suppose to be long in the first place.
What I DID realize is that CM Punk failed in his title reign. The WWE doesn't give title reigns to see ratings drop like they have done TWICE in CM Punks reigns. They give their Raw title to someone who can draw.
Obviously, CM Punk didn't.
Think about it like this jeff hardy didn't have this incident how long of a reign do u think he would of have compared to punk?
Think about it like this.
Who gives a fuck?
If the WWE didn't think Punk was ready, they wouldn't have had him cash it in until later this year, like they did with Edge back in 05/06. They thought Punk could run with the title, and he dropped the ball.
Jeff Hardy screwing up has nothing to do with the fact that Punk failed.
The fact is from start to finish cm punk reign has been unpredicable and that is what makes wrestling exciting.
Not according to the ratings, which dropped while he was champion.
punk wqas throwed into the position last minute and I don't think creative had any long term goal with punk being champion
OR...
They gave Punk the title run because they thought he'd have a chance to be a good champion, and he failed miserably. Quit making miserable excuses for Punk's failure as a wrestler.
A lot of times its better for a face to chase the title than to actually win it
Who came up with this nonsense? I read it every where, and it's such bullshit.
EVERY great title run that the WWE has EVER had came with the face as champion. Hogan, Hart, Austin, Cena...all the great title runs were faces. This nonsense that a heel is a better champion is a bullshit leftover from a time long past.
Faces are what draw. Good defeating Evil is what makes people buy. Jesus Christ I can't STAND when people say that.
I think people are being over critical of punk cut the man a break
No more than they ever were of Triple H or JBL or Batista or John Cena. In fact, where was the IWC saying to cut John Cena a break?
But, this is different right? Because CM Punk comes from Ring of Honor, so he's a "REAL" wrestler, right?
What interesting storyline are you talking about? when CM Punk became the WHC he was given a stupid storyline that he needed to prove himself ot other people and wrestled against wrestlers that absolutely were not compatible with punks ring work.
Uh, that's an interesting storyline. It's creative, unique, and original. It's a story that worked for Rocky Balboa.
As far as "not compatible", that's Punk's fault, not the WWE. Your champion has to be able to wrestle ANYONE. Don't believe me? Read Bret Hart's book. This nonsense that other guys weren't compatible, and that we should blame WWE for that, is stupidity as it's finest. I see that line all the time, and it's ridiculous. Furthermore, it just proves how bad CM Punk still is in the ring. I mean, is Punk any smaller than Rey? HBK? No. The difference? Those guys are good workers? Did Punk have any more different of a variety than John Cena? No. The difference? John Cena is a good worker.
CM Punk is a 1 trick pony.
In what catagory do you find something lackluster? Punk's promo wasnt exactly like a cena promo but it was good enough.The reason you may find that his matches were lackluster is because he was paired up with uncompatible wrestlers that could work with punks.So let me get this straight Punk had to work with a washed up heel and a guy who's gimmick is to dominate and you find that punk's fault? you check back old episodes.
And those are the same workers John Cena, HBK, and Rey Mysterio have had to work with, and it never seemed to slow them down.
Quit making fucking excuses for Punk's pitiful work.
Yeah right
Two words. John Cena.
I rest my case.
You cant compare cena with punk because 1, They have very different gimmicks and 2, Cena has a different in ring style than punk.
WHAT?
Who is talking about that? We're talking about taking bad booking and making it work. In-ring style and gimmick have nothing to do with it.
Just because he didnt succeed as a WHC doesnt mean that he cant prove himself in the future.
Who said otherwise?
But, it doesn't change the fact he proved he wasn't good enough to be champion, and it doesn't change the fact he was a failure.
Of course not. He wasnt meant to be.
Yes he was. ALL World Champions are supposed to be legitimate. And if Punk had an ounce of ability to make people care about him, then his storyline would have worked beautifully. But, he didn't, so it didn't.
Thats you're opinion and not of the other viewers.And yes he did something of value he made raw fresh and new.But you cant blame creative's developements just on ONE wrestler
No, it's the opinion of the million viewers who were tuning into Raw during and after the Draft, just to go away in only a few weeks time when Punk was champion.
To answer you're question i believe he is going to bounce back because he doesnt have to deal with terrible workers.[/QUOTE]
People won't really remember his title reign properly, he "lost" the title in a weird sort of way, and while Jericho is a good champion the WWE should have kept the belt on Punk. Why? Look at the ratings. RAW was getting 3.5s with Punk as champion, now they're averaging 3.1/3.2.
The figures speak for themselves.
You are so right, they absolutely do.
The normal 2 hour slot for Raw on Draft night drew a 3.7. The next Monday (when Punk won) drew a 3.5.
The last Monday before Punk dropped the belt drew a 2.9 rating. The week before? A 2.8 Two weeks before that? A 3.1.
You are absolutely right. The numbers speak for themselves. 3.7 before Punk, 2.8 after.
I rest my case.