The Reality Era and its implications.

[AegonTargaryen]

After watching the Michael Cole-HHH segment from Raw, it was pretty clear that they've been hinting antagonism towards CM Punk's actions. The rumour of HHH being legitimately pissed about punk not wanting to work with him, or more specifically, demanding the Last match/main event or he'll leave, seems real more than ever. The past two weeks, when HHH and Stephanie ejaculated their suppressed angst, they were not just referring to Daniel Bryan in a kayfabe storyline angst, but hinting contempt and hatred for CM Punk trying to act like he's bigger than the WWE.

In what was essentially a brilliant promo, when HHH said he's tired of "little guys", he meant it to be for CM Punk much more than DB and of course he insinuated how he's sick of stars relying on their past glory AKA Batista, and stars with untapped potential aka Randy Orton.(I'm not sure how Randy's potential is untapped, though because IMO Randy has done it all, and done it much better than John Cena, whether it be steel cage and last man standing matches against HHH, being a face, a heel, or feuds with Christian).

Now, It got me thinking and visions flashed before me of 2011, and CM Punk's pipebomb and promos from July to November of that year and it was obvious that CM Punk with his build/look wasn't quite the champion material traditionally synonymous in the eyes of the WWE to be someone like John Cena, The Rock, or Randy Orton. . But the initial faith in Punk had only come when they gave him the WWE title at MITB, and then Summerslam(for now, we shall overlook all the Kevin Nash-HHH-Punk idiocy that happened). However, CM Punk made it when he became champion at Survivor Series and the rest his history. But how Punk became champion at MITB was all again interwoven with the story/truth about his contract expiring and him not wanting to resign because he wanted change. I believe for no other reason than this imminent danger of Punk going away that they gave him the title and then the big reign from Survivor Series. But we all know that his title reign was largely overshadowed by lame John Cena feuds and the returning Rock who IMO wasn't even very good with his promos and promoting the WWE. He was more of a half-hearted I've-returned-for-something-and-I'll-go-back-soon champion.

Hence, Punk's long-standing resentment towards the WWE and his subservient status. Essentially, he must've quit for several physical/mental/personal factors and the resentment of not getting "what he wants" could be said to be the major factor that caused his departure, and subsequently, the so-called "Reality Era" .This thread does not intend to argue whether Punk was right or wrong in whining/demanding something. I suppose the implications are HHH being sick and disgusted of untraditional and non-WWE-moulded Indy wrestlers acting like a million bucks and again none of us here are going to blame either party-HHH or Punk but it now seems that HHH wants to wrestle full-time or at least more than he does, and be the champion and lead the roster for a while.

I have a few interesting questions for you:-

1. How much do you think is HHH angst-filled, antagonistic and venomous towards a storyline Daniel Bryan Yes-movement as opposed to his real and to an extent justifiable hatred/contempt towards CM Punk?

2. This one is amazing. Chris Jericho ,Edge, Kurt Angle and pretty much anyone who wasn't HHH or John Cena were always either Mid-carders or the mainstay on the B-SHOW and despite their charisma/talent/experience they never complained or demanded main-event spots "OR ELSE". Kurt Angle was much more of a main-eventer too but he was a Seasonal 3-months a year main-eventer with 9 months being spent in non-WWE championship feuds. But CM Punk being Punk, wouldn't remain happy and decided to not renew his contract in 2011. That's the catalyst that got him the long WWE title run which even the aforementioned wrestlers did not ever get. Not on the A-show anyways. The question is:- Had CM Punk either just left, or been conditioned with a similar fatalistic/accept your role attitude as Jericho/Edge/Angle, and had we never had the long title run from 2011-2013, whom do you think would've really been the WWE champion and mainstay on Raw? John Cena?

 

[IT Factor]

WWE are hypocritical. This is the "reality era" yet we are to believe Taker is a dead man who controls the supernatural and takes men's souls.

That said, I did enjoy HHH's promo and also suspected his comments were aimed at Punk. If WWE were to keep pushing this as the "reality era" then the first thing that has to go is the whole PG thing. I guess that would never happen but if we are expecting reality, nothing can be held back.

 

[Logisticalbooker86]

I am sorry to insult, but here goes.

Jesus Christ, fellas. The "Reality Era" is not a new era, HHH said it to mock those who have tried to name their own era or a different era. Normally, I would not even bother responding, except another thread was made a few weeks ago about whether Bray Wyatt is going to bring about a new era.

It's a phrase in a promo people. Until WWE tries to trademark it and put it on a logo that is all it is.

for God's sake, and the millionth time, WWE TV is not moving away from PG. THEY JUST RELEASED A SCOOBY-DOO MOVIE TODAY.

 

[JoVilla21]

The "Reality Era" was an era people thought was beginning the night of Money In The Bank 2011. People thought the Reality Era was upon us.


Now that Triple H said it on Raw makes me wonder why would he say it though. Possibly to take a jab at Punk since he was the catalyst for the Reality Era back in 2011.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

I am sorry to insult, but here goes.

Jesus Christ, fellas. The "Reality Era" is not a new era, HHH said it to mock those who have tried to name their own era or a different era. Normally, I would not even bother responding, except another thread was made a few weeks ago about whether Bray Wyatt is going to bring about a new era.

It's a phrase in a promo people. Until WWE tries to trademark it and put it on a logo that is all it is.

for God's sake, and the millionth time, WWE TV is not moving away from PG. THEY JUST RELEASED A SCOOBY-DOO MOVIE TODAY.

Excuse me, but maybe it's just my mistake. Nowhere in the thread do I mention that it's a thread ABOUT the ushering in of a new era or anything, nor do I believe it to be apparent. My mistake being, I should've added "The Reality Era segment/promo and its implications". I'm sorry once again.

 

[Logisticalbooker86]

No, it is I who owes you in apology. I am sorry. My reply was out of line.

I would have been much better served to put it in the thread which asks about a return to TV-14.

I do find myself enjoying RAW more in recent weeks, The Rise of Bray Wyatt, coupled John Cena actually looking somewhat vulnerable. I am glad that HHH has gone full-blown heel instead of playing a weird tweener. Batista and Orton are much more fun now that WWE is not trying to ignore the crowd response to big Dave.

I am really looking forward to WrestleMania XXX, but I am a tad nervous about watching it on WWE Network.

 

[FlairFan2003]

First of all, no "main eventer" can be in the title picture all the time, all year. Guys like Edge (who spent a lot of time in the World Title picture, holding the title, and main eventing vs Cena, Flair, & Taker among others) & Kurt Angle (held virtually every title that was winnable, numerous Raw & PPV M-events) were not constant mid carders held down by the HHH-Cena power duo. Also, the assumption that Punk's title reign, which got significant attention due to it's 80s like-pre PPV era length, was overshadowed by Cena isnt true. Cena spent little time in the title picture during that year plus reign and Punk main evented far more often than Cena. Yes, Cena did have some high profile feuds but Punk was the focal point, and no wrestling show can prosper without a strong undercard. WWE didnt book Taker-HHH for consecutive W-Mainias for fun, they didnt because they didnt think Cena alone could carry a big buyrate, even against The Rock. Want to see a World Champ who isnt the main attraction during his reign look at Goldberg's first WCW Title run, despite almost epic build and a title win for the ages, he wins the belt in July yet doesnt main event or get top billing for the PPV in July, Aug, or Sept (Hogan did), has to share M-event status at the Halloween Havoc event with Hogan-Warrior, then drops the title two months later at the only show during his reign in which he got the best and biggest build for the event.

Punk may not have been happy with his run recently which is fine, lots of guys have issues with their storylines or their character's use. Wrestler's by trade are independent contractors with no health care, no retirement, and no Union or collective bargaining rights. The way your character is used on TV can significantly impact your earning capacity. I never have a problem with someone who sticks up for themselves although I think there is a fine line between defending your character & hurting the show, fact is sometimes what is best for your character isnt best for the show overall.

None of us knows enough about the inside particulars to really say if Punk walking out was justified. General consensus is Austin was wrong to walk out in 02 in a dispute o8er a match finish. Flair however is considered justified for walking out in 98 in WCW. The 97 Brett Hart situation is more complicated, both sides seemingly makimg valid points. As for WWE taking veiled shots at Punk they do that for attention, plain & simple. More fans buzz & talk when they do this, which equals increased interest which they hope equals better ratings. We fall right into the trap like lambs lead to slaughter.

 

[JJ15776]

WWE are hypocritical. This is the "reality era" yet we are to believe Taker is a dead man who controls the supernatural and takes men's souls.

That said, I did enjoy HHH's promo and also suspected his comments were aimed at Punk. If WWE were to keep pushing this as the "reality era" then the first thing that has to go is the whole PG thing. I guess that would never happen but if we are expecting reality, nothing can be held back.

...what the hell are you talking about? What, exactly, has Undertaker done that was supernatural in the last...I don't know, 3 and a half years? Maybe longer? Better yet, whose soul has he taken in the last...what, 15 years? That is, honest to god, one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

And why the hell would "nothing can be held back" if we're expecting reality? You want wrestlers to tap out within seconds to every submission move, else suffer a broken bone or torn ligament? You want people to be out for months with a cracked skull every time they get hit in the head with a chair? You want people to be out for weeks with a broken jaw when they get punched flush in the face? Should they use makeup to give wrestlers black eyes whenever they get punched in the eye? How, exactly, do you propose they pretend to have a broken nose every time the take a punch/elbow/knee/whatever to the nose? That's holding nothing back. That's reality, if you want to be so stupid about it. That's what MMA is for. WWE's "reality" is not real world reality.

Anyway, to answer the questions in the OP:

1.I highly, highly doubt that the way Triple H has talked about Daniel Bryan reflects, in any way, his feelings about CM Punk. The idea that Punk left because he didn't want to work with Triple H at Mania, or wanted it to be the last match, is laughable at best. Of all the stories and rumors about why he left, that may well be the most improbable.

2.We have no idea what kind of attitude any of those guys had. Any or all of them may have left if they were in Punk's situation earlier this year, since the one thing we know is that his departure almost certainly had nothing to do with their Mania plans for him. Also keep in mind that we have no idea what led to Punk's near departure in 2011, or why the WWE gave him the title. It's quite likely that WWE had planned all along to give him the title, regardless of the possibility of him leaving. Besides, guaranteed title runs are a standard part of contracts. Edge in particular, I know for a fact that he was promised a title run when he re-signed before he had won a world title. The only difference is Punk's situation played out more publicly. Obviously, if WWE didn't want Punk to be the champion, and guaranteed him a title run just to get him to re-sign, they would've taken the title off him quickly and never gave it back...instead, they gave him the longest run in two decades(surpassing even the great John Cena) and we obviously know that that wasn't part of the contract. WWE did that completely on their own. So with that in mind, obviously nothing would have changed if Punk had a "different attitude" and stuck around(that's like asking who would've been the first Undisputed Champion if Jericho had a better attitude, it makes no sense...there's no reason to think Punk's attitude led him to being champion for so long.). If he had left, I'd imagine that Cena would've been champion for much of the time, along with Alberto Del Rio and everybody else we saw in the title picture around that time. We're probably talking about seven or eight different reigns instead of one or two.

 

[kadroan]

The "Reality Era" was an era people thought was beginning the night of Money In The Bank 2011. People thought the Reality Era was upon us.


Now that Triple H said it on Raw makes me wonder why would he say it though. Possibly to take a jab at Punk since he was the catalyst for the Reality Era back in 2011.

It would be great if they go through with it. It may draw a new audience. How else can they expect to grow?