The problem with comparing Bryan & Punk is that it's apples & oranges. In the case of Bryan, reportedly, Vince thought that he & all the members of Nexus did a fantastic job and had no issue with what happened. However, allegedly, a big sponsor of WWE at the time took issue with it and Bryan was let go. Personally, and I have no evidence to back this up as it's just a feeling, I'm not so sure that Bryan was ever legitimately let go in the sense that all ties were severed. I think it was more along the lines of them telling him "we're gonna take you off TV for a while, you can work some indie shows and we'll bring you back once the heat has died down." Internet fans were indeed outraged and were all over WWE like a cheap suit. Again, I don't see that Bryan had any legit heat with the company as he became WWE United States Champion less than 2 months after popping back up.
In CM Punk's case, however, the guy just flat out quit. He walked out, reportedly, about half an hour before the post Royal Rumble episode of Raw went on the air and hasn't been seen in WWE since. His contract officially expired sometime last month and, again, if reports are right, WWE doesn't really want him back at this time. I don't think there's any real sliver of hope left that this is some kind of work, it's gone on for much too long and sentiment for CM Punk among a lot of fans has dwindled.
We still don't even know what the 100% full story behind this is, and there's a good chance we never will. If Punk was unhappy and wanted to leave, I understand that he needed to do what he felt was best for himself. At the same time, the way he left was pretty unprofessional in my eyes and had me wondering if it was part of a calculated business move on his part in which he hoped that ratings would tank, resulting in him gaining leverage upon negotiating a more lucrative deal.
From what we've all read & heard about, Punk, allegedly, did complain about various part timers coming back. However, and again this is all based just on reports, complaining about one thing or another seemed to be Punk's Modus Operandi; he simply never seemed satisfied with anything that the company was doing. For example, aside from part timers, Punk was alleged to be unsatisfied with how he was used and that he wasn't getting the "John Cena push." If true, then I'm not sure I can hold it against WWE for not giving him such a push because of all the, alleged, endless complaints about one thing or another and it's not as if Punk's ever really expressed any sort of real loyalty to the company. Cena's a company man through and through, and yes I know it's often seen as being "cool" or "edgy" to be someone that rages against the machine, somebody that's rebellious. The problem is that all these reports suggested that Punk was someone who was rebellious almost just for the sake of being rebellious. Over the next several months, sentiment turned against Punk in the eyes of a lot of people as all this info came out and it looked like he simply walked because WWE wouldn't give him what he wanted.
Here's the thing about Punk; I personally think that his confrontational personality we saw on television is part of who he is, it's an aspect of him that's jacked up for the sake of his character. At the same time, a lot of the CM Punk we see on television is an exaggerated version of who Phil Brooks is. As a result, that means that a lot of the "change" he stated he wanted over the past few years on television was a change that simply had one real "change" about it: CM Punk being on top as the brand new "face" of the company. He wanted to be the top guy, it's just as simple as that, yet, as indicated by reports, it doesn't seem like Punk had the sort of temperament, loyalty or work ethic that John Cena has demonstrated over the past decade.
I think that the only way for Punk to return to WWE would be on his own terms and WWE isn't going to give into those terms. Don't let yourself be confused; Punk didn't hold WWE "hostage" 3 years ago at Money in the Bank. His match with Cena wasn't a "shoot" in which he ultimately went into business for himself, won the title and left. That's not how professional wrestling works anymore because significant wrestling companies are corporations now. There are any number of legalities put into place to prevent wrestlers from going into business for themselves even if one of them tried. If Punk had gone down that road, WWE would have sued him for breach of contract and theft of WWE property, namely the WWE Championship, and they'd have had an air tight case.
Punk's terms, in my opinion, would be that he'd be the top guy and I highly doubt that's going to happen. Reportedly, he & WWE management aren't on great terms, a good number of the locker room now sees him as a guy who showed up, made a lot of money & left and Punk has no real leverage to make such a demand. In his absence, ratings in WWE haven't plummeted, fans have embraced the notion of Bryan, Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose & Wyatt being heavily pushed; hell, fans were wanting to see Bryan pushed well before Punk left. In truth, Bryan being out injured has statistically shown that he's one of the few talents in years who's presence or lack of presence has had any significant impact on ratings.
If Punk came back as a part timer, there'd be no other way to view it other than it being hypocritical on his part, that's how a lot of fans would see it anyhow. I could see him eventually heading to TNA or ROH working on a reduced schedule for a lot of money where some fans would embrace him just for going there while others may not. I do think he'll come back to WWE at some point down the line, though I highly doubt it'll be on all the terms he would prefer.
