Who did the worst walkout CM Punk or Austin?
- Thread starter mizowns
- Start date
Jonyboyuk2
Getting Noticed By Management
I do not believe either man was an asshole.
I am a huge WWE fan and have been for 27 years this year.
Punk was injured, and he was concerned he was putting his body and health on the line for a business that was not going to reward him with the opportunity to headline a WrestleMania. He felt that he was risking himself and he was exhausted. Punk had been in wrestling for 15 years; that is a lot to put your body through. He had made enough and he was very unwell at the end (staff infection) and probably could not do it to himself anymore. Punk at least spoke to Vince and HHH before he left so the company did know; and even though it was only a matter of hours; at least he told them.
We can sit there and say "oh he let the team down" but the most annoying thing for WWE at the time would be re-writing the segments with Punk in on that Raw. If you believe what you can read; show re-writes happen even when Raw is about to go on air. The impact would not have been that great. From a team moral point; Punk walking about so close to Mania and the Network launch probably unsettled the boys in the back; particularly those below the main event tier.
Punk was unhappy and injured for a long time. Something had to snap and it did. WWE management should have been expecting that for months.
As for Stone Cold Steve Austin; again I get why he walked out. He should have told someone first, but the fact he left is because Vince had insisted on making Lesnar beat Austin clean in a squash match on Raw when Lesnar was a green rookie and not over at the time. It made no sense.
Think of it from Austins point of view at the time; he had wrestled with a broken neck for over 2 years. He had led the WWF to new heights and was the most over wrestler in the WWF at the time. He spent most of 2000 in great pain whilst recovering and lost a lot of money that year because he was on the sidelines. When he came back he had been stuffed in a feud with Rikishi; which ended Rikishis career pretty much, and made Austin's era fade. His next story line was not really much better; and was confusing really. He lost at the December PPV (well he failed to win) the 6 man main event, and then won the Rumble. He the lost to HHH, which was a good thing for HHH, but it damaged the WM main event. He was also booked to turn heel on The Rock in his own hometown of Texas and the crowed kept cheering Austin on. Bad move. They should have had Rock go over and the next night Austin should have whopped his ass and turned heel then. None the less; his character as a heel was refreshing and he and Kurt Angle and Vince were classic comedy segments.
The problem then became the repeatative nature of the matches against Undertaker and others and the invasion story really disrupted Austins heel character.
Further down the line he entered in to an abysmal feud with Scott Hall and Kevin Nash which sucked too. By this point Austin needed a strong main event run if he was to retain his headliner era, and he just wasn't going to get that. When they told him to put Lesnar over; I think Austin had to think about his own career and what that would mean from a business sense. Austin had risked disability for the rest of his life at this stage and I understand that personal demons had began to effect him outside the ring!
After all that Stone Cold did for the WWF, he had every right to walk the way he did; why put himself under any more risk. Sure he was paid extremely well, but he also made Vince McMahon a billionaire!
If he felt that he was being mis-managed he had the stroke to do what he did.
Again; he should have said on the way out the door but WWE re-write shows as they go along; it was not that major.
What should have happened then; as it should today; WWE should have a well-being department (seperate to the Wellness policy) that Independent Contractors can consult for advice on certain issues. The thing with CM Punk's staff infection should never have happened.
To call either guy a selfish asshole is really not fair; they risk their life and bodies to entertain the fans. We should respect that!
I am a huge WWE fan and have been for 27 years this year.
Punk was injured, and he was concerned he was putting his body and health on the line for a business that was not going to reward him with the opportunity to headline a WrestleMania. He felt that he was risking himself and he was exhausted. Punk had been in wrestling for 15 years; that is a lot to put your body through. He had made enough and he was very unwell at the end (staff infection) and probably could not do it to himself anymore. Punk at least spoke to Vince and HHH before he left so the company did know; and even though it was only a matter of hours; at least he told them.
We can sit there and say "oh he let the team down" but the most annoying thing for WWE at the time would be re-writing the segments with Punk in on that Raw. If you believe what you can read; show re-writes happen even when Raw is about to go on air. The impact would not have been that great. From a team moral point; Punk walking about so close to Mania and the Network launch probably unsettled the boys in the back; particularly those below the main event tier.
Punk was unhappy and injured for a long time. Something had to snap and it did. WWE management should have been expecting that for months.
As for Stone Cold Steve Austin; again I get why he walked out. He should have told someone first, but the fact he left is because Vince had insisted on making Lesnar beat Austin clean in a squash match on Raw when Lesnar was a green rookie and not over at the time. It made no sense.
Think of it from Austins point of view at the time; he had wrestled with a broken neck for over 2 years. He had led the WWF to new heights and was the most over wrestler in the WWF at the time. He spent most of 2000 in great pain whilst recovering and lost a lot of money that year because he was on the sidelines. When he came back he had been stuffed in a feud with Rikishi; which ended Rikishis career pretty much, and made Austin's era fade. His next story line was not really much better; and was confusing really. He lost at the December PPV (well he failed to win) the 6 man main event, and then won the Rumble. He the lost to HHH, which was a good thing for HHH, but it damaged the WM main event. He was also booked to turn heel on The Rock in his own hometown of Texas and the crowed kept cheering Austin on. Bad move. They should have had Rock go over and the next night Austin should have whopped his ass and turned heel then. None the less; his character as a heel was refreshing and he and Kurt Angle and Vince were classic comedy segments.
The problem then became the repeatative nature of the matches against Undertaker and others and the invasion story really disrupted Austins heel character.
Further down the line he entered in to an abysmal feud with Scott Hall and Kevin Nash which sucked too. By this point Austin needed a strong main event run if he was to retain his headliner era, and he just wasn't going to get that. When they told him to put Lesnar over; I think Austin had to think about his own career and what that would mean from a business sense. Austin had risked disability for the rest of his life at this stage and I understand that personal demons had began to effect him outside the ring!
After all that Stone Cold did for the WWF, he had every right to walk the way he did; why put himself under any more risk. Sure he was paid extremely well, but he also made Vince McMahon a billionaire!
If he felt that he was being mis-managed he had the stroke to do what he did.
Again; he should have said on the way out the door but WWE re-write shows as they go along; it was not that major.
What should have happened then; as it should today; WWE should have a well-being department (seperate to the Wellness policy) that Independent Contractors can consult for advice on certain issues. The thing with CM Punk's staff infection should never have happened.
To call either guy a selfish asshole is really not fair; they risk their life and bodies to entertain the fans. We should respect that!
Jonyboyuk2
Getting Noticed By Management
of course SCSA has since said he regret is cos he lost a lot of money that year and he felt it wasn't perhaps the best thing to do on reflection; you can see why he did it.
WWF/WWE superstars are indepenant contractors. They make their money off their aura in the ring. If they leave WWE, they have to make a living elsewhere. Who could trust Vince after the Bret Hart montreal screw job.
WWF/WWE superstars are indepenant contractors. They make their money off their aura in the ring. If they leave WWE, they have to make a living elsewhere. Who could trust Vince after the Bret Hart montreal screw job.
@smarkmouth
Friendly Neighborhood
I'm almost similar in thought to JonyboyUK2. While I agree that they both had legitimate gripes, I also feel they both could have handled it better. It was, however, their choices, so I won't dissect that too much. I won't reiterate any more history, but I feel answering in favor of one over the other will only come from the posters bias. That's fine, we all have bias', but let's remember our subjective opinion is not a fact.
The only other position I could feel this argument taking is accounting their spot on the roster, which is hard as Austin and Punk were certainly comparable at the time of their walk outs. Frankly, even if Punk or Austin were lower on the card, I'm not sure that would answer it for us either. I think even if someone like Heath Slater or Titus O'Neill walked out, it wouldn't be any worse or better than Austin/Punk.
Sorry. This may look like I'm trying to kibosh the thread and discussion. That wasn't my intention.
The only other position I could feel this argument taking is accounting their spot on the roster, which is hard as Austin and Punk were certainly comparable at the time of their walk outs. Frankly, even if Punk or Austin were lower on the card, I'm not sure that would answer it for us either. I think even if someone like Heath Slater or Titus O'Neill walked out, it wouldn't be any worse or better than Austin/Punk.
Sorry. This may look like I'm trying to kibosh the thread and discussion. That wasn't my intention.
I agree.
Austin did the worst walkout, non-kayfab is also beating his wife bloody 3 times, only a coward does that.
But Punk was also a crybaby. "If I don't have a wrestlemania-mainevent I'm leaving". Punk = Millionaire crybaby.
Austin had the "worst" walk out. At the time Austin walked out, he was THE top babyface of WWE. He already had a big impact in WWE's direction (he mainly carried the attitude era) and had contributed on WWE a lot more than Punk did. He was advertised to face Brock Lesnar. I imagine creative were going nuts, trying to fix the story lines with Austin's exit. Even so, that Austin's exit was acknowledged on TV the week after that.
On the other hand...Punk was never THE top babyface. He had a championship reign of 400+ days, but how many PPVs did he close? (if you're not in the last match, then you're not in the real main event). Punk's "last" match was on a PPV, were he got put through a table. So WWE could disguise his exit based on story lines. After the Rumble, Punk wasn't advertised for anything meaningful, unlike Austin.
So yeah, I believe Austin's walk out was worse than Punk's.
On the other hand...Punk was never THE top babyface. He had a championship reign of 400+ days, but how many PPVs did he close? (if you're not in the last match, then you're not in the real main event). Punk's "last" match was on a PPV, were he got put through a table. So WWE could disguise his exit based on story lines. After the Rumble, Punk wasn't advertised for anything meaningful, unlike Austin.
So yeah, I believe Austin's walk out was worse than Punk's.
I'm not sure about that, sure he was a bonified main eventer and had carried the company in previous years but when he left, the roster was STACKED with talent that could take his place pretty easily (and did) without affecting the ratings a whole deal.
Triple H returned from his quad injury and was HOT back then, perhaps his best run as a face. You also had Hulk Hogan returned which the fans ate up. Shawn Michaels made his miraculous return as well near enough that time. That's 3 massive returns in the space of 6 months.
Not to mention you had Kurt Angle, Kane (who wasn't completely ruined by then) Ric Flair, Chris Jericho, Undertaker and an emerging Brock Lesnar coming through. Austin leaving sure was a blow but it wasn't like they had no main eventers to cover for him. I don't think WWE was in a better position in terms of having top tier talent around this time.
rmp0012002
Championship Contender
Definitely Austin as I believe he decided on route to a show that he was done. Punk was sliding down the ladder a bit and had ring related health issues he felt the WWE wasn't addressing. He also didn't have the pull to make any demands. Austin has admitted he was wrong in the way he walked out but he was Vince's top money maker of all time and usually the main event so he should have used a little bit of his weight on Vince if he didn't like how he was booked. Austin is the face of the Attitude Era so I'd think he had some pull.
Stone Cold Tea
Getting Noticed By Management
In both case the fact they walked out is inexcusable even though personal issues played a big part at the time as well. In the case of both guys they felt underappreciated and under utilized. In that case i feel SCSA had more of a right to walk out as he had a legitimate gripe with the storyline proposed to him and a lot of people agree that even though Austin was wrong to walk out they can to an extent understand his reasoning behind it, I mean Austin was definitely one of the last guys Brock should go over.
I've read over the transcript of CM Punks podcast but can't fully remember it right now so excuse me if i forget something. Punk had a reason to feel mistreat too yes but they guy walks out after he just had a 3 month rest i think his issue was more selfishness and possibly a bit of disapointment in himself that when he was given the ball to run with, as epic as his reign was to the diehards, he never really did transcend the business the way he said he would. Lets be honest punk isn't face of your company material. To the smarks yes, to the casuals no. Add in the fact he didn't get to close out 'mania ( he got to face taker for gods sake!) and he felt that a match with triple h wasn't big enough for him then in my opinion we have a guy who just reeks of pure selfishness, arrogance and an over inflated opinion of his importance on the card
I've read over the transcript of CM Punks podcast but can't fully remember it right now so excuse me if i forget something. Punk had a reason to feel mistreat too yes but they guy walks out after he just had a 3 month rest i think his issue was more selfishness and possibly a bit of disapointment in himself that when he was given the ball to run with, as epic as his reign was to the diehards, he never really did transcend the business the way he said he would. Lets be honest punk isn't face of your company material. To the smarks yes, to the casuals no. Add in the fact he didn't get to close out 'mania ( he got to face taker for gods sake!) and he felt that a match with triple h wasn't big enough for him then in my opinion we have a guy who just reeks of pure selfishness, arrogance and an over inflated opinion of his importance on the card
ADLegend21
Sucker for Stables
They both had reasons to go but Austin's was peppered with not wanting to put over a rising star where as CM Punk went out of his way to "make" everyone he worked with. He was in bad shape and he flat out told Rusev to toss him around as opposed to just kicking him in the corner.