Consider it dropped. Until I find that you're wrong once again.
Then you'll never have to bring it up again.
If I did agree, that was a hideous oversight and could probably be attributed to me being a bit tired.
The fact is, he has been an upper-midcarder. But if this angle has proved anything, it's that CM Punk can hang with the best of them. Wherever he's been to in this angle, he's getting a great reception.
Punk has always moved between the main event and the upper midcard in WWE. But so has Rey Mysterio. So has Chris Jericho. Like them, Punk is hard to pin down into one category. However, three world title runs leads me to believe that WWE sees him as a main eventer. And now, I don't think there is any question as to whether WWE sees him as a main eventer.
I think there's probably still serious doubts.
What people keep overlooking is the material he's being allowed to use which makes the IWC see him in a different light. My wife, who will keep an eye on wrestling while I watch it, didn't really give a damn about one thing Punk said tonight (except for the personal plane comment, to which she rolled her eyes), and just ignored him until Cena came out.
Now, I wouldn't classify my wife even as a casual fan, more of a "well, I'll kind of pay attention if it's on" type of person, but using this as anecdotal evidence is the best I can do to prove the things Punk is saying is really not that big of a deal, if you remove the "breaking kayfabe" side of it. He's certainly not delivering these promos any better than Jericho or Angle or Triple H. Of course, the difference is those guys I mentioned could do it WITHOUT needing to break kayfabe, without needing the extra shot of adrenaline which comes from the realism. Everything they can do they do as part of the show, not as breaking out of the show (well, except for Triple H, he tends to step outside kayfabe at times).
When Punk was working with the same material everyone else was, where was this "great" ability to promo that he supposedly has? Until the WWE gave him the "live mic", he was no different than any other worker on the roster.
For Punk to truly prove something to me, he has to be able to be as good as you all say WHILE using WWE storyline material. Until then, I'm just going to have to refer back to his previous years of upper midcard status.
*sigh*
No, that was not my basis for proving you wrong in THIS particular argument. The fact I have to actually say that causes disappointment in me for you.
Re-read what I wrote again, and understand I'm talking about the big picture, not this particular argument. I've proven you wrong many times, and the reason I've proven you wrong is because you subscribe to stereotypical IWC beliefs, which usually are wrong. Now, I can get into the particulars of each debate on why you are wrong (like I have done in this thread), but in general, my besting you comes from the position you take, and your inability to prove anything true because of that position.
For example, you want me to think Punk is a great promo guy and should be a legit main-eventer. You know, like the IWC has been screaming about for years. So you take two weeks worth of promos, and use that as your basis to prove that Punk can "hang" with the main-eventers, while completely ignoring Punk's "great" work has been completely dependent upon, as he himself said, "breaking the fourth wall".
Typical IWC mentality, and the reason you keep losing. You don't see the big picture, you live in the here and now, and you don't understand Punk has never been this "hot" until now, and he had to break kayfabe on TV to do it, and even then, his promos appeal far more to the Internet crowd than the casual crowd.
That's what I meant.
The bolded part I find intriguing though. You're so very nearly right. It's not a case of not understanding anything beyond what I like, it's a case of not caring. The fact is, I don't care about anything beyond what I like. Why should I? I watch wrestling for my enjoyment and my entertainment. No one else's.
Because, and as I've explained a million times before on this forum, no one gives a rat's ass about what YOU care about. Everyone only cares what THEY like.
However, in order to have any reasonable or rational discussion on quality, you cannot rely on what each person prefers, you have to have objective criteria. Using your logic, I could say Heidenreich is the best wrestler the WWE ever had, because I like him and nobody else can say he's not. Which, of course, is a completely stupid thing to say, and anyone with half a brain knows that. But if we try to determine quality merely by what one person prefers, then it's a ridiculous endeavor.
So you have to have objective criteria. And in the wrestling business, the number one goal of every pro wrestler, the reason they are hired, is to make the company money. So, it becomes a game of determining, not what YOU like, but what the PEOPLE like.
That's why you should care what others like.
Hey, if you feel that I'm wasting your time, you too can stop. What did this even start with anyway? Oh I remember, you said CM Punk got little reaction
No, I said he was the weak link of the promo, and I'm right.
Via Armbar was the one who jumped in about crowd cheers determining quality, which is just wrong.
that losing Punk wouldn't be that big of a deal for WWE (even though their actions speak volumes).
In the last few years, the WWE has lost HBK, HHH, Edge, The Undertaker (for all intents and purposes), Jericho, Angle, Batista, etc...hasn't been that big of a deal.
What makes you think losing an upper-midcarder, who has to rely on shock value and breaking kayfabe to finally get good heat, is going to be a big deal for the WWE? If losing Jeff Hardy, who was a MUCH bigger draw than Punk has ever been, didn't hurt the WWE, why would losing Punk?
Again, you're posting from the IWC perspective, and not looking at the big picture.
What's sad is you're a decent poster, just with terrible understanding of pro wrestling. I hope one day you'll break out of the silly things you back now and take the time to learn. There's nothing wrong with liking what you like, but you have to learn to separate your feelings from truths.
I am tempted to quit this. I'm feeling that's it is quite pointless as the original points were dealt with. Plus, debating with you can get stale. However, myself quitting will only serve to boost your already inflated internet ego. I'll just be another "lesser person" who you have claimed to "defeat in the battle of debating about wrestling". So yeah, I'm torn.
I think it's funny you accuse me of having an Internet ego, and yet you won't quit a debate you think is pointless. What does that say about you?
