|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Aug 27, 2014 13:49:04 GMT -5
If Rock isn't around, we get Cena vs Punk for the title at Mania 29. Very unlikely. Everyone can play the "a bigger star was around/wasn't around" game to make excuses for people or to diminish their accomplishments. If Rock isn't around, the title doesn't go on a midcard Punk vs Jericho match at Mania 28 and Punk doesn't get the year-long title reign. Or if Rock was around for 28 but not 29, WWE is more likely to pull the trigger on new stars and Ryback wins the title at Hell in a Cell 2012.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Aug 27, 2014 14:06:21 GMT -5
If Rock isn't around, we get Cena vs Punk for the title at Mania 29. Very unlikely. Everyone can play the "a bigger star was around/wasn't around" game to make excuses for people or to diminish their accomplishments. If Rock isn't around, the title doesn't go on a midcard Punk vs Jericho match at Mania 28 and Punk doesn't get the year-long title reign. Or if Rock was around for 28 but not 29, WWE is more likely to pull the trigger on new stars and Ryback wins the title at Hell in a Cell 2012.You and I are just going to have to agree to disagree there I guess. Ryback was/is garbage and I honestly don't think CM Punk vs the Rock had anything to do with it. If they really wanted to put Ryback over at Mania they could have easily pushed him at the WHC and they didn't, they didn't even let him beat Mark Henry. There were multiple opportunities to elevate Ryback after HIAC and WWE didn't do any of them, regardless if you thought his credibility was shot after the Punk match/feud or not. Ryback wasn't going anywhere near the Mania 29 main event because he was exposed as a fraud. Punk vs Taker, Punk vs Cena, Cena vs Taker, maybe Cena vs Brock, none of that was going on before Ryback. Also, I didn't say a word about Mania 28, but what do you assume would have closed that show if the Rock wasn't around? If you don't think Punk was in the conversation, wearing the WWE Title, I think you're kidding yourself. Not everyone can play the "bigger star was around" game because it's only happened a handful of times. Other than Hogan at 9, The Rock returning, and likely whatever happens at 31 with Brock, when has the "bigger star" or part time guy returned to take the Main Event from the full time roster or champion? With all of that, The Miz has main evented a WrestleMania, and there isn't a series of words in the English language that can convince me that Miz should be held in a higher regard than Punk because of it.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Aug 27, 2014 14:22:06 GMT -5
You and I are just going to have to agree to disagree there I guess. Ryback was/is garbage and I honestly don't think CM Punk vs the Rock had anything to do with it. If they really wanted to put Ryback over at Mania they could have easily pushed him at the WHC and they didn't, they didn't even let him beat Mark Henry. Nah. You can only end a streak once. If Goldberg loses the first time he faces Hogan, Goldberg's done. By the time WrestleMania rolled around, Ryback was just enhancement talent for the Shield and CM Punk anyway, beating Henry wouldn't have put the September/October lightning back in the bottle. It's fine to not like him, but you're kidding yourself if you ignore the momentum he had as a rising star when he was undefeated. Actually, Punk's best chance at main-eventing WrestleMania might have been if Rock didn't come back for 29 and if Cena didn't get hurt in fall 2012... Because Ryback dethroning Punk might have gone on Mania 29. Although it still probably wouldn't have topped the card ahead of Lesnar vs HHH and Cena vs Undertaker. Undertaker vs Triple H. Cena vs Lesnar. Undertaker vs Cena. All three of those would have been bigger than any of them would have been with CM Punk swapped in for one of the participants. It's happened every single year that WrestleMania has existed. Why didn't Bob Holly ever main event WrestleMania? Because there were always bigger stars and bigger matches around. CM Punk was on seven WrestleManias, if I'm counting correctly. The Rock was only wrestling on two of those, but on all seven, there were bigger stars and bigger matches than anything CM Punk was doing. And that's the great thing about Daniel Bryan. He made his fans passionate enough to get him thrown into the WrestleMania main event as the main guy ahead of a returning star. Punk only made his fans passionate enough to make excuses and complain about returning stars. So yeah, I guess Bryan's the man to vote for.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Angry Cena on Aug 27, 2014 14:28:12 GMT -5
Your honesty comes off very miserable and angry so fix that. I disagree. He wasn't out of line or angry. I don't get this response at all. That's fine.
|
|
|
Post by Slim on Aug 27, 2014 14:58:26 GMT -5
To me, CM Punk is better in ring, he made really amzing matches during his career. And of course, he's better at the mic.
|
|
Negan™
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Jul 31, 2013 16:42:44 GMT -5
Posts: 356
|
Post by Negan™ on Aug 27, 2014 16:07:29 GMT -5
Bryan. He has an intangible quality which gets into the hearts of fans which Punk never did. And, personalities aside, Bryan is twice the wrestler Punk was. Bryan is also more popular at his peak than Punk was at his. This isn't even close. This. Bryan is one of those special wrestlers that makes the fans want to actually cheer for him. I'm a 21 year old "smark" and I actually be cheering Daniel Bryan on in his matches. That says it all. I geniunely want him to win. The only wrestlers I can remember with this quality were Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart. Perhaps Austin aswell.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 12:57:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 17:28:28 GMT -5
Bryan. He has an intangible quality which gets into the hearts of fans which Punk never did. And, personalities aside, Bryan is twice the wrestler Punk was. Bryan is also more popular at his peak than Punk was at his. This isn't even close. This. Bryan is one of those special wrestlers that makes the fans want to actually cheer for him. I'm a 21 year old "smark" and I actually be cheering Daniel Bryan on in his matches. That says it all. I geniunely want him to win. The only wrestlers I can remember with this quality were Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart. Perhaps Austin aswell. Love the reference:)
|
|
|
Post by greenjack1992 on Aug 28, 2014 7:32:24 GMT -5
You can't ask that. Flair changed the way the industry works so people like Bryan could come in and beat up big guys and so that people like Austin Aries could turn up and wreck everybody on the microphone. Just because he pioneered something doesn't mean he's the best at it, but there's no question that his contribution is not only bigger but also more poignant. That's like asking who the better band is between The Beatles and Oasis. Oasis were far more technically proficient, had higher production value and wrote songs which rivaled The Beatles in quality and in sales - for all intents and purposes they were probably slightly better - but The Beatles are the greatest of all time because of their contribution to the music industry, not for how well they played their instruments. It's not a fair question. Bryan is better than Flair in the ring, but Flair will always be the best ever. It's vary fair, you can't tell the type of performer based on a booking decision on a show. It doesn't prove quality because crap has main evented it before. The original guy said, Bryan is better because he main evented WM, which is a paper accomplishment that you will only get if the company likes you. I don't agree with that either, the second The Miz main evented WrestleMania 27 it meant nothing. What I'm saying is you can't compare Bryan and Flair because it's just not a fair comparison. One is the best at something the other pioneered.
|
|
|
Post by rustyy on Aug 28, 2014 11:25:54 GMT -5
Bryan. He has an intangible quality which gets into the hearts of fans which Punk never did. And, personalities aside, Bryan is twice the wrestler Punk was. Bryan is also more popular at his peak than Punk was at his. This isn't even close. This. Bryan is one of those special wrestlers that makes the fans want to actually cheer for him. I'm a 21 year old "smark" and I actually be cheering Daniel Bryan on in his matches. That says it all. I geniunely want him to win. The only wrestlers I can remember with this quality were Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart. Perhaps Austin aswell. Well, I'm like a lot more than a good wrestler, people like Bryan, Hart and Michaels don't offer that to me. I would take someone who is good on the mic over any of those 3 any day of the week. Please don't try and tell me any of them are good on the mic either, Bret and Michaels were cringeworthy and Bryan is alright at best. And Punk does make people want to cheer him, he got cheered against Rock and Taker while he was the top heel in the company. Name someone else who could have poured Paul Bearer's ashes on themself and got cheered.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Aug 28, 2014 12:38:55 GMT -5
This. Bryan is one of those special wrestlers that makes the fans want to actually cheer for him. I'm a 21 year old "smark" and I actually be cheering Daniel Bryan on in his matches. That says it all. I geniunely want him to win. The only wrestlers I can remember with this quality were Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart. Perhaps Austin aswell. Well, I'm like a lot more than a good wrestler, people like Bryan, Hart and Michaels don't offer that to me. I would take someone who is good on the mic over any of those 3 any day of the week. Please don't try and tell me any of them are good on the mic either, Bret and Michaels were cringeworthy and Bryan is alright at best. And Punk does make people want to cheer him, he got cheered against Rock and Taker while he was the top heel in the company. Name someone else who could have poured Paul Bearer's ashes on themself and got cheered. What the are you talking about? Seriously? HBK is a really good talker. Like comfortably better than Bryan. You're just making up nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by knupmc on Aug 28, 2014 12:42:55 GMT -5
Punk is better and here's the reason why:
He can play the character of the top heel in the business He can play the character of the top face in the business He is arguably one of the greatest to ever hold a wwe mic He is truly one of a kind He brought attitude to the ring
|
|
|
Post by rustyy on Aug 28, 2014 12:46:26 GMT -5
Well, I'm like a lot more than a good wrestler, people like Bryan, Hart and Michaels don't offer that to me. I would take someone who is good on the mic over any of those 3 any day of the week. Please don't try and tell me any of them are good on the mic either, Bret and Michaels were cringeworthy and Bryan is alright at best. And Punk does make people want to cheer him, he got cheered against Rock and Taker while he was the top heel in the company. Name someone else who could have poured Paul Bearer's ashes on themself and got cheered. What the are you talking about? Seriously? HBK is a really good talker. Like comfortably better than Bryan. You're just making up nonsense. Thanks for telling me my opinion. But no, modern HBK sucked. I'll give you 90's cokehead was better though. I thought we were talking modern era.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Aug 28, 2014 12:52:35 GMT -5
What the are you talking about? Seriously? HBK is a really good talker. Like comfortably better than Bryan. You're just making up nonsense. Thanks for telling me my opinion. But no, modern HBK sucked. I'll give you 90's cokehead was better though. I thought we were talking modern era. I'll take my victories where I can get them.
|
|
|
Post by Weemanv1 on Aug 28, 2014 13:00:41 GMT -5
Bryan made me want to watch the product every Monday. Punk made me want to watch...uh... Well... He didn't. So Bryan.
|
|
Negan™
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Jul 31, 2013 16:42:44 GMT -5
Posts: 356
|
Post by Negan™ on Aug 28, 2014 20:50:41 GMT -5
This. Bryan is one of those special wrestlers that makes the fans want to actually cheer for him. I'm a 21 year old "smark" and I actually be cheering Daniel Bryan on in his matches. That says it all. I geniunely want him to win. The only wrestlers I can remember with this quality were Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart. Perhaps Austin aswell. Well, I'm like a lot more than a good wrestler, people like Bryan, Hart and Michaels don't offer that to me. I would take someone who is good on the mic over any of those 3 any day of the week. Please don't try and tell me any of them are good on the mic either, Bret and Michaels were cringeworthy and Bryan is alright at best. And Punk does make people want to cheer him, he got cheered against Rock and Taker while he was the top heel in the company. Name someone else who could have poured Paul Bearer's ashes on themself and got cheered. What? HBK is one of the best talkers ever...
|
|
|
Post by rustyy on Aug 28, 2014 21:07:25 GMT -5
Well, I'm like a lot more than a good wrestler, people like Bryan, Hart and Michaels don't offer that to me. I would take someone who is good on the mic over any of those 3 any day of the week. Please don't try and tell me any of them are good on the mic either, Bret and Michaels were cringeworthy and Bryan is alright at best. And Punk does make people want to cheer him, he got cheered against Rock and Taker while he was the top heel in the company. Name someone else who could have poured Paul Bearer's ashes on themself and got cheered. What? HBK is one of the best talkers ever... No. He is not. He's never cut a memorable promo, he's never captivated me, he's not a natural.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Aug 28, 2014 21:33:45 GMT -5
Bryan for me. I like Punk but have always felt he is overrated. Good in the ring but he got sloppy at times and really gave out the "backyard wrestler" vibe IMO. Bryan's matches seem to flow much better and his execution in the ring is much cleaner. Punk gets the nod on the mic but I feel Bryan is underrated. Punk has always been a great talker but after his initial "pipe bomb" his shoot promos basically consisted of him saying what the IWC had for years. Nothing super groundbreaking. I thought his SES promos and promos on Jeff Hardy were the highlights of his mic work in the WWE.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 12:57:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2014 1:10:05 GMT -5
As a pure wrestling talent:: Bryan
As a sports entertainer & character: Bryan
As a genuine human being: Bryan
As seeming entitled & mad at the world: punk
just my opinion
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 12:57:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2014 3:22:54 GMT -5
As a pure wrestling talent:: Bryan As a sports entertainer & character: Bryan As a genuine human being: Bryan As seeming entitled & mad at the world: punk just my opinion LOl that is funny I agree
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 12:57:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2014 3:23:21 GMT -5
Bryan for me. I like Punk but have always felt he is overrated. Good in the ring but he got sloppy at times and really gave out the "backyard wrestler" vibe IMO. Bryan's matches seem to flow much better and his execution in the ring is much cleaner. Punk gets the nod on the mic but I feel Bryan is underrated. Punk has always been a great talker but after his initial "pipe bomb" his shoot promos basically consisted of him saying what the IWC had for years. Nothing super groundbreaking. I thought his SES promos and promos on Jeff Hardy were the highlights of his mic work in the WWE. Yeah essentially he just had the balls to say it
|
|