MattelsRule
Main Eventer
JakksRule is dead! Long live MattelsRule!
Joined on: Mar 18, 2005 2:03:07 GMT -5
Posts: 2,468
|
Post by MattelsRule on Jul 2, 2008 17:39:34 GMT -5
OK - some points about my post. 1. I am happy about a fresh champion. 2. I think CM Punk has tremendous "potential" 3. It's not a question of whether Punk earned it from a work ethic stand point - it's a question of, was he built up properly to hold this title!!? You argue about Brock Lesnar winning in 5 months - BUT - he destroyed EVERYONE in his path!! CM Punk has jobbed for 9 straight months, ASIDE FROM MITB!! I agree that he is champion transitionally to establish everyone else's position on RAW. Punk has never been in a GOOD feud - his only notable feud since debuting TWO YEARS AGO was with John Morrison!! And there wasn't any heat on Morrison for anything. I'm sorry everyone - I'm a WWE Fan - I don't watch TNA, ROH, Independent Wrestling World, CM Punk High School Wrestling! I HAVE NO CONCERN FOR WHAT PUNK DID BEFORE HE CAME TO WWE!!! He is in WWE now and he hasn't established himself yet. He hasn't feuded with anyone notable, done anything memorable, or given me a "Holy Shit" moment. He has the potential to be a great champion - but as far as I'm concerned, he hasn't garnered enough attention or momentum to be World ING Champion!! I'm sorry. IC Title reign on RAW should have come first. What makes Punk deserve it over Jericho? It's a RATINGS PLOY! It's smart by WWE. But lets all face the f'ing facts - CM PUNK HAS NOT DONE ANYTHING NOTABLE IN 2 YEARS with the exception of a lackluster ECW Title run and a MITB victory which he only got because Hardy got suspended at the wrong time!
|
|
|
Post by HugoOne on Jul 2, 2008 17:41:33 GMT -5
Money in the bank is just a way for wrestlers to steal titles at WWE`s convenience. Yes it`s way too soon, hell it`s too soon for an IC run for him. He`s only been wrestling since 1999. The same year my daughter was born. I`d say theres a ton more guys who deserve it more than Punk. i`d rather see Val Venis with it or someone who`s been there forever. Big Daddy V deserves it more than Punk, Mark Henry deserves it more than Punk and the list goes on and on. He`s about as much of a joke as Batista is. Again WWE`s serving a silver platter to the kids and chicks. Punk`s gonna become another John Cena Guarunteed. Would be nice if they gave back to the fans who were around in the 80`s and 90`s and built the company to what it is today because quite frankly from the piont of view of someone who`s been a wrestling fan since 1983 WWE, more specifically Raw sucks balls and doesn`t grab the attention of us older fans. I've gotta disagree. According to this, you see people deserving of the Championship due to the fact that they've been around for a long time instead of their wrestling ability. Mark Henry, Big Daddy V, and (as much as I love him) Val Venis as World Champion would BOMB. You say CM Punk appeals to girls and kids. Why doesn't he appeal to males as well exactly? He started wrestling in 1999. He won the Championship in 2008. That's 9 years. To put it into perspective, Steve Austin (while Punk is not up there in terms of popularity, don't get me wrong) started wrestling in 1989, and won in 1998. Again, 9 years. You may disagree with Punk as Champion but to say he's undeserving is ridiculous, especially when he helped build a company such as Ring of Honor and helped put it on the map while his stellar matches.
|
|
MattelsRule
Main Eventer
JakksRule is dead! Long live MattelsRule!
Joined on: Mar 18, 2005 2:03:07 GMT -5
Posts: 2,468
|
Post by MattelsRule on Jul 2, 2008 17:44:39 GMT -5
And again, no offense to ROH fans but most WWE fans are not familiar with his work there. He has a cool character and personality to the casual fan.
Also - Steve Austin was a more familiar face to the casual wrestling fan as WCW was more popular than ROH ever was AND Austin was built up properly by WWE and he was WAAAAAAAAAAAAY over - I wouldn't say the same about Punk. The place went nuts because they saw Edge lose and a title change hands unexpectedly. IF they had built up a Punk/Edge match - it wouldn't have come off the same way.
|
|
|
Post by angelsandairwaves on Jul 2, 2008 17:46:25 GMT -5
him being born was too soon tbhiyamftwwtflol
|
|
|
Post by justamazing on Jul 2, 2008 17:48:03 GMT -5
Why is everybody saying stuff like "it made him look weak" etc.? The whole point of it was to give Edge a taste of his own medicine. It doesn't make Punk look weak at all. He has got the biggest title in the WWE, and he has it for a reason.
|
|
|
Post by S on Jul 2, 2008 18:14:49 GMT -5
Punk deserved to win it. He's worked his ass off his entire career, from ROH, to OVW, to WWE, and everywhere in between. Sure it may be too soon, but Lesnar won the title after debuting 5 months earlier. Cena won the title in a little over 2 years, as did Punk. HHH won it in 4. The haters can say it's too soon, but people they like also won it too soon. I'm sorry, but: 1) Brock is a guy who wouldn't be believeable anywhere but the main event 2) Cena had a much more individual character 2 years after his debut, it was arguably his highest point gimmick wise (and don't tell me that Punks 'straight edge' deal is a gimmick... if it was, it would be even more original, but aside from have it mentioned a couple of times, its a rather forgetable thing when looking at his WWE work) 3) There is a big difference between 2 years and 4 years
|
|
|
Post by BoJack Hogan on Jul 2, 2008 18:27:47 GMT -5
wwe made a catastrophic mistake by giving him an actual wwe title...hey...i like that..sounds like a new moniker for me.
|
|
CWE OWNER
Main Eventer
2015
Joined on: Oct 1, 2005 20:47:13 GMT -5
Posts: 2,896
|
Post by CWE OWNER on Jul 2, 2008 18:37:13 GMT -5
I think if they are clever they Punk could be the next HBK. It was like when HBK won his first title at WM12 last night.
|
|
|
Post by Lk™ on Jul 2, 2008 18:40:38 GMT -5
sooner than i expected, but i don't care. i'm thrilled that he won. biggest mark out moment in a very long time.
|
|
|
Post by Heresy on Jul 2, 2008 18:51:15 GMT -5
3) There is a big difference between 2 years and 4 years 2 years to be exact. Was it too soon? Maybe. It was, however, a balsy move that added a lot of excitement and unpredictability to the way WWE books its shows. Not every wrestler needs to follow Shawn Michael's path to the title. CM Punk is as well rounded as they come... he'll grow into his new position no problems.
|
|
|
Post by S on Jul 2, 2008 20:14:36 GMT -5
3) There is a big difference between 2 years and 4 years 2 years to be exact. Was it too soon? Maybe. It was, however, a balsy move that added a lot of excitement and unpredictability to the way WWE books its shows. Not every wrestler needs to follow Shawn Michael's path to the title. CM Punk is as well rounded as they come... he'll grow into his new position no problems. *sits in the corner*
|
|
|
Post by TheChamp420 on Jul 2, 2008 21:21:31 GMT -5
to soon, they should have done what the did with hbk in his first title run in 96, build it up to some great match then give him the gold. make him be in the wwe for a few years and earn it. i'm sure he earned it in other brands roh or what ever, but too soon for wwe.
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Jul 2, 2008 21:22:23 GMT -5
I think that he won the title just to get it on Raw and I am happy though because Raw needs a title!
I hope he doesn't have the title for like 3 weeks.. That would suck!
He is a good wrestler and has paided his dues for a long time now so I am glad he won..
|
|
|
Post by Controversial Maverick PUNK on Jul 2, 2008 21:26:41 GMT -5
The vast majority of people complaining, are the one's who dislike/hate Punk - that stands to reason, though and it's to be expected.. I'd be complaining if Kennedy, MVP or Morrison had won the belt.. That being said - it's rather ridiculous to compare Punk's win to David Arquette winning the WHC.. and just pain intellectually- disabled to say that he's not ready for even the IC title.. Still, let the haters hate.. The bottom line is, with regard to Punk being WHC, and whether it's too soon, there's only one opinion that matters - and it's certainly not theirs.. that opinion, belongs to one Vince McMahon..
|
|
Adam3s - V1
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 12, 2006 8:41:51 GMT -5
Posts: 1,794
|
Post by Adam3s - V1 on Jul 2, 2008 22:08:34 GMT -5
Austin came into WWE and won the title within 2-3 years correct? I'm also right in thinking in his first year he was built up to be something like a glorified jobber as Stunnin' Steve Austin (I'm sorry if I've got the nickname in the wrong time zone but I know he went with that nickname before becoming 3:16). Then he got popular but got injured and spent a lot of time not even wrestling. So by the time he was popular and wrestling it took him around 1 year give or take to become champion. He was also at this time been wrestling for 9 years the same amount of time as Punk currently. Yet Austin's title win lead to an increase in rating and the company sky rocketing so maybe too soon is a good thing. Better too soon than too late (RVD, Joe)
|
|
|
Post by BØRNS on Jul 2, 2008 22:27:23 GMT -5
The past month of WWE as a whole has been CHANGE. The draft was change, NOC was change, and Punk's win was change. I think that if Punk's over, then give him the title. It doesn't mean he has to be champion forever, but let him have that taste and then let him build upon it.
|
|