July Wrasslin’ |OT| The Ring’s a Field, the Field of War, That’s Where We Lay the Law

Punk was white fucking hot in 2011, the kind of hot you put a rocket on right to the bank. What did they do instead? They had Del Rio cash in the briefcase a month after he won the belt, he's put in a shitty angle with Kevin Nash, loses on the next PPV to HHH, loses on the next PPV in a three way for the title (Del Rio retains). and lost a tag match on the next PPV against Miz and R Truth (teamed with HHH, Punk took the pin). Bad storylines, losing the title, four straight PPV loses, this is how you dampen the hottest wrestler in about a decade. Punk never reached the level he should have, and this stretch was the reason why
 
I honestly believe even Cena knew him and Punk had something special. They brought out good in each other.

He'll come out and toe the line of yes my battles with THE DEMON Kane in 2014 are probably the MOST DANGEROUS I COULD POSSIBLY HAVE EVAR, SERIAL GUYS. But deep down he must be bored to tears.

I know I am.
 
Aiii said:
But he was good enough. Had they pushed him properly throughout 2011 and build up for a Cena vs. Punk main event for Mania in 2012 he would have been just as big as John Cena, but with a broader appeal as he had supporters both young and old, instead of just young. Hell, they rushed the title unification and return of Punk. If they actually held off a few more weeks and not had a title unification until Mania, just have both guys claim they were champion that would have been a HUGE draw. As much as Rock was, if not more.

Punk might not be as muscled as John Cena, but there's no denying he was a better wrestler. He was definitely a much better talker.
Click to expand...
Aiii said:
But he was good enough. Had they pushed him properly throughout 2011 and build up for a Cena vs. Punk main event for Mania in 2012 he would have been just as big as John Cena, but with a broader appeal as he had supporters both young and old, instead of just young. Hell, they rushed the title unification and return of Punk. If they actually held off a few more weeks and not had a title unification until Mania, just have both guys claim they were champion that would have been a HUGE draw. As much as Rock was, if not more.

Punk might not be as muscled as John Cena, but there's no denying he was a better wrestler. He was definitely a much better talker.
Click to expand...
I don't believe any of this for a second.

2012 was when The Rock and John Cena had their first match. No way in hell is a CM Punk/Joan Cena match ever outdrawing that. How am I expected to believe that when Wrestlemania 25 did under a million buys, and Wrestlemania 26 didn't even reach 900,000 buys? Then Wrestlemania 27 comes along, The Rock gets involved, and they're over a million without him even having a match. He pretty much single handledly gave them a few hundred thousand buys.

Aiii said:
Ratings increased and Money In The Bank buyrate increased 20%. Pretty substantial I would say.

Anything after that is skewed because they put the belt on Del Rio and Kevin Nash happened instead of continuing a hot program.
Click to expand...
A quick google search shows me they drew 195,000 buys. Up from 165,000 buys the previous year. 4.84 million is the average viewership for the show the night after Money in the Bank which is the PPV that got all the buzz in the world apparently, with a peak of 4.98 million viewers. Batista got a higher viewership than that earlier this year with peak of 5.25 million viewership, and the night after Wrestlemania did 5.3 million viewership peak with a higher overall rating.

I'm not seeing anything noteworthy here in comparison to what WWE seems to do usually. Yet you're saying if WWE spent 8 months building this up, it'd outdraw Cena/Rock potentially, but at the least, match it?

And saying, 'This star could bring in old and new viewers alike, and be a replacement for Cena and be the top face' is an extremely strong claim. Sounds like nonsense. Especially when I'm seeing Daniel Bryan, who after being shit on for months on end, has consistently got the largest and hottest reactions I've seen since The Rock and Stone Cold 15 years ago, and even he can't do that.
 
Oh yeah, you talk about chemistry in the ring and I can't think of 2 guys who bring out the best in each other quite like Punk and Cena. I thought the MITB match was made by the crowd and the angle at first, but the match they had on Raw for the #1 contendership was incredible.

As for Punk himself, that promo did seem to bring back some lapsed fans and had a lot of mainstream exposure, it was all over sites at the time. It would have brought me back if the initial part of the Nexus hadn't already done so.
 
Verendus said:
I don't believe any of this for a second.

2012 was when The Rock and John Cena had their first match. No way in hell is a CM Punk/Joan Cena match ever outdrawing that. How am I expected to believe that when Wrestlemania 25 did under a million buys, and Wrestlemania 26 didn't even reach 900,000 buys? Then Wrestlemania 27 comes along, The Rock gets involved, and they're over a million without him even having a match. He pretty much single handledly gave them a few hundred thousand buys.
Click to expand...

Short term PPV pop built on the back of a guy who will work 2 matches a year over further building what could be the biggest guy to come along in a decade, sounds like some senile Vince McMahon logic. This is exactly why WWE is in the position they are, clinging to the stars who were popular back in the day to try and pop a rating or a buyrate instead of building new ones.
 
Verendus said:
I don't believe any of this for a second..
Click to expand...

You know what doesn't happen overnight? Ratingsjumps by 30%.

It took Stone Cold Steve Austin over half a year after winning King of the Ring to get even close to making a difference. When the nWo was formed ratings stayed around 3.5 until the second half of 1997 before they went up to 4.5 due to the Sting storyline. Etc.

Money in the Bank sold 30k more, nearly 20%, due to Punk, that's a huge difference for one guy to make overnight.
 
I'm not sure how you can't get that I am advocating they build on what Punk brought. Not just stick with it.

It's like the people back in mid 2013 claiming "Bryan's not a draw, you can't push him!", well no shit he's not a draw, they hadn't pushed him yet. You don't become a draw overnight, and Bryan, surprise surprise, is a draw these days, who pushes ratings, attendences and merch.

Rock/Cena was all well and good for one night of buyrates and gates, but what about the next night? Rock was gone after one promo and didn't show up for six months more. Meanwhile, Punk was there the whole time, being shafted in favour of Cena every month. Had they built up Punk from the pipebomb in mid 2011, he could have been surpassing Cena by WM, bringing a much different audience than Cena brought. They never capitilised on their different appeals.

Maybe the reason WWE keeps having to rely on part timers to provide a bandaid on a ten inch laceration is because any time they get handed a new top star on a platter, they ignore it and go with Cena anyway. Punk, or Bryan, or even guys like Ryback or Ziggler who couldn't be the top guy, but sure could have been main event guys, all botched. Bryan came the closest, but they still beat him up every week and book him as weak or non-serious.

Yet then here comes Roman Reigns, who mysteriously gets the perfect top guy booking no one else did. So they do know how to do it, they just choose not to.

EDIT: 30k extra buys from ONE PROMO is something to be noticed. Imagine what a year of promos and builds could have done.
 
Officerrob said:
Short term PPV pop built on the back of a guy who will work 2 matches a year over further building what could be the biggest guy to come along in a decade, sounds like some senile Vince McMahon logic. This is exactly why WWE is in the position they are, clinging to the stars who were popular back in the day to try and pop a rating or a buyrate instead of building new ones.
Click to expand...
CM Punk was one of those new stars they built. Or does he not magically count now for some reason?

WWE did the right thing by going ahead with The Rock/Cena at Wrestlemania 28. It's a huge match-up, and it's one match. It doesn't stop them for building a good card for the rest of the 3 hours they have for the show. And seeing how consistent WWE has been with revenue since 2005 or so, I really don't see why they'd sacrificing a huge money match which obviously has much larger implications than just the buyrate for Wrestlemania 28, for an unproven act that ultimately amounted to very little in comparison anyway.

Aiii said:
You know what doesn't happen overnight? Ratingsjumps by 30%.

It took Stone Cold Steve Austin over half a year after winning King of the Ring to get even close to making a difference. When the nWo was formed ratings stayed around 3.5 until the second half of 1997 before they went up to 4.5 due to the Sting storyline. Etc.

Money in the Bank sold 30k more, nearly 20%, due to Punk, that's a huge difference for one guy to make overnight.
Click to expand...
And none of this is even impressive in respect to what WWE was accomplishing back in 2005-2007. Let alone during their mainstream years which they will never get back because of a variety of factors. But you're making the claim that CM Punk would bring in old viewers and new alike etc. If there's one thing I'm seeing from WWE, is that for close to a decade now, they're relatively consistent with some spikes and downturns here and there, which is to be expected.

I'm talking too much now and need to do other things, but I'm just making the point that I don't see it. Give him his six month build or eight month build, and I don't even see him doing more than what was happening 7 years ago.

You're free to disagree of course.
 
I don't even know why, either. What other company would actively put a lid on a hot commodity, because they only want one hot commodity, not two?
Why not build BOTH Ambrose and Reigns as the top guys, not just Reigns. They seem to think the "one top invulnerable superstar" structure they have with Cena is the perfect template in 2014, which is scary.
 
You know what I hate?

The fact that evil boss HHH was constantly getting physical with D-Bry, beating him up and making him look weak but now that Cena is the champ its like 'oh no!' *hands on head* is all he can do because Cena is a 'legit' champ and I don't want to try mess with him that way cause I might get a 5 knuckle shuffle.
 
Watching my first ECW show. Not ever. Just in my chronological journey. Episode 26. Starting strong with Public Enemy. >_>
 
Verendus said:
You're free to disagree of course.
Click to expand...

And I will.

Also, let me counter by posting the ratings graph chart of the Monday Night Wars:
Monday_night_wars_ratings.gif


Please note how many months or even years it takes to get a noticable ratings and interest increase. Even in the biggest boom period wrestling has ever seen.
 
Aiii said:
Regret what? Contrary to Warrior he has plenty of cash. He's happy, he has other things going on in his life, just got married. And I'm sure he has plenty of side-gigs he can go to now. And really, aside from the WM Main Event, he's accomplished literally everything a guy can accomplish in the company right now.

There really isn't much to regret there. I wish I could retire at 35.
Click to expand...

Wha? Warrior had tons of money and owned his character and made it work for him. He was never a pov.

EDIT: Damn I just read the rest of the page. You guys are too much. Jeezus.jiff
 
Conrad Link said:
You know what I hate?

The fact that evil boss HHH was constantly getting physical with D-Bry, beating him up and making him look weak but now that Cena is the champ its like 'oh no!' *hands on head* is all he can do because Cena is a 'legit' champ and I don't want to try mess with him that way cause I might get a 5 knuckle shuffle.
Click to expand...

Bryan was a B+ talent that his boss didn't respect. That was the point of the Daniel Bryan storyline.

Come on people.
 
Conrad Link said:
You know what I hate?

The fact that evil boss HHH was constantly getting physical with D-Bry, beating him up and making him look weak but now that Cena is the champ its like 'oh no!' *hands on head* is all he can do because Cena is a 'legit' champ and I don't want to try mess with him that way cause I might get a 5 knuckle shuffle.
Click to expand...

No one touches Cena, ever. No one ever looks stronger than Cena, ever. And he never shows any kind of weakness, ever.
Same template Reigns is getting. He gives no fucks about anything, and I don't mean that in a "cool" way, I mean that in a "well if he doesn't care, why should I?". He never cares about anything, he never looks weak, no one ever gets the upper hand on him, and if he ever loses, it will be after they hammer home ten times that he totally would have won in a fair fight but the heel cheated with a tank or something.

It's a fine template to go with if you want another top face that gets booed by most crowds. Personally I think that's crucial to avoid for your face of the company and looks downright embarassing on screen, but I guess I'm not in charge of WWE.
 
Aiii said:
And I will.

Also, let me counter by posting the ratings graph chart of the Monday Night Wars:
Monday_night_wars_ratings.gif


Please note how many months or even years it takes to get a noticable ratings and interest increase. Even in the biggest boom period wrestling has ever seen.
Click to expand...
Biggest boom period, two big companies, and the Raw viewership at it's peak, was what, 10 million? What about before then? Or right after during the years of 2002-2004?

They've averaged 4-5 million for a decade now, and they're not coming close to reaching those numbers again.
 
Vince McMahon said:
Wha? Warrior had tons of money and owned his character and made it work for him. He was never a pov.

EDIT: Damn I just read the rest of the page. You guys are too much. Jeezus.jiff
Click to expand...

I'd say we're just enough Sunny Mac.

I'll give you that Warrior had money. Fair enough. He was still a miserable old fuck for most of his post-WWE career though and I think it's fair to say Punk seems pretty happy with his post-WWE life.
 
Verendus said:
Biggest boom period, two big companies, and the Raw viewership at it's peak, was what, 10 million? What about before then? Or right after during the years of 2002-2004?

They've averaged 4-5 million for a decade now. They're not reaching those numbers again. The world is a very different place today.
Click to expand...

That is an excellent attitude to take to ensure you indeed never reach those numbers again.
 
joelseph said:
Dude can act. Hope they bring him back to use again, the GM spot was such a waste for him.
Click to expand...

I really like him as a personality, I hope he gets another crack at it. He's photogenic, endearing, and entertaining on the mic. I loved when he redid his Twitter page to be GM. He's great.
 
Verendus said:
CM Punk was one of those new stars they built. Or does he not magically count now for some reason?

WWE did the right thing by going ahead with The Rock/Cena at Wrestlemania 28. It's a huge match-up, and it's one match. It doesn't stop them for building a good card for the rest of the 3 hours they have for the show. And seeing how consistent WWE has been with revenue since 2005 or so, I really don't see why they'd sacrificing a huge money match which obviously has much larger implications than just the buyrate for Wrestlemania 28, for an unproven act that ultimately amounted to very little in comparison anyway.


And none of this is even impressive in respect to what WWE was accomplishing back in 2005-2007. Let alone during their mainstream years which they will never get back because of a variety of factors. But you're making the claim that CM Punk would bring in old viewers and new alike etc. If there's one thing I'm seeing from WWE, is that for close to a decade now, they're relatively consistent with some spikes and downturns here and there, which is to be expected.

I'm talking too much now and need to do other things, but I'm just making the point that I don't see it. Give him his six month build or eight month build, and I don't even see him doing more than what was happening 7 years ago.

You're free to disagree of course.
Click to expand...

Punk was a star who could have been a megastar, they squandered that chance.

That "for close to a decade" period you refer to where ratings are basically stagnant, is the Cena era. Cena has brought stability, but it's a pretty low level of stability.
 
Sometimes people look into the Wrasslin void for too long. This is one of those moments where the void is looking back at everyone. It looks something like this:
iMu18u5vwI1vw.gif
 
Cena to Reigns: "I know the authority screwed you...."

WHEN??????

HOW??????

By allowing him constant shots at the title??

ifeellikeimtakingcrazypills.gif

Reigns: "Its ok baby gurl, I'm too cool for school, BELIEVE THA.... oh look a title shot."
 
Vince McMahon said:
I really like him as a personality, I hope he gets another crack at it. He's photogenic, endearing, and entertaining on the mic. I loved when he redid his Twitter page to be GM. He's great.
Click to expand...

The type of guy who should have been tried as a manager, but for some reason those aren't allowed these days (outside of Heyman)
 
The whole Reigns/Ambrose/Rollins thing is so dumb. Despite getting a chair to the back by Rollins, Reigns couldn't give a shit.
 
Verendus said:
Biggest boom period, two big companies, and the Raw viewership at it's peak, was what, 10 million? What about before then? Or right after during the years of 2002-2004?

They've averaged 4-5 million for a decade now, and they're not coming close to reaching those numbers again.
Click to expand...

speaks volumes of WWE's inability to grow when equally redneck, hick, carny shows like Duck Dynasty and Honey Boo Boo are some of the most popular shit on TV. it's a zombie company waiting for the next murder-suicide to finally fold. shit, the complete and utter failure of the Network might do it soon.
 
Vince McMahon said:
The whole Reigns/Ambrose/Rollins thing is so dumb. Despite getting a chair to the back by Rollins, Reigns couldn't give a shit.
Click to expand...

He's too busy getting himself into title matches by having the Raw GM poison Stephanie, and then Stephanie and HHH doing nothing about him being put in the match even though they run the damn company...
 
Lambda Pie said:
speaks volumes of WWE's inability to grow when equally redneck, hick, carny shows like Duck Dynasty and Honey Boo Boo are some of the most popular shit on TV. it's a zombie company waiting for the next murder-suicide to finally fold. shit, the complete and utter failure of the Network might do it soon.
Click to expand...

People like watching idiots. Ever see South Beach Tow? It's fascinating - it's a show built on the premise of making the show look just stupid enough for the dumbest sub-set of people to say "hang on...this might not be real" - instead of outright tricking them. It's fascinating because the best way to get people to watch is to make them feel like they have it all figured out.

Shit, I also just described wrasslin.
 
Ithil said:
I don't even know why, either. What other company would actively put a lid on a hot commodity, because they only want one hot commodity, not two?
Why not build BOTH Ambrose and Reigns as the top guys, not just Reigns. They seem to think the "one top invulnerable superstar" structure they have with Cena is the perfect template in 2014, which is scary.
Click to expand...

THIS. This is their biggest issue in terms of their upper-card, they just refuse to seriously push more than one person at a time.

It's actually to Reigns detriment that they'll continue to book him as an untouchable star. Instead of giving him an organic long term push that'll keep him over they'll ram him down everyone's throats until they're bored who then turn on him when Ambrose, Bryan, Wyatt etc are all consistently outperforming him.
 
Vince McMahon said:
The whole Reigns/Ambrose/Rollins thing is so dumb. Despite getting a chair to the back by Rollins, Reigns couldn't give a shit.
Click to expand...

This is my most hated aspect of it all. I mentioned it before but he should be thanking Rollins for 'selling out' now he's suddenly thrust into the main event going for the world title constantly.

Poor Ambrose was the only one that cared about them apparently. Reigns the dick is shown to not even give a shit, left him alone to fight for justice and revenge cause oh look better things to do suddenly.

"Thanks for the music bro, see ya."

:|
 
Vince McMahon said:
People like watching idiots. Ever see South Beach Tow? It's fascinating - it's a show built on the premise of making the show look just stupid enough for the dumbest sub-set of people to say "hang on...this might not be real" - instead of outright tricking them. It's fascinating because the best way to get people to watch is to make them feel like they have it all figured out.

Shit, I also just described wrasslin.
Click to expand...

Except with wrasslin' people get annoyed when they learn they haven't figured out everything and then criticize the things they weren't able to figure out. See injury to Rollins, Seth.
 
Officerrob said:
Punk was a star who could have been a megastar, they squandered that chance.

That "for close to a decade" period you refer to where ratings are basically stagnant, is the Cena era. Cena has brought stability, but it's a pretty low level of stability.
Click to expand...
According to what could he have been a megastar? It's easy to say this without having anything to back it up, which none of us do. All we have are those small bits of data, and those MITB PPV numbers aren't impressive, nor are viewership peaks of 4.84 million when apparently there is so much buzz. Both Batista and Cena in their peaks were much bigger than CM Punk ever was.

It takes months to build a consistent draw but your peak doesn't last years and years, but if even Cena could not become bigger than WWE wanted, after years of effort, after he initially made bigger waves than CM Punk ever has, what makes you think CM Punk would? Off what are mild numbers?

What's most important is the overall roster in my eyes, not one guy. WWE's quality is hurting today because they don't have the kind of overall starpower they once did. There was a time where they could build two brands with enough stars on each show, with veterans and newer stars. Raw was doing over 5 million viewers here and there in 2005, and leading into Wrestlemania 21, which did a buyrate of 1.1 million. And that PPV had no mainstream stars, just a stacked card, headlined by a new star. They're struggling today with one brand. However, they're also in a better position today than at anytime post-2010 I think. Bryan is hugely over. They have Reigns, Rollins, and Ambrose who are looking like future main eventers. Bray Wyatt is also a good supporting act with potential to reach the top too. It they do well, they'll have something fresh again for a few years. Maybe.

Having said that, I don't think they'll ever bring back old viewers. It's a soap opera, it's 'fake' as detractors like to say, and it's seen as a joke by most people. That stigma will remain, so I don't think it's a bad thing that WWE tries to focus on their core audience.
 
I didn't watch wrasslin when CM Punk was on top but he was still a big star. Would often see him on various talk shows and stuff. He certainly transcended wwe and really he still does. Not sure how people can complain about that aspect. Very few can make that claim today.
 
Mr.Awesome said:
I didn't watch wrasslin when CM Punk was on top but he was still a big star. Would often see him on various talk shows and stuff. He certainly transcended wwe and really he still does. Not sure how people can complain about that aspect. Very few can make that claim today.
Click to expand...

Stuff like the Talking Dead appearance (his first one)? He set that up himself, WWE did nothing for it. He even made a comment about it, that they never advertised it or promoted it or anything. They only ever make an effort to push Cena for all these talkshows and whatever. Any time they get him on one you usually get a whole video package about it.

Even though Punk is most certainly a better interview than Cena, who always comes off like a scripted corporate robot, that's apparently what they think "sells" the company, though I think the last new viewer Cena brought that didn't still have their baby teeth was probably circa 2006.
 
Ithil said:
Stuff like the Talking Dead appearance (his first one)? He set that up himself, WWE did nothing for it. He even made a comment about it, that they never advertised it or promoted it or anything. They only ever make an effort to push Cena for all these talkshows and whatever. Any time they get him on one you usually get a whole video package about it.

Even though Punk is most certainly a better interview than Cena, who always comes off like a scripted corporate robot, that's apparently what they think "sells" the company, though I think the last new viewer Cena brought that didn't still have their baby teeth was probably circa 2006.
Click to expand...

Cena did this though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clH7eI8YmwM
2006 like you said

John's great.
 
Ithil said:
With the world's biggest push. Something Punk never got.
Click to expand...
How did CM Punk not get a huge push? He got an amazing push. Not everything has to be the Cena push. He may not have gotten number one position booking for years on end, but he was given some ridiculously good stuff to work with and certainly had everything positioned around him those first few months. Isn't the MITB angle and the pipebomb part of it all?

Let's not use Cena then. CM Punk isn't even comparable to Batista in the first 6 months of 2005, and that was Batista coming off being a mid-carder as a rookie.

In hindsight, looking at how CM Punk quit, it's actually a great decision WWE didn't give him that number one spot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sports betting |OT|
7
10K
Hideous Snake replied
ItalianGAF |OT| - Italia
3
955
Azzurri replied
November Wrasslin' |OT| New Blood Rising
2 3
105
31K
EverydayBeast replied
  • Locked
Resetera and the pedo problem (updates)
NSFW  43 44 45 46 47
2K
491K
notkeylime replied
July Wrasslin' |OT| All this G1 talk is making me Climax.
400 401 402 403 404
20K
952K
klonere replied
Top Bottom