Jump to content

Raw Discussion 10/10/11 **Spoilers**


tiger_rick

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members
Neither way created an instant Superstar, because you can't build an instant Superstar!

 

Is it instant? CM Punk has been in or around the top of cards since about 2008.

 

Here's a comparison for you - they transformed JBL from an Acolyte and virtual non-entity to a heel that was over like rover in one month, WWE Champion within two, and very quickly working with the likes of Undertaker and Kurt Angle, looking like he belonged in the mix, being used as the heel to put John Cena on the map as WWE Champion and then neatly becoming a credible challenger for Big Dave then lil Rey before taking his hiatus.

 

In comparison, Bradshaw had nowhere near as much "wrestling skill" as Punk, arguably is no better a promo, and had nowhere near as much experience as Punk in singles matches of ANY note on telly - Punk had already held the Big Gold Belt three times and rumbled with the Undertaker and Randy Orton before he was programmed with Cena, for fuck's sake. And yet JBL took what was offered with both hands and made something special and enduring out of it.

 

I find CM Punk incredibly enjoyable to watch both in the ring and on the mic, but it's plain to me he could have done so much better with the opportunity afforded him, as both his natural talents, experience and previous treatment by the company prepared him so much better for his big chance than others before - like JBL - so at least some of the buck must rest with him.

 

How long did it take Triple H to go from being that guy who stuck out in main events when they starting forcing him down everyone's throats, to the point where he was a genuine full-time top star? A year or more?

 

Do you genuinely think that? He was despised when he turned on DX, was every inch the Rock's equal during their feud that summer (while Rocky himself had only been dining at the top table for eight months or so) and pepetrated all manner of dastardly deeds throughout that autumn/winter, having some killer matches along the way. I was perfectly happy with him main eventing when he took the title - anything to give us a rest from another cycle of Austin/Undertaker - and his match with Stone Cold at No Mercy reinforced to me that he was worth the investment. Maximum, you're talking five months between his first pay per view main and lamping Mick Foley at the Rumble, the point where lots of folk want to admit grudgingly that he "finally" started looking like a star (even to the ludicrous claim that fat knackered Mick "made" him), when he was one of the main reasons to watch Raw (along with his arch-nemesis, The Rock, of course) for most of the preceding three or four months with his heinous actions, retaining the belt at all costs and hilarious ventriloquism at the Little White Chapel.

 

No forcing him down this throat, sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 165
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Neither way created an instant Superstar, because you can't build an instant Superstar!

But only a true spastic or genuine mongoloid would consider Punk to be in anywhere near the same boat as R-Truth. Prior to 2011, R-Truth had main-evented fuck all except if he was in the odd team match. Anyone who thinks Punk was obscure up until June of this year needs their head checking, and if no defects are found (though they probably would be), they need a good fucking kicking to inspire them to have a word with themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither way created an instant Superstar, because you can't build an instant Superstar!

 

Is it instant? CM Punk has been in or around the top of cards since about 2008.

 

Here's a comparison for you - they transformed JBL from an Acolyte and virtual non-entity to a heel that was over like rover in one month, WWE Champion within two, and very quickly working with the likes of Undertaker and Kurt Angle, looking like he belonged in the mix, being used as the heel to put John Cena on the map as WWE Champion and then neatly becoming a credible challenger for Big Dave then lil Rey before taking his hiatus.

 

In comparison, Bradshaw had nowhere near as much "wrestling skill" as Punk, arguably is no better a promo, and had nowhere near as much experience as Punk in singles matches of ANY note on telly - Punk had already held the Big Gold Belt three times and rumbled with the Undertaker and Randy Orton before he was programmed with Cena, for fuck's sake. And yet JBL took what was offered with both hands and made something special and enduring out of it.

 

I find CM Punk incredibly enjoyable to watch both in the ring and on the mic, but it's plain to me he could have done so much better with the opportunity afforded him, as both his natural talents, experience and previous treatment by the company prepared him so much better for his big chance than others before - like JBL - so at least some of the buck must rest with him.

 

JBL was given a 9 month, unbroken World Title Reign, while pushed as the clear top heel on the brand. If Punk had won the belt at Money In The Bank and continued with a constant push all the way into Wrestlemania next year, it might have been a reasonable comparison. As it was, Punk held the belt one month, roughly, and was the focus of the brand for about the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

People are forgetting, WWE weren’t asking for astronomical numbers for the Money in the Bank pay-per-view. They wanted a significant different based on the sheer amount of TV time dedicated to him in the lead up. And they never got that. Eddie, you always talk about people ignoring your points, but Money in the Bank was a massive failure. There is no two ways about it. If this was 1997, Vince would have taken the hit and dusted himself off and continued with it (like he did with Michaels, Bret and Diesel when they werent setting the world on fire). But in 2011, the stockholders judge whether business is bad and it clearly was. They changed the landscape of the TV and it failed. They didn’t push him like they push Christian or The Miz. They went completely off the format. Comparing R-Truths build (and considering that it was career no-hoper R-Truth who fans didn‘t have time to even digest as a heel yet) is ridiculous. If they’d have given the Miz the build to WrestleMania that CM Punk had, nobody would have been complaining. Miz got nothing. I can only judge on what I see, and he has been absolutely shocking since about July. For arguments sake, lets say WWE have cut back on him. They’ve done that before. They had every intention of burying Booker T in 2001. But they couldn’t ignore how brilliant he was at standing out in those segments with Austin, Test and Shane McMahon. Or RVD in 2001 as well. He walked around that ring with such belief in himself, the fans didn’t care that he had the personality of a fishing float. Or even Batista in 2010. Batista hated working for WWE. That Rey Mysterio programme was meant to be Big Dave winding down and then leaving. But he improved his character so much that he became a far better performer because of it. WWE can easily bury someone, but they can’t tell you how to deliver your lines, they cant tell you how to carry yourself and they cant stop you getting over if they have you in a main event position. Storylines have been shit, but the performances have matches the same poor standard of quality.

 

And who is to say it’s the writers fault? Who’s to say this isn’t what CM Punk wants out of his character? They gave him the freedom on the microphone. He’s learned from Saplosky and Ring of Honor, so that alone means that his ideas of what a main eventer should be means that you to get all “insider” and come across as a face nobody can relate to or indeed like. Lets have a look at him:

-CM Punk says what he wants (Rob Naylor lol).

-He’s in and around the main event scene.

-He isn’t on Smackdown performing to 1500 people.

 

He’s in a far better position than his performances in segments and angles suggest he should be. He’s found his nich

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the numbers (PPV) go down when Punk was in the main event, or up?

 

How is devoting TV time to Punk more expensive than to R-Truth?

 

People are talking like WWE spent a 5 million dollar worldwide Ad campaign to get Punk over. They didn't. They gave him freedom on the mic for a few weeks, and the next PPV (with him featuring in the main event) did BETTER than the last one.

 

What would the investors be pissed about....

 

"Erm.. Mr McMahon, you pushed that CM Punk fellow and only managed 5 thousand more buys. Why so shitty"

 

If the PPV number didn't drop, then why the hell would anyone care?

 

Blaming him for the TV ratings is bollocks too, as those shows all featured Triple H, Cena or Vince as well. Why would Punk be solely to blame?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the numbers (PPV) go down when Punk was in the main event, or up?

 

How is devoting TV time to Punk more expensive than to R-Truth?

 

People are talking like WWE spent a 5 million dollar worldwide Ad campaign to get Punk over. They didn't. They gave him freedom on the mic for a few weeks, and the next PPV (with him featuring in the main event) did BETTER than the last one.

 

What would the investors be pissed about....

 

"Erm.. Mr McMahon, you pushed that CM Punk fellow and only managed 5 thousand more buys. Why so shitty"

 

If the PPV number didn't drop, then why the hell would anyone care?

 

Blaming him for the TV ratings is bollocks too, as those shows all featured Triple H, Cena or Vince as well. Why would Punk be solely to blame?

 

Because you cant really see vince or hhh looking at it and blaming themselves but instead ya can see em going ''hmm a 1.3...well we were in those segments but we've deffo drawn higher in the past...see we knew phil couldnt work''!! and as the weak link out of the 3 he'll take the blame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
JBL was given a 9 month, unbroken World Title Reign, while pushed as the clear top heel on the brand. If Punk had won the belt at Money In The Bank and continued with a constant push all the way into Wrestlemania next year, it might have been a reasonable comparison. As it was, Punk held the belt one month, roughly, and was the focus of the brand for about the same time.

 

Do you not think if they had seen enough difference in the tv ratings leading up Money In The Bank and to SummerSlam and the number of buys for both, up to let's say the day before the latter, they might have made the call to sustain his push? JBL was given the title because everyone could tell Eddie G was cracking up under the pressure of being champion (and admitted as such) and happened to be working Bradshaw at the time, who conveniently was over like crazy, and I severely doubt anyone chimed in during the booking meeting that week and said "ok fellas, let's ride this one through to 'Mania."

 

My point however was, he become a star almost instantly, and really ran with it. I won't pretend to know for sure they didn't always plan to cut Punk short via Bertie cashing in his briefcase as early as booking Money In The Bank, but I honestly believe they might not even plan that far ahead anymore.

 

''hmm a 1.3...well we were in those segments but we've deffo drawn higher in the past...see we knew phil couldnt work''!!

 

Using his real name, eh? Check you out.

 

EDIT: Raw was awful by the way. One of the worst shows in yonks. Apparently JR didn’t know he was getting sacked either, so at least they haven’t lost their sense of humour.

 

Shades of his draft to SmackDown. They really don't like him, do they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Did the numbers (PPV) go down when Punk was in the main event, or up?

They went up due to the build and hit yearly lows almost as soon as he returned. Since when did an interest spike translate into big business? Kane drew money promising to set himself on fire on a PPV. If you fail to deliver, you can only do that once.

 

How is devoting TV time to Punk more expensive than to R-Truth?

Did R-Truth go on Jimmy Kimmel? Was R-Truth the centre piece of the debut at the heavily hyped Comic Con? Did R-Truth go to Baseball games and get show on TV with an onscreen graphic as the champion? Or paid money for real music (which they will continue to pay royalties for each time it appears on DVDs). They put the rocket up his arse as far as promotion of him went.

 

"Erm.. Mr McMahon, you pushed that CM Punk fellow and only managed 5 thousand more buys. Why so shitty"

Surely you can see how thick that sentence is. They spent money on promoting him in the media and spent so much television time giving him freedom on the microphone. When they ask "why did the recent run of pay-per-views perform so poorly?" What excuse should they use?

 

If the PPV number didn't drop, then why the hell would anyone care?

But ... SummerSlam did drop! And so will Night of Champions and Hell in the Cell? And so have television ratings? If you are judging him on one buyrate than fell below expectations, thats a up hill struggle to argue with.

 

Blaming him for the TV ratings is bollocks too, as those shows all featured Triple H, Cena or Vince as well. Why would Punk be solely to blame?

Triple H and Cena have been regular characters for years. And have a track record with the audience. Cena vs Triple H drew money on PPV. Their segments usually draw high ratings. CM Punk vs. Triple H and CM Punk vs Cena didn't draw. Who's the problem? Who out of those three has zero track record of drawing money and television ratings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JBL was given a 9 month, unbroken World Title Reign, while pushed as the clear top heel on the brand. If Punk had won the belt at Money In The Bank and continued with a constant push all the way into Wrestlemania next year, it might have been a reasonable comparison. As it was, Punk held the belt one month, roughly, and was the focus of the brand for about the same time.

 

Do you not think if they had seen enough difference in the tv ratings leading up Money In The Bank and to SummerSlam and the number of buys for both, up to let's say the day before the latter, they might have made the call to sustain his push? JBL was given the title because everyone could tell Eddie G was cracking up under the pressure of being champion (and admitted as such) and happened to be working Bradshaw at the time, who conveniently was over like crazy, and I severely doubt anyone chimed in during the booking meeting that week and said "ok fellas, let's ride this one through to 'Mania."

 

My point however was, he become a star almost instantly, and really ran with it. I won't pretend to know for sure they didn't always plan to cut Punk short via Bertie cashing in his briefcase as early as booking Money In The Bank, but I honestly believe they might not even plan that far ahead anymore.

 

Did he really become a Star almost instantly though? I remember the general feeling being "what the fuck is Bradshaw doing in the main events?" at first.

 

Absolutely no doubt that JBL became a great, great promo and a fun character, but he was the B Show champion during a period where they were short on talent on Smackdown and decided to put the time in to build him up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JBL was given a 9 month, unbroken World Title Reign, while pushed as the clear top heel on the brand. If Punk had won the belt at Money In The Bank and continued with a constant push all the way into Wrestlemania next year, it might have been a reasonable comparison. As it was, Punk held the belt one month, roughly, and was the focus of the brand for about the same time.

 

Do you not think if they had seen enough difference in the tv ratings leading up Money In The Bank and to SummerSlam and the number of buys for both, up to let's say the day before the latter, they might have made the call to sustain his push? JBL was given the title because everyone could tell Eddie G was cracking up under the pressure of being champion (and admitted as such) and happened to be working Bradshaw at the time, who conveniently was over like crazy, and I severely doubt anyone chimed in during the booking meeting that week and said "ok fellas, let's ride this one through to 'Mania."

 

My point however was, he become a star almost instantly, and really ran with it. I won't pretend to know for sure they didn't always plan to cut Punk short via Bertie cashing in his briefcase as early as booking Money In The Bank, but I honestly believe they might not even plan that far ahead anymore.

 

Did he really become a Star almost instantly though? I remember the general feeling being "what the fuck is Bradshaw doing in the main events?" at first.

 

Absolutely no doubt that JBL became a great, great promo and a fun character, but he was the B Show champion during a period where they were short on talent on Smackdown and decided to put the time in to build him up.

 

 

I thought he was wwe champ for a year because hhh didnt want to work tuesdays? Im starting to think heyman liked to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you not think if they had seen enough difference in the tv ratings leading up Money In The Bank and to SummerSlam and the number of buys for both, up to let's say the day before the latter, they might have made the call to sustain his push?

They wouldn't have known the SummerSlam buyrate the day before SummerSlam. And Punk hasn't been shunted down to the midcard, he's main-evented both pay-per-views since SummerSlam and is now in a Superteam with Triple H in the storyline which is getting far more attention than Cena vs Del Rio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
I thought he was wwe champ for a year because hhh didnt want to work tuesdays? Im starting to think heyman liked to us.

 

I'm starting to think you're a fucking moron.

 

Oops, I've liked lied. I've always thought that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...