Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 14:00:17 GMT -5
Coming from the Bryan comments on part-timers thread, I mentioned how 3 straight years Punk gets pissed off because he's by passed for the main event.
So the Wrestlemanias, 27, 28, 29, where did he deserve to either get place in a main event match, or his match should've been the main event the most?
The case for each.
Wrestlemania 27: He's feuding with Orton, when he said he rightfully should've been the one challenging John Cena for the WWE title. Not Miz. And that eats him up and he hates Miz for that.
Actual Match: vs. Randy Orton
Better Matches Available: vs. Edge for the World Title vs. Cena for the WWE Title
Wrestlemania 28: He is in the title match with Jericho. But, should it have been CM Punk vs. The Rock at Wrestlemania 28 instead of Royal Rumble 2013? Or could we get a John Cena vs. CM Punk rematch at this show and finally put this match up on the big stage?
Actual Match: vs. Chris Jericho for the WWE Championship
Better Matches Available: vs. John Cena for the WWE Championship vs. Rock for the WWE Championship vs. Daniel Bryan for the WWE Championship
Wrestlemania 29: This is the most interesting. So he's paired with Undertaker. This Wrestlemania to me had the most potential for 2 different things. Why not have Punk carry the title into Wrestlemania at 504 days and defend his title in a streak vs. streak match. Punk's reign vs. Taker's streak. Or have it be John Cena vs. Rock vs. CM Punk. Punk had a legit issue with both and even if he still had to drop the title at Royal Rumble have him get his rematch here. Punk could've been booked so much better than feuding over an "Urn".
Actual Match: vs. Undertaker
Better Matches Available: vs. Undertaker for the WWE Championship vs. Cena and Rock Triple Threat vs. Lesnar vs. Daniel Bryan for the WWE Championship
So, which year does CM Punk deserve the coveted "Wrestlemania Main Event Match" the most?
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 20, 2015 14:05:09 GMT -5
Honestly none. The timing was never really right IMO
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,981
|
Post by chazraps on Dec 20, 2015 14:06:55 GMT -5
29 for sure.
27 is probably the worst Wrestlemania in terms of execution, but as far as individual performances leading into that event over the past year, The Miz definitely deserved it. Not to mention how much stronger he was 9, 6 and 3 months before the event after Straight Edge Society got watered down.
28 was after his Pimpbomb promo re-engergized the business and he should be rewarded for that, BUT, this was the year we already had 4 months invested into a Rock-Cena main event before that even happened. The mind was made up, and truthfully Rock-Cena with a one-year build was the way to go.
29, however, should have been a three-way-dance of Cena, Punk and The Rock. The reason Cena's "Redemption" story felt forced wasn't because of anything involving The Rock OR Cena himself, but rather because Punk had been so on-fire circulating around these goings-on and absolutely felt like he belonged in it, especially after the instant classic Cena and Punk had on Raw.
The story was right there, the ability, performance and build was right there, and while that leaves the question of who Taker takes on, Punk-Cena-Rock was absolutely right for the top spot.
|
|
|
Post by KobashiChop on Dec 20, 2015 14:07:26 GMT -5
29. Cena vs Rock vs Punk.
The rematch was an awful finisher fest and although Taker vs Punk was MOTN, Taker could've faced anyone else.
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Dec 20, 2015 14:08:00 GMT -5
Remember toward the end of 2013 when Punk was teaming with Bryan against the Wyatts? I really thought they were building toward Punk vs Bryan at Wrestlemania.
|
|
Lupin the Third
Patti Mayonnaise
I'm sorry.....I love you. *boot to the head*--3rd most culpable in the jixing of NXT, D'oh!
Join the Dark Order....
Posts: 36,330
|
Post by Lupin the Third on Dec 20, 2015 14:10:35 GMT -5
I think WM 29 should've been Title vs. Streak.
|
|
FAR5222
El Dandy
Counted 237 Bros. SWERVE Got no cookie for it.
Posts: 7,889
|
Post by FAR5222 on Dec 20, 2015 14:10:36 GMT -5
2011. He was on some next level shit. 2009-2011 (pre pipe bomb) was the most entertaining heel.
|
|
comahan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by comahan on Dec 20, 2015 14:14:46 GMT -5
29 for sure
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Dec 20, 2015 14:15:50 GMT -5
WrestleMania 28 should've been the blowoff to the Cena/Punk feud.
At WM27 they should've gotten Cena/Rock out of the way (with Miz defending the title in the midcard against John Morrison, or in a triple threat with Orton and Punk) or had Miz defend the title against Cena and Rock in a triple threat.
|
|
|
Post by Ruthless Pessimism on Dec 20, 2015 14:17:27 GMT -5
I don't see an option for "none" or "other"...so no votes.
|
|
|
Post by Slingshot Suplay on Dec 20, 2015 14:21:11 GMT -5
27. Miz was overexposed on every show (raw, smackdown,nxt) and had unlimited mic time on all shows but ultimately could not deliver in the ring like Punk could.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Dec 20, 2015 14:23:55 GMT -5
Complete hindsight booking but I would have used him in two.
27 should have been Cena beating Punk for the title after Rock counters New Nexus interference. Next night you can still set up Rock/Cena for 28 and have Punk complain about Rock costing him the title. Punk works to get back to the title and eventually turns face.
28 stays Rock/Cena. Probably keep Punk/Jericho as well.
29 Cena is the Rumble winner, Rock wins the title from a different heel at the Rumble, Punk turns heel and cheats the Rock out of the title in Feb. setting up Rock/Punk/Cena at the Rumble.
|
|
Sam Punk
Hank Scorpio
Own Nothing, Be Happy
Posts: 6,305
|
Post by Sam Punk on Dec 20, 2015 14:24:29 GMT -5
It's missing the "none" option.
|
|
|
Post by Saul Goodman on Dec 20, 2015 14:29:38 GMT -5
If he didn't hold the title for too long, then maybe he could have won the royal rumble and win the belt at WrestleMania. The whole booking during his title run was terrible, it was the reason why I started to hate him.
|
|
|
Post by StormanReigns on Dec 20, 2015 14:31:07 GMT -5
Coming from the Bryan comments on part-timers thread, I mentioned how 3 straight years Punk gets pissed off because he's by passed for the main event. So the Wrestlemanias, 27, 28, 29, where did he deserve to either get place in a main event match, or his match should've been the main event the most? The case for each. Wrestlemania 27: He's feuding with Orton, when he said he rightfully should've been the one challenging John Cena for the WWE title. Not Miz. And that eats him up and he hates Miz for that. Actual Match: vs. Randy Orton Better Matches Available: vs. Edge for the World Title vs. Cena for the WWE Title Wrestlemania 28: He is in the title match with Jericho. But, should it have been CM Punk vs. The Rock at Wrestlemania 28 instead of Royal Rumble 2013? Or could we get a John Cena vs. CM Punk rematch at this show and finally put this match up on the big stage? Actual Match: vs. Chris Jericho for the WWE Championship Better Matches Available: vs. John Cena for the WWE Championship vs. Rock for the WWE Championship vs. Daniel Bryan for the WWE Championship Wrestlemania 29: This is the most interesting. So he's paired with Undertaker. This Wrestlemania to me had the most potential for 2 different things. Why not have Punk carry the title into Wrestlemania at 504 days and defend his title in a streak vs. streak match. Punk's reign vs. Taker's streak. Or have it be John Cena vs. Rock vs. CM Punk. Punk had a legit issue with both and even if he still had to drop the title at Royal Rumble have him get his rematch here. Punk could've been booked so much better than feuding over an "Urn". Actual Match: vs. Undertaker Better Matches Available: vs. Undertaker for the WWE Championship vs. Cena and Rock Triple Threat vs. Lesnar vs. Daniel Bryan for the WWE Championship So, which year does CM Punk deserve the coveted "Wrestlemania Main Event Match" the most? 29. No one really wanted to see Rock/Cena II, Cena just wanted his win back. A WM main event could have pushed Punk to that level, even if it was a triple threat (which he pushed for). The Rock losing to WWE's top guy really helped no one.
|
|
bob
Salacious Crumb
The "other" Bob. FOC COURSE!
started the Madness Wars, Proudly the #1 Nana Hater on FAN
Posts: 78,403
|
Post by bob on Dec 20, 2015 14:45:20 GMT -5
twice in a lifetime
|
|
xCompackx
Wade Wilson
Posts: 27,261
Member is Online
|
Post by xCompackx on Dec 20, 2015 15:33:49 GMT -5
I highly doubt it would've changed the outcome, but 29. Punk wasn't really there yet at 27 since he didn't become particularly "big" until his match at MITB, and while I didn't like the build to it, 28 was fine with Rock vs. Cena as the main event.
That being said, Punk still would've lost and the only thing that would've changed is he would've gotten paid more for it.
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Dec 20, 2015 15:35:05 GMT -5
I adamantly maintain to this day that the Mania 29 main event should have been a triple threat with Punk. Miz deserved his spot at 27, despite what people say now, and he was just sacrificed to Cena and Rock's egos anyway. 28's Cena v Rock was genuinely huge and deserved its spot. 29 with Punk would have made for an incredible atmosphere and a more interesting match. Cena could still have won, but it would have been a great payoff for Punk's great year.
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Dec 20, 2015 15:49:48 GMT -5
29. I know a lot of people will say 28, but let's be honest, rock vs cena was a huge money making match, and when it comes to business, it would be stupid to look past that match.
I would've had punk drop the belt to Cena in a triple threat with Rock at 29. Cena pins Rock,and punk can argue he never lost the belt.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Dec 20, 2015 15:54:34 GMT -5
I highly doubt it would've changed the outcome, but 29. Punk wasn't really there yet at 27 since he didn't become particularly "big" until his match at MITB, and while I didn't like the build to it, 28 was fine with Rock vs. Cena as the main event. That being said, Punk still would've lost and the only thing that would've changed is he would've gotten paid more for it. I think Punk would've been perfectly fine with that.
|
|