|
Post by froggyfrog on Feb 9, 2016 23:01:58 GMT -5
Wrestlemania XXX trumps anything Punk did in WWE
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 9, 2016 23:03:21 GMT -5
Bryan
He main evented WM, retired on good terms in a memorable farewell and isn't going to get rinsed in the UFC
|
|
|
Post by britishbulldog on Feb 9, 2016 23:33:02 GMT -5
I say Bryan. Punk was very over, but as I said in a different thread. Bryan was the most popular wrestler since Austin or rock and nearly Hogan level of fan support. Both were amazing but there aren't many that had the crowd behind them life Bryan did
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Feb 9, 2016 23:38:21 GMT -5
Well, Punk at least got to stick around during his hottest period. Bryan ended up on the shelf. Twice.
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Feb 9, 2016 23:39:09 GMT -5
Which one got to headline Wrestlemania tho?
...Yeah, that's what I thought.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Feb 9, 2016 23:47:54 GMT -5
Which one got to headline Wrestlemania tho? ...Yeah, that's what I thought. If that were the only accolade that counts, Miz has had a better career than Punk.
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Feb 9, 2016 23:53:59 GMT -5
Which one got to headline Wrestlemania tho? ...Yeah, that's what I thought. If that were the only accolade that counts, Miz has had a better career than Punk. ...Well, you said it, not me. I was just being a dick there though. To answer the question seriously? ...I'd say Punk but that's also with an * next to it. Bryan really did go out when he was at his peak which makes this a not-so-fair comparison. Punk had a clear peak that lasted a couple months and, while he didn't have a bad career by any stretch, never really came close to reaching that peak again. At the same time, you could make an argument that Punk's peak was bigger than Bryan's just because it was getting people outside the wrestling bubble talking. So, realistically, it could go either way and I wouldn't fault anybody for voting for either guy.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Feb 9, 2016 23:58:55 GMT -5
If that were the only accolade that counts, Miz has had a better career than Punk. ...Well, you said it, not me. Well, I prefer Miz to Punk anyway, so I'd be cool with that. To answer the question seriously? ...I'd say Punk but that's also with an * next to it. Bryan really did go out when he was at his peak which makes this a not-so-fair comparison. Punk had a clear peak that lasted a couple months and, while he didn't have a bad career by any stretch, never really came close to reaching that peak again. At the same time, you could make an argument that Punk's peak was bigger than Bryan's just because it was getting people outside the wrestling bubble talking. So, realistically, it could go either way and I wouldn't fault anybody for voting for either guy. I definitely think it's really too close to call - Punk's highs in WWE weren't quite as high as Bryan's (although they were clearly sustained much longer), but Punk created more buzz about wrestling than Bryan ever did.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Feb 10, 2016 0:09:12 GMT -5
Hard to fault either, both had great careers, certainly more than many of us would have expected given the company's, um, track record with guys in their boat. Punk was as white hot as anyone has been in more than a decade, he was a character that felt more organic than those around him, and he was compelling.
Bryan was all of those things too, and what, I think, gives him the edge is that for the last 3 years of his career, he had something NO ONE on the roster had. He had as close to universal crowd love as is humanly possible, he was over like rover, they LOVED him, and that connection, to me, for the sustained period, is what gives him the edge.
|
|
Scott
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 3,577
|
Post by Scott on Feb 10, 2016 1:03:58 GMT -5
Without thinking much about it, it just feels like Punk.
|
|
RIHT
Hank Scorpio
Wanted a title with "YOU'RE WELCOME!" Close enough.
Hey-yo.
Posts: 5,897
|
Post by RIHT on Feb 10, 2016 2:10:15 GMT -5
Punk needs a better conclusion than his exit. Both Bryan and Punk could've done so much more, even with amazing title storylines under their belts, but Bryan's retirement was just a wonderful way to go out and cement his legacy as legendary. I'd like to see CM Punk & WWE make peace and give him a proper finale to his career.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger Millionaire on Feb 10, 2016 2:16:01 GMT -5
Punk simply because 434 days as champion compared to Bryan's reign that consisted of what 1 title defense vs Kane? Bryan obviously had the biggest WrestleMania moment between the two though. And of those 434 days, how many do people really remember. He won the title on an undercard vs Del Rio, and spent most of the next year playing 2nd fiddle to guys like Lesnar, Cena, and Rock. They didn't really main event him until they needed a heel to feed to the Rock. I mean the reign was long, but it was a shitty championship reign.
|
|
Professor Chaos
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bringer of Destruction and Maker of Doom
Posts: 16,332
|
Post by Professor Chaos on Feb 10, 2016 2:26:16 GMT -5
Punk simply because 434 days as champion compared to Bryan's reign that consisted of what 1 title defense vs Kane? Bryan obviously had the biggest WrestleMania moment between the two though. And of those 434 days, how many do people really remember. He won the title on an undercard vs Del Rio, and spent most of the next year playing 2nd fiddle to guys like Lesnar, Cena, and Rock. They didn't really main event him until they needed a heel to feed to the Rock. I mean the reign was long, but it was a shitty championship reign. The face run was kinda flat but I personally loved his heel run of it.
|
|
Perfect Timing
Dennis Stamp
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 4,869
|
Post by Perfect Timing on Feb 10, 2016 2:30:34 GMT -5
I think it's Punk. If Bryan had wrestled from last year till now he have the advantage. Daniel Bryan had so much more left but Punk was really stale before he quit. So just going by that I'd say Punk made more of a name for himself.
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Dave on Feb 10, 2016 2:30:35 GMT -5
WM 30 was magic but MITB 2011 was one of the biggest nights in the last decade.
I loved both guys a bunch. I'll quote Bender from Futurama to sum it up: "Eh, they're both fine choices. Whatever floats your boat."
|
|
|
Post by Hobby Drifter on Feb 10, 2016 2:32:24 GMT -5
Bryan.
WWE will celebrate Daniel Bryan until the stars grow cold and fall from the heavens. CM Punk is going to get the Macho Man/pre-return Lesnar treatment.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Digby Stamp on Feb 10, 2016 2:49:56 GMT -5
Both were great, but Daniel Bryan got me emotionally invested in the product in a way that I haven't been since I was a kid.
As much as I enjoy Punk's work, Daniel Bryan's WWE career from beginning to end meant more to me on a personal level, so I'm giving the edge to him.
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Feb 10, 2016 2:57:37 GMT -5
Not many people can say they were WWE Champions for over a year .. just sayn'
|
|
|
Post by Green Arrow on Feb 10, 2016 3:26:34 GMT -5
Daniel's accomplishments over a much shorter time span rival what punk did in a lot longer.
Daniel had the bigger moment
DB.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Feb 10, 2016 4:55:36 GMT -5
Bryan basically walked out on top after winning a belt at Mania... Twice....
CM Punk was unintentionally written off by Kane while on death's door and left while mad at his boss, never getting the Mania ME, and is currently on the receiving end of a frivolous lawsuit that's also forced his wife to retire
|
|