Originally Posted by Starbuck
The people giving Ryback credit are joking...I think. Punk's a bigger draw than Ryback imo but that's not saying much. Both of them are wildly inconsistent and obviously need a lot of help to produce any significant sort of number. I'd attribute the HIAC buyrate to the fact that Punk was legitimately in danger of losing his title for the second time in his reign. The first was against Cena and this time it was Ryback. For all his other matches everybody knew he was going to win. People genuinely didn't know who would win that one though and it was a fresh match. Both of them get the credit as far as I'm concerned along with the intriguing story behind it all.
And you must have missed the part where people were calling Ryback pathetic whilst marking for DAT RATINGS MACHINE CM PUNK. Don't act like there aren't double standards on both sides. Fact is, nobody draws anymore. Cena has the ability to bump numbers when they give him something decent but even he's not making as much of a dent as he used to. 3 hours is killing them.
Well you were covering the double standards on the other side, so I decided to cover the side.
I'm certain Rock316AE wasn't joking, and I'm certain that's the case for a few others at least (I'm sure there were some joking though). But who's to say those marking for Punk drawing and saying Ryback is pathetic aren't joking either? It works both ways on all levels, does it not?
But eh, I'm a mark for Punk, a fan of Ryback, and I'm happy their HIAC buyrate did well and segments/matches involving the two of them seem to be doing well, even if it the gains may be due to Cena/Vince/whoever else is there/whatever other circumstances there are.