Originally Posted by murder
Falkono has a point. Best example is a random HHH vs Taka in the middle of the show on Raw in 2000 (Much like Punk vs Clay this week). Hunter was there wrestling twice on TV each and every week (Punk only wrestles one time a week on TV). And Taka was even less charismatic and less over than Clay.
And still, Hunter/Taka was a huge success (both in the ratings and live) and Punk/Clay wasn't. Can Punk defenders or anybody claiming the champ is not important to the ratings in general explain this situation?
It's no where near the same. Taka was an unbelievable worker and one of the best in the company at the time. Him and HHH had a superb match which MAIN EVENTED Raw. I still watch it on Youtube and it was a superb TV match, it bares no comparison whatsoever to Clay/Punk.
If Punk had been spouting his mouth off and say someone like Tyson Kidd challenged him for the title back stage and it main evented Raw, THEN you could compare. plus I wouldn't even DVR that because that would be one of the matches of the year. Especially if it was somewhere hot, imagine it being in Canada.
Tyson Kidd would like a million bucks like he always does given the chance, you give him a few false finishes, the crowd go absolutely ape shit, only for CM Punk to end up winning, maybe even add some sort of dirt form in there to get the Canadian crowd really buzzing.