AlienBountyHunter

Exactly, Rock beating Punk at Rumble just won't work. He is a part timer that's already over with the fans. He doesn't need to win the title, and if he does it will hurt the rest of the roster especially Punk. Punk really needs that 'big match win' during this long reign, and this should be it.

I would love to see him walk into 'Mania with the title, even if it was a guaranteed loss. He deserves to main event the big one after the last year he's had.

sillymunkee

Until the 90s all the champs were PT. Work a couple nights a month at MSG and if you were Hogan you shot a movie in between appearances in the 80s.

Freeloader

He shouldn't. Punk should have the belt when he faces The Undertaker. If he does not, it will cheapen that match, and nobody gives a shit if Cena wins or loses the belt at WM.

__________________

Berkajr

Hahaha Either you are trolling or you are just clueless.
Hulk Hogan from 1984- early 1988 (During his first championship reign, probably wrestled like 250-300 matches a year. On top of that he participated in more marketing stuff than any other superstar on the roster because he was the face of the company. An on top of that he particpated in the most make a wish foundation stuff for WWF than any other superstar, only to be surpassed by John Cena.
As for taking of to shoot movies, well, Hogan did drop the title to Andre, wo Savage eventually could be the champion while Hogan took time off to shoot the movie No holds barred.

As for Savage, he too wrestled like 250-300 times during his stay as WWF champion. Warrior had heaps of matches too. Same goes with Sgt Slaughter. So to say any of them were part time wrestlers is just trolling or just being plain clueless.



But as for Part Time wrrestlers who were champion, I'd say the following were:

*Hulk Hogan in 1993 (Came back and was given the WWF title in order to boost ratings, Hogan only defended the title once, and that was in Japan. Though he still wrestled som tag matches)
*Shawn Michaels 1998 (Became a part time wrestler due the injury he suffered at the Royal Rumble until he retired at WM 14)
*Vince McMahon in 1999 (He was never a full time wrestler, but however, he was full time devoted to WWF, and still is)
*The Rock in 2002, won the title from Undertaker, but could not wrestle as much due to commitments in Holywood if I am not mistaken)
*Shawn Michaels in 2002 (won a singels match against Triple H at Summer Slam, won an Elimination Chamber match to win the title, defended it against Rob Van Dam in a very safe and protected match, and dropped it back to HHH at the Following PPV)

__________________


What a horrible night to have a curse

Quasi Juice

The Rock is normally part time but now he's been showing up for every RAW (and SD) to hype the match and I'm sure if he becomes the champ he'll be on every RAW leading into Mania as well so basically that makes him full-time. I get your point though. Last time Taker won the World Title he was also somewhat a part-timer temporarily going full time again.

As for Punk/Rock. As much as I like Punk and would love for his title reign to go through to WM, I can't help but admit I'd mark seeing Rock with the WWE Title again.

__________________

Geeee

David Arquette? Vince McMahon? Vince Russo?

Choc Lesnar

Undertaker matches are cheap anyway. Complete gimmick match at this point, the outcome is obvious no matter how many near falls or stipulations that are involved.

Dopesick

Hogan in 1993.

__________________
Kill Your Boss

zxLegionxz

Punk already hit his peak this whole elevating him to next level is a dumb argument,Rock is winning and he doesnt need it the title and the WWE does and thats why he accepted to carry the belt

__________________

murder

Full-time doesn't just mean working all TVs and PPVs but also most if not all house shows. So Rocks 2002 title reign falls in that category.

Hogans reign in 93 counts and maybe his 2002 reign as well as all of his WCW title reigns.