First of all, the only reason that Punk's reign was boring was because WWE left him at no.2, which means that they used their Indian immigrants to book his feuds, and it shows. Same with Sheamus, really. Somebody decided to water down both their characters, and Punk's lucky that someone smart said "What the fuck are we doing"?
However, as John Cena faces, they both failed. Which should be obvious. Punk's a dick, skinny, and full of tattoos. Not no.1 babyface material, while Sheamus just isn't charismatic enough.
The "predictability" you're complaining about will actually result in a higher payoff when Punk does lose the title, rather then the hopscotch the title had beforehand (didn't fucking matter who was champion, since he'd lose it in a month anyway).
I do not believe Punk was being billed as #2 except in pretty much 3 PPVs where Cena teamed with The Rock, fought The Rock, and fought Brock Lesnar. He was #1 in every other case unless you're arguing that when he faced Cena they were billing him as #2. . .which I would disagree with as he was still the champion.
Punk's been allowed to call himself the best wrestler in the world and even put it on his t shirt. He's been put over Cena twice in the last year and a half and Cena over him 0 times.
I also disagree that his reign was boring "because he was left at #2", and with the premise that he was intentionally billed as #2 as opposed to just naturally not going over Cena despite being put over Cena almost the whole time.
His push has absolutely been enough to get him over Cena if he was capable of doing so. A 300+ day reign, beating put against all of the best workers in the company and going over them (Jericho, Bryan, Ziggler, Cena, Del Rio), getting TONS of mic time, losing less than 5% of his promos, etc. He's been handed everything you could ask for besides be allowed to break kayfabe or break the PG rating on a weekly basis. Which is stuff nobody else gets to do either.
He's also been given tons of stipulation matches to spice up his fueds, and been allowed to fued against "the company" with Laurinitis, and now with Lawler, JR, and Vince. The guy gets everything he can possibly get within reason. He's been getting enough push and mic time for like 3 wrestlers.
As for the predictability comment, WWE in general is predictable. Have you participated in the Forum Championship game at all? I've been doing that for a year on here, and almost everybody has been getting nearly perfect scores on their predictions over the last 4 PPVs. That's never happened even once before that. Yet it's happened 4 straight times. Everyone's predicting the outcomes of the matches perfectly or almost perfectly.
Also, the "payoff" won't be big if he's just dropping the title to a predictable source like The Rock at the Rumble. Where's the excitement besides just to see The Rock? It'd have fuck all to do with CM Punk. Rock doesn't need extra situations to get buys and big cheers. So the length of Punk's reign is rendered a footnote. Meaning there was no point in even letting him have one for that long.
And "hopscotch"ing the title: The title never changed hands less than 5 times a year during the attitude era. That was the most interesting time in WWE. I looked up the numbers before too, and the title has not changed hands 0 times in a year since the 80's. Back when Hogan defeated the Iron Shiek for the title before Wrestlemania I even aired! 28 years ago. So in no way is this a proven thing to work. The only thing that's proven is that it's been boring.
^ A lot of that, of course, is just my opinion. Not trying to claim it as the best one. Oh, all it's opinion besides the facts I posted obviously.