I'm a fan of Punk, but the Rock/Cena feud was more entertaining to me. I just kind of got the feeling that Punk wanted to hurt the rock instead of entertain if that makes sense. It was average because I was disappointed by the matches they had.
The promo work was great, especially by Punk. Rock did his routine, but when he was serious, he brought it. I thought Punk raised his game. The match quality, unfortunately, didn't live up to the hype.
The feud was good up until the Royal Rumble, but after that, blah. It won't be a feud that I will remember. It had potential, but it lost a lot of steam after the Rock won.
Originally Posted by new_guy
People complain about newer talent not getting over, but what they mean is that their favourite isn't getting over, everyone else can go to hell. I'm for as many people getting over as possible, it would improve the show and the more over people there are, the more avenues there are to push new talent, yes, your favourites are more likely to get pushed if there are more over people to feud with.
The first week of build was great and made me feel like Rock/Punk was going to be special. Unfortunately, everything from there until the Chamber was largely inoffensive filler and while Punk showed signs of aggression, the feud wasn't as intense as it could have been. In the end, it was more about Heyman, Vince and the Shield than about Punk and Rock themselves.
"Well sir, I guess there's just a meanness in this world..."
the feud was awesome, but the prospect of Cena winning the RR really made the whole thing lose credibility and sense, it was already written in stone, everything was planned so cena, that stale piece of shit, Gets his win back at WM