[The Cynical Miracle]

It's not his fault that Raw shows week after week were dreadful in 2012, in fact I would put that year up there as the very worst in the history of this company. In that period he was for me the only highlight of watching Raw and almost always stole the show (no not Ziggler).

Because they're jelly that their favourite wrestler never held the belt as long as Punk.

Holding the belt for 434 days straight > Winning and Losing it 16 times

Facts are facts yo.

 

[Reaper]

It's a tendency of the IWC to shit on everyone's reign the minute they actually win the belt.

It's a combination of poor booking and them not getting exactly what they were expecting from the title reign.

In the case of Punk, I'm guessing it was because most people were expecting him to remain face and they turned him heel instead.

But this is too commonly seen. Ever since I've come on this forum, I've seen very, very few posts that seem to praise any title reigns in the WWE's entire history.

And this is actually a common problem ... getting a title is an easier story to tell. But what do you do when the guy has reached the pinnacle of success. We're too used to the happily ever afters and have no idea what to make of someone we have to see again and again after they've had theirs

 

[JohnnyC55]

My problem with Punk at the time was that his promos were way too long and boring.

He would go on for 15 minutes, and what he was saying didn't even make sense.

 

[Lariatoh!]

Ratngs?! Not sure... Maybe you've got it twisted OP, I think people crap over the booking not Punk himself. Instead of being put as the main event like the champion should, Cena was in just about every single main event in bad storylines while Punk was elegaded to upper mid card.

The thing is, this has been going on for years. When Kurt Angle was WWE Champ for the first time, he was always in the mid card as well wrestling Hardcore Holly and running away from the Undertaker, while Austin and HHH's feud headlined for example.

 

[Simpsons Modern Life]

Cause a lot of people are sheep, they also like to big someone up and then once they've finally got what they deserve they then start to shit on them and pull them down, human nature for a lot of the population unfortunately.

Think about every talent they've bigged up, then when they get there they pull them down, Daniel Bryan gets it now, Dean Ambrose is starting to get it, CM Punk is getting it .. the list is endless.

 

[Hannibal Lector]

Because they're jelly that their favourite wrestler never held the belt as long as Punk.

Holding the belt for 434 days straight > Winning and Losing it 16 times

Facts are facts yo.

LOL. I'd rather see Edge's short reigns than CM Punk's god awful one. So no.

 

[ddp]

It's a tendency of the IWC to shit on everyone's reign the minute they actually win the belt.

It's a combination of poor booking and them not getting exactly what they were expecting from the title reign.

In the case of Punk, I'm guessing it was because most people were expecting him to remain face and they turned him heel instead.

But this is too commonly seen. Ever since I've come on this forum, I've seen very, very few posts that seem to praise any title reigns in the WWE's entire history.

And this is actually a common problem ... getting a title is an easier story to tell. But what do you do when the guy has reached the pinnacle of success. We're too used to the happily ever afters and have no idea what to make of someone we have to see again and again after they've had theirs

i thought that was a praised idea. he was getting stale so they turned him. you open up new feuds for him.

that's why0 wwe would have failed with bryan and sandow so they got them to chase again.

 

[Reaper]

i thought that was a praised idea. he was getting stale so they turned him. you open up new feuds for him.

that's why0 wwe would have failed with bryan and sandow so they got them to chase again.

So far so good for Bryan. But I'm not keeping my hopes up for Sandow. Even though he delivered a couple of great promos in front of Cena, they need to build up Sandow more through interferences, backstage segments, assisting Cena's opponents etc for a month or so regularly before I start believing that he's actually even in the title hunt.

Putting him anything non-Cena related makes me think that they've put him back in the mid-card.

 

[SUPAH STRONG STYLE]

Because the majority of the IWC can't decide whether or not they hate something or like something.

Their opinions on wrestlers change more than a woman's mood on her period.

 

[JB1991]

Lol come one, is everyone supposed to like the guy ? i mean i like him but people do have some good arguments to not like him sometimes

 

[Gandhi]

Not everybody likes CM Punk, why can't some people on this forum comprehend that? Jeez...

 

[SUPAH STRONG STYLE]

Lol come one, is everyone supposed to like him ? i mean i like him but people do have some good arguments to not like him sometimes

Agreed.

I can see how it gets old though. When some of the forumers ramble on about how much of a vanilla midget he is, I almost feel like I'm watching a Kevin Nash video.

 

[The One]

Because people have different opinions.

 

[G-Mafia]

Punks heel run with the title was the saving grace of 2012. Anyone that says otherwise is a hater. That's a fact. CM Punk was a throw back villian and I liked it.

 

[CHIcagoMade]

Punks heel run with the title was the saving grace of 2012. Anyone that says otherwise is a hater. That's a fact. CM Punk was a throw back villian and I liked it.

fpalm

 

[Londrick]

Because haters are gonna hate. Easily one of the GOAT WWE title reigns.

 

[Starbuck]

Because it was, for the most part, shit, forgettable and irrelevant.

 

[Alden Heathcliffe]

Because CM Punk is a jackass who rubs people the wrong way and thus people shit on his reign.

 

[Rick_James]

First half of Punk's title reign was garbage, second half was great though, the guy plays a heel so much better than a face and was finally generating interest.