|
|
1. Are you supporting Punk?
Yes, because I feel that a lot of his gripes are legitimate. Especially on his health and the general creative direction of the WWE over the years.
2. Are you supporting WWE?
Hard to answer. I guess so. I mean, it sounds gritty and nasty at times, and if those problems are there hopefully changes are made.
3. If supporting Punk, why do you believe WWE is in the wrong?
Because how the fuck could they have fucked up CM Punk in 2011 and almost fucked up Daniel Bryan? The part-timers coming in does sort of cap the roster and create fewer full-time stars. Also, that stuff with the injuries is just...terrible.
4. If supporting WWE, why do you think Punk is in the wrong?
Because at the time he left the WWE, he really wasn't the guy to headline the show. It was Daniel Bryan's gig. Triple H vs. Punk was actually a really good spot for him, creatively. I guess they could have slapped together something with John Cena, or continued his angle with The Shield, but whatever.
5. Does Punk have a legitimate gripe against Ryback? If yes, why? If no, why?
If Ryback was an unsafe worker and not good enough to be in his position, sure. Well, it's more a gripe with the management that just saw potential dollar signs in a stiff guy.
6. Do you believe Punk will ever wrestle in a WWE ring again?
He says never, and he says that pretty definitively. I would have said "Yes," because I think Punk would realize how much money there is in burying the hatchet. And he can become one of those part-time guys that get all the glory. If he agreed to return tomorrow, and Daniel Bryan wasn't ready by the time the Rumble came along, I'm sure he could negotiate a Royal Rumble win and position himself to be the guy to beat Brock Lesnar, and it would be good, both creatively and financially.
7. Do you believe Vince will talk about this on his podcast with Austin?
I had "Yes" typed out, because people will be expecting him to, Austin isn't an idiot, and isn't being taped in front of a crowd or something? As if they aren't going to change "CM Punk!"? I expect more chants than usual during the main show too. That being said, if the company doesn't want it mentioned, and they feel that giving it attention could damage the WWE Network or their standing in the public, then I think Austin is one of the few verbal performers who can negate the issue very effectively. Austin is doing this spot because it is good for him too. If he asks questions Vince really doesn't want to hear, then it might close a money door for Austin as well. I think Vince understands this too, the two will talk, and they'll either work out something for Vince to say and make it appear like Austin pressed him as far as it could go, or Austin will do some sort of "Man, I'm not going to ask you about that can of worms," side-step.
8. As WWE Champion for 4__ days, did Punk deserve his Wrestlemania headline match? As in, closing the show?
Punk deserved it, but not for his run as champion. He deserved it because he drew attention to a fairly stagnant product in 2011, despite losing for like a million PPVs straight, and presented himself, believably, as the new hot item. In my opinion, Jericho should have won the Rumble in 2012 to build him up as Punk's challenger. Should they have closed over Cena vs. Rock? That's tricky. On one hand, Cena vs. Rock is the money draw at that point; but I think they had the chance to convince viewers that Punk vs. Jericho is. I don't think anyone would have turned on the match, and I think Punk retaining the title and proving he is "The Best in the World" is a perfectly fine main event story. Why would The Best be anywhere else but last? But I can understand the point that Cena vs. Rock was the right choice. That being said, Cena vs. Rock II was very uninspired as a main event, completely went against the tagline "Once in a Lifetime" that was used to the promote the first match, and it's not like the first was a classic that demanded a re-run. CM Punk should have aired his gripes about being the WWE Champion for so long and still playing second-fiddle to Cena, and inserted himself into the main event as the most heelish character, but sort of right and with a lot of fan support of his own. Hell, he probably should have even won. Cena nor Rock needed it. Punk could have used it. The Royal Rumble wasn't exactly necessary to setup this match, so Jericho could have won the Rumble (again), gained even more credibility as a certain Hall of Famer, and challenged Dolph Ziggler for the World Heavyweight Title. Del Rio and Swagger would have been better suited to a US Title match.
9. During Punk's historic run, do you believe he was shown the 100% respect somebody in that position deserved at all times?
Not creatively. He got an amazing run, but it just felt...there at times. Your WWE Champion should never just be there. I think he should have had a constant cold war with Cena. I honestly think that Cena should have beaten The Rock at Mania, and then Brock should have beaten Cena. Punk could gripe about how he's not closing shows, and it becomes apparent that Punk still has something to prove against John Cena somehow. Brock Lesnar is also in the discussion. Punk felt like a really good Intercontinental Champion at times. I also felt the heel turn was a bit off. Punk wasn't creatively hitting all cylinders as a face, and he sort of became "another guy," but having Punk not peacefully co-inhabit with John Cena could have helped that. I actually think that turning Cena, shoot me for bringing it up, would have made business more interesting. Punk was apparently doing great with merchandise, and Cena cashing in his Money in the Bank briefcase like a dog would have caused quite a stir. Maybe not even a Cena heel turn, but a Cena "you clearly weren't confident to take on Punk one-on-one" development could have really helped people flock behind Punk more, and brand him more as a "guy."
10. Do you believe WWE doctors could have treated him better?
If those stories are true, absolutely.
11. Do you believe CM Punk, and other WWE performers should be allowed proper time to heal before being pushed to return before time?
Yes, definitely. It's better for them and better for the company when they are able to perform at their best and can have longer careers.
12. Do you believe that CM Punk and other WWE performers should just 'suck it up' as it's part of the industry, and they should be forced to return when they're requested to, whether they're ready or not?
Sucking it up is a part of the business, and it seems like everyone does. But there are times when a guy just shouldn't wrestle, and that should be the company's prerogative as much as it is the individual performer's. If you aren't so dependent on a few "names," you might be able to slip guys in and out of stuff more easily. Create a storyline out of the injuries. Punk gets hurt whilst on top, have someone take his leg out with a crowbar backstage. Instant feud when he is back.
|