Money in the Bank Money In The Bank 2011, was Punk going over the correct decision....

Discussion in 'PPV's & Specials' started by seabs, Aug 21, 2012.

  1. Now I'm sure most loved Punk fulfilling his promise and escaping his contract with the WWE title around his waist, I know I did. However in the long term would he have been better off getting screwed by the corporate group to gain a reason to return? Or was the way it was done better? Let's hear some opinions.
  2. I thought it was done badly, they built up a whole he is definitely leaving story, never returning, he goes over and next week returns so it's just like lol we gave him a contract :umad:
    They could have built up a massive feud between WWE and Punk which would have been amazing imo.
    Even if they did want Punk to go over they should have waited more than a week to return him, just felt so antclimactic, Mysterio should have got a months reign then Cena goes over him then Punk returns imo, just felt so rushed.
  3. Agreed with Cole, it felt rushed and Mysterio should have kept the championship for a little while, it was his first WWE championship, and they just striped it off of him in an hour or so. Would have been better to at least wait until the next Pay-Per-View to bring back CM Punk and have John Cena win and everything.
  4. WWE chickened out on the "Punk taking the WWE title" storyline. It could have/should have been the biggest angle since the first appearance of the Nexus.

    It disturbs me that WWE has some great intentions with some of their storylines only to back off because the story's "too complicated". It often seems that WWE is afraid the audience will not realize who the good and bad guys are supposed to be. So, they make sure to shorten and simplify the stories so that we root for "the right guy".

    The really dumbfounding thing is that Austin was never supposed to be a big babyface star. He was being built as the next big heel. The WWE had given up on the Rock as their next big babyface and had turned him heel, where he would probably have remained a career midcarder. It wasn't WWE that made the crowd cheer for Austin or Rocky. It was their willingness to let their characters and their stories develop that made those guys into the stars they are.

    So, yes, Punk needed to win at MITB last July. It wasn't Punk that screwed up the storyline. It wasn't his lack of charisma or capability.

    It was WWE's lack of faith that John Cena would still be viewed as the face of the company as fans were already starting to cheer for Punk. If anything, it was WWE's lack of faith in Cena and the audience's reaction that caused the storyline to flop.

  5. It would've been awesome if he was out for a month or so, sometimes videos could show up of him doing whatever he wanted to the WWE title and even wrestling in indies, other feds (I know it wouldn't happen but it'd be awesome), with McMahon and Cena trying to get the title back... would've been the best story in a few years. But yeah, since they're writing for kids they can't do stuff like that. :facepalm:
    • Like Like x 1
Draft saved Draft deleted