WWE propaganda at it's finest.
CM Punk's character change, wrestling-wise, makes no sense. He was beating top contenders clean for 6+ months, then he turns heel, not because there was somebody better than him, but because he felt he was overshadowed, which has nothing to do with his wrestling ability and all of a sudden I'm supposed to believe he lost the ability to wrestle on a main event level?
It would also fit his character better, if he just beat some contenders or a contender cleanly, since he's supposed to be the best in the world.
But that's just the way WWE portrays their heel wrestlers.
CM Punk's character change, wrestling-wise, makes no sense. He was beating top contenders clean for 6+ months, then he turns heel, not because there was somebody better than him, but because he felt he was overshadowed, which has nothing to do with his wrestling ability and all of a sudden I'm supposed to believe he lost the ability to wrestle on a main event level?
It would also fit his character better, if he just beat some contenders or a contender cleanly, since he's supposed to be the best in the world.
But that's just the way WWE portrays their heel wrestlers.


Reply With Quote

. Don't get me wrong I was a huge fan of the attitude era just like 95 percent of the members of the IWC. The reason we can't have it back is because a major portion of wwe's audience is children. The fact is that both time periods have it's ups and it's downs and to be honest I don't understand all the complaining about this generation. we have cm punk as the wwe champion for over a year, when he is clearly as close to an attitude era wrestler that we will get any time soon. We have team hell no! which happens to have two great wrestlers in it. we have a group of vigilantis that attack face superstars. it's not like we are getting a crap product, I am fine saying it's not the attitude era... but let's be fair.

Bookmarks