More On The Punk Interview

You may also like...

14 Responses

  1. Heyo says:

    It’s amazing how true Punk’s points became over time. Back when he said what he said, he sounded whiny because there were legit reasons why he didn’t get what he wanted(Rock vs. Cena II was a huge draw and the Rock drew a ton of money to WWE with his 2011-2013 run).

    Now? Holy hell did things fall apart. Vince’s head is firmly up his own ass, and whenever or not you get the top spot or get buried is decided “because reasons”. Does it matter that ratings have largely tanked under Reigns’ title reign? No, because Vince decided that he’s the champion and screw you if you disagree. Try to get over on your own? You’ll just go under 50-50 booking or be a jobber and that’s that. Hell, you could argue that just about anyone getting over was buried or they tried to bury them at this year’s Wrestlemania(seriously, there was no reason for Styles and New Day to lose clean like that).

    It doesn’t help that Meltzer has reported MANY times that Vince and HHH are butting heads over the direction of the product, and that’s just the cherry on top.

    • Greg says:

      New Day losing was to setup the legend thing (which they could have had New Day win and then have the LON beat them up and then have the legends come down). I’m guessing the reason for Styles losing was they thought everyone would forget when he won the fatal four way on Raw. Don’t agree with that.

      Ratings are not Roman’s fault.

      Vince owns the damn thing. Of course he decides what he wants because he can.

      WWE set a revenue record in 2015 (their profit is a different story). So technically WWE had their most successful year in history with Roman being heavily featured.

  2. Jay H (the real one) says:

    Also the fact that he takes credit for Daniel Bryan and The Shield. Im sorry but wasn’t it us the Fans and Bryan that got him over? I am pretty sure it was.

    • Pickle says:

      Got him over, yes. Got him into the Mania main event, no. The plan for Bryan before Punk quit was Bryan/Sheamus in a nothing midcard match. No triple threat, no double duty, no title win.

      Bryan, like Punk said numerous times, totally deserved the main event, but he probably wouldn’t have gotten it if Punk stuck around.

  3. deanerandterry says:

    I agree with a lot of what Punk says here, I think he could have made a decent run as a top guy when he was white hot but at the same time from a business stand point you can’t blame WWE for sticking with Cena, especially since he was still drawing strong and had been for years. Could WWE have afforded a shot to Punk as the top guy? Sure but at the same time you can’t blame WWE going the safe route.

    Punk should expect a lower payday than Taker, Cena, Rock and Lesnar for WM29, that’s just common sense. Triple H, although he didn’t deserve more money for his match at WM29 I’m sure he had a lot more duties during that week which would warrant him making more than Punk. He’s pretty high up on the WWE corporate ladder, that extra work accounts for A LOT.

    WWE should have allotted the time off Punk was asking for and should have laid off a bit when it came to constantly pressuring Punk to come back early, at the same time Punk had every right to tell Vince to shove it.

    His frustration with constantly doing favors for Vince and not getting a return even when Vince kept saying “I owe you one” is justified but it also shows his business ignorance. If you do the boss a favor its fairly common for them to keep asking until you put your foot down.

    As much as I understand how upset Punk is (I know what its like working hard, doing the best work, being a good soldier and not getting compensated the way you feel you should) but at the same time sometimes you got to push back hard and although Punk often stirred shit and made his issues vocal it seemed like he ultimately just did what WWE wanted him to for the most part and it got to a point where he exploded and left in a very unprofessional way. I don’t blame Punk for leaving as he needs to take care of himself but if he put his foot down more and was a little more of an asshole (he wasn’t an asshole in WWE, he was difficult at points but all Vince needed to do was push a little bit and Punk would usually fold) he would probably have a much better relationship with WWE right now, maybe he would still be wrestling (or at least left in a better way).

    Ultimately WWE could have done better by Punk but its not like they did bad by him, Punk has reasons to be upset no question but for some things he should have been more reasonable about.

  4. M.R. says:

    Just feels like a calculated move to regurgitate everything the IWC believes and wants to hear. He’s nowhere near the big deal he seems to believe he was.

  5. Jay H (the real one) says:

    The injuries remind me of Kurt Angle in 2006 and them trying to give him time off but he wouldn’t take it. I agree that he should have taken the time off if he was that hurt but he was stubborn. I just find it funny and call BS on him it not being about the money. Thats like saying anyone with a job isn’t there for making a paycheck.

  6. Killjoy says:

    I gotta agree with Punk on the while WM 29 money thing. Rock/Cena, Lesnar/HHH and him vs Taker. Those were the 3 main matches of the show, all built as headlining matches. But out of those 6, he, the one with the biggest workload, ended up with the short end of the stick.

    From a money making point of view, being put with those top guys should be a call to move up, not stay the same or get less.

  7. ted says:

    Interesting interview I agree with some of what punk says. Other parts sound like sour grapes. Hopefully he can be happy in whatever he chooses to do now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.