Armani said: Dude he wasn't in a losing streak, he was in the Main damn staple that was the center of the show, he was booked as a monster a lot of times and was protected having him with Ric Flair as his partner, anyone in that locker room at that time would kill for that position. Orton was their first plans and Batista was their second, he said that in his documentaries. So he was considered for a push. Punk push happened because of his pipebomb, kayfabe wise he had a weak losing record before the push even started. He was a jobber since 2010 till then in 2011, so in casual eyes he was a nobody, plus his push happened after WM, if Punk booking was very solid from the beginning of the year he would have been a bigger star by then and wont be viewed as a joke. Click to expand...

You mean 2009 but that was a long time ago and been a jobber ever since his match with Taker, so it's irrelevant to talk about. Click to expand...

So I'm confused here, did he get pushed or not? He was the ME in 2009 so how wasn't he able to outshine anyone? his feud with Hardy was the best that year and his work with Taker was good too, but just came too short. His following work with SES was great but was just used as a jobber staple. Not his fault. Click to expand...

:stupid:. Do you do this in purpose or are you just ignorant? Every top star needed exposure and big names to get over. Austin is a big example for that. Click to expand...





https://sites.google.com/site/chrisharrington/wwe_house_shows_may2008_aug2014 It wasn't doing well in terms of ratings dummy. My point is, he was doing well in terms of attendance and even buys when he was the champ only not the full year. Click to expand...

Those numbers NOC and HIAC were higher than the previous year except for SS. Doesn't change what I was trying to say. It was higher in buys with Punk on it. Click to expand...

I'm not sure if sarcasm or not. Orton/Cena which was advertise as the greatest of all time got only 2,000 higher than Punk/Miz/ADR. Punk wasn't meant to bring big numbers with these two, they are not even credible ME, they weren't fan fav nor did they care about them. At that time he was meant to be pushed against a bigger name to level up his star status, he wasn't at that level yet.



Ok, HIAC 2012 did 199,000 buys without Cena, no big name just Punk. Cena absence did 17,000 compared to the previous year with him 182,000 so yeah lol. Click to expand...

When did I say he was? lol. I was talking about 2013 when he was at ring side. HBK was the special ref, Punk had a match, and Cena returns in this PPV too. So two returns + two other big stars adds more buys, duh. Click to expand...

No he's not the perfect example, he was never been booked as bad as Punk before getting pushed in 2005, again he was in the main staple won clean matches in 2004 oct/Dec, won the rumble, and ME with Triple h. So he was meant to be pushed and even before that he wasn't jobbing in the staple as you suggested, if you call pairing him with Ric is then you're really....



Cena was still being pushed, he wasn't a joke when they started his push + he had big names to work with while Punk had Miz, Truth, and ADR. Do the calculation here and give your unbiased opinion instead of making shit up, they are not the same thing. Click to expand...

Well, it's from Meltzer anyway. There were tons of reports saying so. Even earlier this year, so how does that work. Either ways Merch does show how popular a wrestler is because the most popular wrestlers were measured by that too. Click to expand...

So 333,000 buys wasn't good enough :lmao. Especially how he was in a losing streak and only beat Jericho for the #13234 times, you expect the casual to believe he can beat Brock when he was basically losing to every big star. Does that really make sense to you lol. When people saw Brock losing clean, people were freaking out because they thought he will lose all of his credibility and drawing power, same thing with Cena, if losing doesn't mean much then Cena wouldn't win those big matches and see reports saying they needed to protect him for the bigger matches (Brock). So this doesn't apply with Punk? Ha hater. Click to expand...

Batista was a mid-carder and no one expected him to be the top guy. This is revisionist bullshit at its finest. There is a reason, why even today, some internet fans think Cena/Orton is The Rock/Austin of this generation even though Batista took that spot long ago. This is what people thought would happen in 2004. Batista himself says in his book, and documentary, that Triple H decided to go with Batista. He wasn't the second choice, it just happened. Again, please stop making up crap, it's the one thing I hate most in these debates because people start lying.It's relevant because he'd been pushed before but didn't become huge.He was in the main event on Smackdown, the B-show. And they ended up bringing Batista back, even after they initially brought Undertaker back. Jeff Hardy was the main factor there, not CM Punk. CM Punk was being pushed as a heel, but he wasn't outshining the top guys. It took until there was no one in the way for that to happen.Every top star didn't fucking need Rock. Cena didn't, Batista, and neither did Orton or Edge. CM Punk had Cena as his first high profile feud. The biggest star possible at the time. He didn't do shit.Firstly, I've already pointed out why it's stupid of you to try and use PPV buys in 2009 for CM Punk, especially when Hardy was the bigger star, they were on Smackdown, and also that it was less than 2008.Secondly, you claimed Smackdown was doing better attendance than Raw. Your link proves you to be a liar. Notice how Smackdown attendance isn't higher than Raw on average except for in Q1, only by an insignificant amount. And that's not when Punk was headlining.Q2 Raw destroys Smackdown (this is when the tour leader was Batista, with Orton).Q3 Raw destroys it too (this is when Cena was tour leader, with Orton).Smackdown Q2 and Q3 is lower, and this is when Edge, Jeff and Punk were getting their time. Notice how Smackdown jumps in Q4 to 9,000 and for the first time, higher than Raw?That's when WWE brought back Batista and Undertaker. It's right at the beginning of that quarter that they get rid of CM Punk as champion. Funny that, isn't it. That's also the only quarter that Smackdown wins over Raw in that year in attendance (funny how Batista's involved in the two biggest quarters of the year - Raw and Smackdown - for house show attendance).And I pointed out the numbers are meaningless because he really do fuck all for business. The decline continued.No one wants to watch Cena/Orton in 2014. People were getting tired of it in 2009, but even that shitty match did better than what Punk did 2 years earlier, even with the yearly decline in progress.Being at ringside doesn't get increased buys. Matches make the difference. Triple H isn't a special attraction.Batista didn't get much booking in 2004 in the first place. He got a rocket attached to him around December 2004 and he brought results almost straight away. So yeah, the perfect example, especially since he's the only superstar who headlined a Wrestlemania in the last decade with over a million buys without any outside help.I don't remember Meltzer saying Punk sold more merchandise than Cena for 8 months. I'm certainly not going to believe it coming from Punk's mouth because wrestlers tend to exaggerate. Cena believes his brand is worth $100 million. Ain't no one buying that bullshit either.No it's not when you're against Brock fucking Lesnar, and the year prior, Triple H outdraws your match. Isn't CM Punk supposed to be the second biggest star in the company? Even Lesnar couldn't do anything with him. Only The Rock did, and that's The Rock.