Quote Originally Posted by Zero View Post
He had plenty of great ones. That Rey promo was great, his Rock box with god one was great, he had some really strong ones in the Cena feud. Even against Hardy as I said he did great character work. But ultimately his problem wasn't his "ability" but his style itself and mindset led to him ultimately led to his promos being extremely self serving and quite frankly super lame in my opinion which is why I compared him to Trips. I reiterate my earlier point in that who really was elevated working a feud with Punk? Or even with him? Both the SES & New Nexus members gained absolutely nothing. Granted the talent wasn't strong itself but for someone with his alleged star power and mic ability he never once brought them up to any kind of next level. In terms of feuds he had tons of chances and ultimately his own content was just that, his own content. To me the top mic workers are those who bring the best out of others and build compelling feuds that build both parties up. I don't put him in that class at all, even against Bryan it goes to show Bryan was better off and much more over AFTER Punk was out of the way rather than when he was feuding with him for months on end. Now I'm not discounting booking issues at all. It sucked for all kinds of people and everyone knows this. But what of Punk, who is claimed as one of the greatest of the era, when others have done more in their feuds than he ever did?
A lot of Punk's big rivals were with acts that were already made - Cena, Hardy, Undertaker, Rock, Big Show, Orton, Mysterio, Jericho. The onus was on Punk to talk himself up, make him feel like he belongs in the main event with these stars and put together some angles and promos that make people interested in watching his matches, which is exactly what happened - in fact if anything it was his opponents job to put Punk over. The onus was rarely ever on Punk to put over new talent, and he quit before he ever moved into that point in his career where he would be expected to put over more talent (which is whether right or wrong is a separate issue to his ability as a talker). The point of Punk being Nexus leader wasn't to put all these other guys over, his character was he was using them to protect himself and make himself look better, same with SES, Punk was a user and it would of made no sense for him to start acting like his lackeys were on his level by talking them up in promos.

I disagree that Punk wasn't one of the better talkers of his generation because he never put Curtis Axel or Ryback over in a promo. On the few occasions he was ever in that position to be the veteran against a fresh talent, WWE fucked it up for him anyway with terrible booking.

Actually, if it wasn't for Punk's promos, Johnny Ace wouldn't of had that long of a on-screen run, so maybe clown shoes can be thankful to Punker if no-one else will

Punk is better on the mic than AJ, I would agree with that. And yet AJ is a much better candidate for multiple reasons:

1. Is a much better work not only in terms of in-ring execution, but peak, consistency, and longevity all clearly fall on AJ's side.
2. AJ's much more influential than Punk and his style has resonated throughout the business on a global scale and in both major and minor ways.
3. I disagree with Punk being a bigger star in wrestling, at least in a positive way. Maybe because of his UFC run he might be more known but in a positive sense? I definitely consider, and think a vast majority of those in wrestling and even fans in this era do and always will consider AJ much more of a legend than Punk.
4. AJ has elevated others multiple times whether in feuds or having their best match, from TNA to NJPW to WWE. I keep asking for examples where Punk did this (and not even just wins and losses of Punk losing to a new guy, but just made him look good. For example in The Shield feud he didn't give a fuck, made them look like shit, then buried Roman for no reason and turned his cult-like fanbase on him for like 5 years) and nobody seems to have very strong, HOF-caliber answers. Or any answers at all for that matter. Because it never happened.
5. I don't care about personal life. Even someone like Omega I have no problem praising when he does good and I've got the receipts to be bitter at him. Still though, I do think AJ's stuff is largely overblown. When it comes time for business, AJ's done good by everyone, while Punk nearly bankrupted his own best friend because of stuff HE did. Still though, even if Punk shot someone in cold blood, claimed he hated all gay people in the world, pissed on the American flag and announced himself as the new Hitler all while wearing a MAGA hat and a girl scout's outfit it's really not relevant to his HOF case other than for amusement purposes. What does is his shitty personality ultimately affected his performances at different periods.
I agree with points 1, 2, 4 (although you seem too fixated on this point) and 5, and would vote AJ comfortably ahead of Punk for HOF.

I've seen both wrestlers live, Punk's the bigger star to me and more tellingly to casual fans who gravitate towards the bigger names and main event acts.

I have to admit the most damning point to my argument is the fact someone like Warrior and Triple H is in the HOF, whereas Punk, for any flaws he may have clearly got it more than they did. More good than bad? As I said to me he's a big match worker and you can point to 5-10 matches where he finally put it together and was motivated enough to rock shit and they almost all are hugely important matches to his career. But how many shitty Chris Jericho matches took place during his era where he looked like he was toast already? What Rey matches were truly memorable? Was he truly a good tv worker the level of someone like never mind the Benoit rule or whatever, even guys like Regal, Christian, and Matt Hardy who aren't HOFers? I don't think he was at all. We agree his indie work wasn't that great. So really, is he a HOF worker? I think there's no way you can claim that. If he would have gotten it together and not been so up his own ass I think he could have been great, but as I said he never fixed his own flaws or cared to knock out what he didn't do well.
I think all the Mysterio matches are memorable and and a couple of them are great, and I thought two of the Jericho matches were great. Perhaps I'm the high man on his WWE matches, but it also looks like you're the low man.

I'd agree Christian's better, Regal is but was never allowed to show it as a high profile match wrestler, but lets not go there on Matt Hardy and how overrated he is as a worker, that's a debate for another day.

I think Shock's point about comparing Punk to HBK is extremely fair. I think Punk is similar to HHH on the mic and similar but different to HBK in ring, as I think HBK often also stretched himself beyond his abilities in-ring. The difference is that HBK's flaws were emotional and his version of "storytelling" which as we see him impart on the next generation...totally sucks. Punk on the other hand stretched himself physically, doing moves he was never capable of and both men's egos going too far and dragging two should be awesome wrestlers to the point of no return, and their reputations harmed more and more as time goes on from being told every week they're the greatest wrestlers that it stuck.
I don't see the HHH/Punk comparisons on the mic because Punk always came off more believable, interesting and flexible in other roles than Trips ever did, but I do get the links to Shawn in how the reputation of them being the best wrestlers feeds into a narrative and a cycle that convinces fans they were better than they really were and people are more willing to overlook their flaws.