|
|
Post by ICW on Jan 30, 2014 18:42:54 GMT -5
CM Punk just did this so everyone could stop talking about Sting. So for that I thank him. It's Stong, dude. Who's Sting? The singer? |
|
|
|
Post by Cassa Nova Kid on Jan 30, 2014 18:55:22 GMT -5
CM Punk just did this so everyone could stop talking about Sting. So for that I thank him. It's Stong, dude. Who's Sting? The singer? Lol did sting sign officially and did CM Punk really leave |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 20:20:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2014 19:02:43 GMT -5
Maybe he's just burnt out and would have left no matter how horrible or fantastic the booking was.
|
|
|
|
Post by ICW on Jan 30, 2014 19:02:46 GMT -5
It's Stong, dude. Who's Sting? The singer? Lol did sting sign officially and did CM Punk really leave My sources tell me "i don't know" |
|
|
|
Post by Cassa Nova Kid on Jan 30, 2014 19:09:53 GMT -5
Lol did sting sign officially and did CM Punk really leave My sources tell me "i don't know" Well done sir lol well done |
|
Dr. Mantis Toboggan MD
Main Eventer
I need a monster condom for my magnum sized dong.
Joined on: Nov 25, 2011 16:25:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,713
|
Post by Dr. Mantis Toboggan MD on Jan 30, 2014 19:41:57 GMT -5
I am not sure if you saw my question. If you were in line for a promotion but someone with who had less experience, left the company years ago, is getting paid more than you to work part time, just because they are a little more popular, would you be upset by that? If you were to receive a pay cut because of a change with in your job made, would you be upset? If you said yes to either, YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE!!! Like I said, Punk and Taker both have wrestled full time for significantly greater amounts of time. There is nothing hypocritical in saying what he said. He is earning his spot just like the rest of the full time roster. The Rock is getting pay to show up a few times a year, Batista has had one match since his return, but Brock (the guy who has the least amount of required match) Has had the most matches. You (just like me) have know what is going on behind the scenes, what you are stating here is nothing but your opinion. For all we know it is a work. And I am not saying that anyone deserves the WM main event more than Bryan, if anything it is the opposite. I am not even saying it is Triple H or Vince's fault. What I am saying is that he is a human being and this isn't some hobby or form of entertainment, it is a job. And like you and me, there are parts of his job he doesn't like, but instead of just letting it fester he brings up these problems. Your question has NO relevance to Punk's situation. Let me reask and answer the question where it would be relevant and similar to Punk's situation. "If I was in line for a promotion but someone who had less experience, left the company years ago, was more popular AND made the company more money than me was to work part time and get paid more than me, would I be upset? The answer is NO! Absolutely, unequivocally NO! Reason why is simple. Its a business. It depends on earnings. I am a big believer on one being paid and receiving perks based on what they earn for the company.....not for how long they have worked for the company or how many more days they work there. The bottom line still is money. If I dont generate as much profit for the business, I dont deserve as many extra perks or as much money as the part time guy. In fact, I should be ashamed of myself. I work twice as long and cant make as much money for the company as someone working half my hours?! Welcome to reality. If you have ever worked for commission and not for salary or hourly wage....this happens every single day to thousands upon thousands of people. Its not how about how long or how much you work..,..its about how profitable you are to the company. I am firm believer that you should be paid based on your contribution to the company not because you show up and just do your job. I dont give 2 craps how long Punk or Taker has wrestled. Austin has worked considerably less for WWE and has generated more money for WWE than Punk. Should he not be considered an all time great?! Thats nonsense. Brooklyn Brawler has worked for WWE a lot longer than Punk or Taker....should he be making more money than either? Again...nonsense. My comments are based on the story listed. Whether the story is true or not true is not relevant for the discussion. Thats a whole nother debate. Maybe it is a work. Maybe its a work based in truth. Doesnt change my opinion nor does it change the facts that I have laid to support my opinion. Yes, it is a job. And like you and me, Punk has a right to not like parts of it....to grow tired of certain aspects. But like you and me, he also has the right to fulfill his commitment. He has a contract. Finish out your deal and take a hike. More than likely, you are not a contracted employee who is required to fulfill a certain number of obligations. We may quit at any point we so desired. Punk does not have that freedom. He can be sued for breech of contract for walking out. Let me ask you a question, if you were to go into a public forum...be that in a print, radio or television ad and spoke negatively towards the company you work for.....do you think you would be fired? If your company announced a major project that you were to have a big role in that same print, radio or television interviewer were to ask you about it and you responded you reserved your opinion till you got your paycheck....might you be fired for that? If you were to speak negatively for one of the legendary employees of your company that has gone on to do bigger and better things and returns to help out on a part time basis....might you be fired? As fans we all love hearing the truth. We love to see Punk speak against the WWE machine. But in reality, he is a PR nightmare. For the company who pays the money that puts food on his family's plate.....its ridiculous. This is not me supporting WWE. This me calling a spade a spade. I am just as critical of WWE as Punk is. But airing the dirty laundry publically is wrong. Walking out on the company is wrong. And not fulfilling your contract, screwing over the very people that have made you the star you are (the fans) is wrong and its selfish. How is Punk saying he has to wait and see if the Network is a good or bad thing negative publicity? He stated that he is unsure, he didn't say that it is going to fail or succeed, he said he would have to wait and find out. He said he didn't like the fact the Rock and others were coming back part time because he had a proverbial glass ceiling put in front of him when that happened, he didn't say it wasn't a good business move. It be like a telling someone "yeah, people already like Bob so we are going to give him the promotion even though he was less experience and will work about 1/64 the amount you do without giving you a chance because we don't feel like giving you a chance." It'd be like if Vince told Austin at the beginning of 1998 or Triple H at the beginnig of 2002 that, "yeah we are going to be letting Hogan main event WM and work part time because he is more popular right now." Why do you think women these days still end up packing up and going home? Because they are told that the company would rather take it safe (or the the women shouldn't work crap) and go with the less experience, not as hard working male counterpart. If you weren't there how do you know that the rumors you heard were accurate? And when you only go off of the info the dirtsheets put out, you are forming an opinion off an assumption, and what is the saying about the assumptions? It makes an a** at of you and me. |
|
Dr. Mantis Toboggan MD
Main Eventer
I need a monster condom for my magnum sized dong.
Joined on: Nov 25, 2011 16:25:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,713
|
Post by Dr. Mantis Toboggan MD on Jan 30, 2014 19:49:43 GMT -5
Stone Cold and The Rock would be NOTHING right now if guys from the early 90s kept coming back as part timers to hog the spotlight and collect paychecks. Stone Cold and The Rock were good enough that Vince didn't need to bring back guys from the early 90s. What if Hogan offered to comeback somewhere in between 1996-early 1998? We would be listening to the same story but it would be Austin and Rock instead of Punk and Bryan. |
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Jan 30, 2014 20:08:19 GMT -5
Your question has NO relevance to Punk's situation. Let me reask and answer the question where it would be relevant and similar to Punk's situation. "If I was in line for a promotion but someone who had less experience, left the company years ago, was more popular AND made the company more money than me was to work part time and get paid more than me, would I be upset? The answer is NO! Absolutely, unequivocally NO! Reason why is simple. Its a business. It depends on earnings. I am a big believer on one being paid and receiving perks based on what they earn for the company.....not for how long they have worked for the company or how many more days they work there. The bottom line still is money. If I dont generate as much profit for the business, I dont deserve as many extra perks or as much money as the part time guy. In fact, I should be ashamed of myself. I work twice as long and cant make as much money for the company as someone working half my hours?! Welcome to reality. If you have ever worked for commission and not for salary or hourly wage....this happens every single day to thousands upon thousands of people. Its not how about how long or how much you work..,..its about how profitable you are to the company. I am firm believer that you should be paid based on your contribution to the company not because you show up and just do your job. I dont give 2 craps how long Punk or Taker has wrestled. Austin has worked considerably less for WWE and has generated more money for WWE than Punk. Should he not be considered an all time great?! Thats nonsense. Brooklyn Brawler has worked for WWE a lot longer than Punk or Taker....should he be making more money than either? Again...nonsense. My comments are based on the story listed. Whether the story is true or not true is not relevant for the discussion. Thats a whole nother debate. Maybe it is a work. Maybe its a work based in truth. Doesnt change my opinion nor does it change the facts that I have laid to support my opinion. Yes, it is a job. And like you and me, Punk has a right to not like parts of it....to grow tired of certain aspects. But like you and me, he also has the right to fulfill his commitment. He has a contract. Finish out your deal and take a hike. More than likely, you are not a contracted employee who is required to fulfill a certain number of obligations. We may quit at any point we so desired. Punk does not have that freedom. He can be sued for breech of contract for walking out. Let me ask you a question, if you were to go into a public forum...be that in a print, radio or television ad and spoke negatively towards the company you work for.....do you think you would be fired? If your company announced a major project that you were to have a big role in that same print, radio or television interviewer were to ask you about it and you responded you reserved your opinion till you got your paycheck....might you be fired for that? If you were to speak negatively for one of the legendary employees of your company that has gone on to do bigger and better things and returns to help out on a part time basis....might you be fired? As fans we all love hearing the truth. We love to see Punk speak against the WWE machine. But in reality, he is a PR nightmare. For the company who pays the money that puts food on his family's plate.....its ridiculous. This is not me supporting WWE. This me calling a spade a spade. I am just as critical of WWE as Punk is. But airing the dirty laundry publically is wrong. Walking out on the company is wrong. And not fulfilling your contract, screwing over the very people that have made you the star you are (the fans) is wrong and its selfish. How is Punk saying he has to wait and see if the Network is a good or bad thing negative publicity? He stated that he is unsure, he didn't say that it is going to fail or succeed, he said he would have to wait and find out. He said he didn't like the fact the Rock and others were coming back part time because he had a proverbial glass ceiling put in front of him when that happened, he didn't say it wasn't a good business move. It be like a telling someone "yeah, people already like Bob so we are going to give him the promotion even though he was less experience and will work about 1/64 the amount you do without giving you a chance because we don't feel like giving you a chance." It'd be like if Vince told Austin at the beginning of 1998 or Triple H at the beginnig of 2002 that, "yeah we are going to be letting Hogan main event WM and work part time because he is more popular right now." Why do you think women these days still end up packing up and going home? Because they are told that the company would rather take it safe (or the the women shouldn't work crap) and go with the less experience, not as hard working male counterpart. If you weren't there how do you know that the rumors you heard were accurate? And when you only go off of the info the dirtsheets put out, you are forming an opinion off an assumption, and what is the saying about the assumptions? It makes an a** at of you and me. Its not that part being the issue. Its the part after claiming it will all depend based on his royalty check. You dont do something like that. This is common sense. So for those who keep saying it aint about money.....clearly it is. I'm not "going off dirtsheets or making assumptions." My response is to THIS thread which based on a dirt sheet post. You make it sound like I am saying the dirt sheet is posting facts. Some might be. Some might not. I have said this numerous times. But THIS thread is a discussion based on the information being reported, not a discussion on how factual the dirt sheet report is. You are confused on this point. If you want to discuss facts in a dirt sheet report, feel free too. But you are engaging with me over something completely different and then twisting words to try and support an argument that I am not having with you because that is not the discussion point. And speaking of royalty checks, that its clear Punk does care about, his WM bonus was considerably larger BECAUSE The Rock came back. Your analogies dont work. The Austin/HHH vs. Hogan is the same as Austin/HHH vs. Brooklyn Brawler. If Hogan, Brawler, Rock...whoever is going to sell more PPVs, sell out arenas, make this company MORE MONEY than Austin, HHH, Punk or whoever....then YES, YES, YES...that person deserves that spot. This is a BUSINESS! You fail to see that. You also fail to see how Punk is screwing you the fan over. |
|
|
|
Post by Next Manufactured’s Sweater on Jan 30, 2014 20:19:14 GMT -5
Stone Cold and The Rock were good enough that Vince didn't need to bring back guys from the early 90s. What if Hogan offered to comeback somewhere in between 1996-early 1998? We would be listening to the same story but it would be Austin and Rock instead of Punk and Bryan. Comparison is silly. Stone Cold was two years into his WWF contract in early 1998 and just won his first Rumble. The Rock was just over a year into his, and was Intercontinental level. They were both relatively new guys on the rise. Daniel Bryan has been in WWE for four years, and has already held multiple World titles and main-evented multiple PPVs. CM Punk has been in WWE (main roster) for almost eight years, and has held many World titles (including a year-long reign) and main-evented multiple PPVs. They are not rookies waiting for a shot. They are main-eventers who do not draw enough money for WWE to not need part-time megastars. WrestleMania is not an Employee of the Year awards show. You don't get the main event for being Mr No Days Off. You get the main event by being the guys that the company can sell the most pay-per-views with. CM Punk has never been that guy, and given his physical condition and general decline in the quality of his work, he never will be. It's like when people say Ted DiBiase or Mr Perfect "should have been world champion" -- they shouldn't, because in their era, they were never the best choice to be world champion. Similar thing with CM Punk. There has never been a WrestleMania where he should've main-evented over the guys that did. Daniel Bryan, maybe one day. Maybe even this year, depending on how the build-up goes. I'd have him vs Triple H with the stipulation that if he wins, he gets put into the title match. Then I'd have him win the title to close the show. |
|
|
|
Post by Sleazyness on Jan 30, 2014 20:35:32 GMT -5
Something I noticed.
When Bret Hart was getting messed around with around the Montreal Screwjob, he confronted the problems and responded to people.
When CM Punk goes through this kinda incident, he runs from it and keeps everyone in the dark.
Just something I noticed..
|
|
|»Champ«|
Main Eventer
Joined on: Aug 17, 2004 0:15:18 GMT -5
Posts: 4,776
|
Post by |»Champ«| on Jan 30, 2014 20:43:05 GMT -5
Reading this on twitter
WWE Taping NXT in Winter Park, FL Tonight; Loud CM Punk Chants Delay Start Time & Signs Being Confiscated
|
|
HalfBlackRazorback
Superstar
Im calling it tonight Bray Wyatt beats Bryan and the IWC explodes
Joined on: Dec 28, 2013 8:43:18 GMT -5
Posts: 710 
|
Post by HalfBlackRazorback on Jan 30, 2014 20:43:24 GMT -5
Something I noticed. When Bret Hart was getting messed around with around the Montreal Screwjob, he confronted the problems and responded to people. When CM Punk goes through this kinda incident, he runs from it and keeps everyone in the dark. Just something I noticed.. Your right and now Hart is a bitter man |
|
|
|
Post by ThugSuperstar on Jan 30, 2014 20:50:05 GMT -5
Something I noticed. When Bret Hart was getting messed around with around the Montreal Screwjob, he confronted the problems and responded to people. When CM Punk goes through this kinda incident, he runs from it and keeps everyone in the dark. Just something I noticed.. Neither situation is even close to being comparable with the other. |
|
|
|
Post by Sleazyness on Jan 30, 2014 20:53:31 GMT -5
Something I noticed. When Bret Hart was getting messed around with around the Montreal Screwjob, he confronted the problems and responded to people. When CM Punk goes through this kinda incident, he runs from it and keeps everyone in the dark. Just something I noticed.. Neither situation is even close to being comparable with the other. Bret's situation was much worse imo and he handled it like a man. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 20:20:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2014 20:53:35 GMT -5
Reading this on twitter WWE Taping NXT in Winter Park, FL Tonight; Loud CM Punk Chants Delay Start Time & Signs Being Confiscated That's very interesting. Doesn't answer anything, but still interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by johnnyb on Jan 30, 2014 20:58:59 GMT -5
Neither situation is even close to being comparable with the other. Bret's situation was much worse imo and he handled it like a man. I love Bret Hart, but..... really? |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jan 30, 2014 21:00:14 GMT -5
Just read a tweet from my buddy at the nxt show, WWE officials have asked the crowd to stop chanting CM Punk
|
|
|
|
Post by Sleazyness on Jan 30, 2014 21:00:36 GMT -5
Bret's situation was much worse imo and he handled it like a man. I love Bret Hart, but..... really? Just an opinion. I just wish us fans could know what is going on. |
|
Dr. Mantis Toboggan MD
Main Eventer
I need a monster condom for my magnum sized dong.
Joined on: Nov 25, 2011 16:25:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,713
|
Post by Dr. Mantis Toboggan MD on Jan 30, 2014 21:09:56 GMT -5
What if Hogan offered to comeback somewhere in between 1996-early 1998? We would be listening to the same story but it would be Austin and Rock instead of Punk and Bryan. Comparison is silly. Stone Cold was two years into his WWF contract in early 1998 and just won his first Rumble. The Rock was just over a year into his, and was Intercontinental level. They were both relatively new guys on the rise. Daniel Bryan has been in WWE for four years, and has already held multiple World titles and main-evented multiple PPVs. CM Punk has been in WWE (main roster) for almost eight years, and has held many World titles (including a year-long reign) and main-evented multiple PPVs. They are not rookies waiting for a shot. They are main-eventers who do not draw enough money for WWE to not need part-time megastars. WrestleMania is not an Employee of the Year awards show. You don't get the main event for being Mr No Days Off. You get the main event by being the guys that the company can sell the most pay-per-views with. CM Punk has never been that guy, and given his physical condition and general decline in the quality of his work, he never will be. It's like when people say Ted DiBiase or Mr Perfect "should have been world champion" -- they shouldn't, because in their era, they were never the best choice to be world champion. Similar thing with CM Punk. There has never been a WrestleMania where he should've main-evented over the guys that did. Daniel Bryan, maybe one day. Maybe even this year, depending on how the build-up goes. I'd have him vs Triple H with the stipulation that if he wins, he gets put into the title match. Then I'd have him win the title to close the show. Hogan was still more popular at that point (up until the Rumble 1998). Austin and Rock also got in later than Punk and Bryan (25 and 23 as opposed to 21 and 18). Austin was also in WCW, ECW, or WWE for all but two years of his career. He had been in the big leagues for 9 years going into WM 14. Punk could have done it the past two years, but I will say after WM 29 his work has been on the decline and doesn't seem to be much of a possibility. |
|
|
|
Post by CrossRhodes on Jan 30, 2014 21:10:22 GMT -5
Just read a tweet from my buddy at the nxt show, WWE officials have asked the crowd to stop chanting CM Punk Yeah man I just heard this too, If this really was a work I can't see them taking CM Punk signs from ppl and trying to restrict chants... This doesn't look good for the ppl burning a candle for Punks return. Good on the fans @ NXT though, The WWE need to start listening... Idk if he's gone or not if anything about Punks reported ditching of WWE is mentioned on Raw Monday night I'll say work, if not? Thanks for a few good, 2 bad and the other mediocre years Punk! |
|
