View Single Post
Old 02-05-2017, 12:51 AM   #41
Mr. Nerfect
 
Posts: 60,894
Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan View Post
Bryan was never anywhere near as natural on the mic as Punk. At his peak he was still pretty awkward. Also, a potential fan knows it's not real. They want an entertainer. They don't care who "makes it look real" more. Punk was not that far behind Bryan in making his wrestling look real. He was MILES ahead of Bryan as an entertainer though.

Bottom line: If you think one of them "sucks", it's tough to make the argument that the other one sucks much less.

Personally, I liked both. But realistically, neither should have been more than a supporting act to the legit stars.
I don't think I completely agree with this. Yes, people want to be entertained, but I don't think eloquence on the mic necessarily does it. Yes, Bryan is more awkward, but that has charms. I'm not trying to say that Punk was not good on the mic, but I don't think the sort of good he was is exactly a draw to anyone not already into wrestling. Bryan created an aura (or, indeed, a movement around him). That being said, I don't think he was a huge draw, but I think there are differences between the two, just like there are differences between Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart.

Retroactively, I think Punk's stuff is immensely overrated, Bryan's far less so.
Mr. Nerfect is offline   Reply With Quote