WrestleMania CM Punk Unhappy About Facing The Undertaker at WrestleMania 29?
- Thread starter Roi
- Start date
-
Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!
I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register
Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 6,691
- Reaction score
- 1,927
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 37
- Location
- Union City, Tennessee
That was last September. He could have changed his mind since then, or - and this is a stretch - but maybe it's not as predictable as one would think because Punk could actually beat the streak? It's a lingering feeling I've had for awhile. Logic would say otherwise but whenever I get lingering feelings like this, I almost always turn out to be right. The fact that there's so much discussion over this match - people calling it a filler because of Taker obviously winning, Punk supposedly not wanting the match, people saying the feud is a little late in beginning the biuld towards it, etc. - makes me think something else might turn out to happen that shocks people.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 15,948
- Reaction score
- 3,135
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Nashville, TN
- Website
- i.imgur.com
He's totally right.
Especially now, when he lost to Rock twice and Cena once, and WWE expects us to believe that he just might beat a friggin Undertaker AT Wrestlemania? C'mon, it's redundant booking.
Especially now, when he lost to Rock twice and Cena once, and WWE expects us to believe that he just might beat a friggin Undertaker AT Wrestlemania? C'mon, it's redundant booking.
Rodrigo said:
He beat Jericho for like 3 or more times during the past year, a win against him won't change anything.
I have always thought that Punk jobbing to Rock twice was a huge mistake, Rock could have won the title at the Royal Rumble, and instead of beating punk again at EC, he could have worked another program, like defending it in the chamber, or even have a match against Jericho or something.
GTI said:
What are you talking about?
This "angry old man" is the greatest thing that ever happened to WWE IMO, Jobbing to Taker at WM is an honor for any superstar.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 15,948
- Reaction score
- 3,135
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Nashville, TN
- Website
- i.imgur.com
Rodrigo said:
Beating Sheamus or Ziggler or anyone else will not help him regain cred at all. Cena and Rock beat him, the two top guys. That settles it.
But I guess wrestling Taker at WM is prestigious enough.
GTI said:
He was and still is.
There will never be anything greater than Taker ever, and BTW, taker didn't main event Wrestlemania in the last few years, probably the only time was in 2010 and it's because it was HBK's retirement match.
WM28 - Once in a lifetime
WM27 - Cena/Miz
WM26 - Taker/HBK
WM25 - HHH/Orton
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 39,124
- Reaction score
- 5,642
- Points
- 118
- Age
- 30
- Location
- God's Country, Sheffield UK
Baraa said:
The last match on the card isn't the only main event though (by that logic WM 18 Rock / Hogan wasn't the biggest match on the card.)
How is Taker still the best thing to have happened to the WWE, he only shows up what 6 times in a whole year now?
seabs said:
I didn't mean he is currently the best thing, I meant to say that there will never be a superstar like Taker ever, not now, not ever.
And I do realize that a show has more than one main event, but I meant the Main Event that closes the show, it is the same as when Punk said pirior to his NOC match with Cena that he didn't main event a PPV since TLC, although he had many "Main events" against the likes of Daniel Bryan and Chris Jericho.