First Reigns- Orton vs Punk

[MikeRaw]

Thought this would be cool to see what people though.
Randy Orton and CM Puk, when you look at them are polar opposites...
Orton is a moster heel, Punk is a top face...
Orton is a pretty boy, Punk is more of a punk/rocker type...
Orton is very strong on the mic, Punk is slightly above average.
Orton is slightly above average in the ring, Punk is great in the ring.

There are many more opposite things between the two, but they both have one thing in common... They both, before their first world title reign, had a strong majority of people on the internet BEGGING for them to be pushed. And they both finally got their push, and cecame top guys in the company.
So, I wanted to compare...

Whose FIRST title reign do you think was more succesful?
For Orton, I'm of course talking about his run as WHC in summer of 2004. For Punk, of course, his current one.
I decided to compare these two, because, as I said, they were both needing a push, and had everyone begging for one, which doesn't happen too often.
So whose first reign was better in your opinion?

For me, it's Punk.
Orton's first reign saw him get bea to a pulp week after week, and lost it very shortly after to Triple H... He really only got one major feud, and that was against HHH. His reign really only served for Triple H...
Punk, on the other hand, has also been beaten down, but never as bad as Orton. His have only been small post match attacks.
Punk has also had more feuds so far. Against JBL, Kane, and Batista (mini). But he has really stepped up.
And also, Punk's was/is/has more pushing involved. His has gotten a ton of promo time, against a ton of guy's, and it just seems different, and better to me than Orton's.

What do you think?

 

[blueberryking2]

My choice is CM Punk, obviously, because Randy Orton lost the World Heavyweight title in 28 days, to his second opponent for the title, Triple H, (Chris Benoit called for a rematch the next night on Raw, after he lost his title at Summer Slam), meanwhile, CM Punk has held the title for a month and a half, exceeding Randy Orton's 28 day reign and he also looks like he might hold onto that World Championship for quite a while longer.

 

[Dre]

Obviously Punks reign right now is way more better then Orton. Because when you look at it, Orton was the Champion for a Month and his only feud was with Chris Benoit and Triple H. Punk is Champion and he has had feud with Batista, JBL, Kane. And he has only been a Champion for a Month and a half.

 

[Sneeky Bastard]

If Punk were heel he would be the top guy and be very strong on the mic.

But obviously Punk has a stronger push, for all the reasons you said.

 

[Airfixx]

I believe that the 2 reigns are distinctly different.

Randy's was predominantly for two reasons...

1. To further the Evolution storyline.
2. To wipe Brock's name from the books as the youngest ever world champ in WWE.

The reign itself did exactly what was intended; it played out really well, the matches and hype were great and despite what others claim, I don't think his month as a champ and his loss to HHH @ Unforgiven 04 were that harmfull... More so what came next when he was no longer the champ.

As for Punk his reign has already eclipsed Orton's in length and I'm feeling that if Punk get's past JBL @ Summerslam then despite the weakly booked start to the reign, I think it could continue at least until Oct/Nov time and if this happens if we see him slowly gain a bit more momentum, I think it can be deemed to be a good reign (especially for a 1st-timer)....


So, in short, in terms of kayfaybe yeah, Punk's has been a more succesful reign already, but otherwise IMO they serve a very different purpose.

 

[R3ll1K]

i wasnt around for ortons first reign so i cant rly talk about whos is better but i do have one thing to throw out there...
any1 thinkin this could make a great fued?

 

[Soulpower]

Orton is very strong on the mic

I must have missed this part.

 

[MikeRaw]

^Yes, you must've.

 

[Kaedon]

I like Orton on the mic

 

[CenaMark54]

I concur. Not everyone can be the Rock on the mic.

Orton is better than 95% of the people who ever held a mic in the WWE.

 

[R3ll1K]

i personaly think he needs to calm down when hes on the mic...he is always gettin mad and yellin and crap and he likes to spit all over the place lol

 

[btman]

I say Ortons reign is better.

Cuz Punk defends the ECW belt (back when it was cool) in a PPV match with a rollup. Punk is worse then Orton on the mic. And Orton generates a ton of heat.

 

[Kaptain KnicKy]

Im gunna disagree with you MikeRaw from the very beginning. Punk is not that great in the ring. IVe said it before, and Ill say it again - he may've been tamed since being in the WWE, but to me he is average in-ring. He seems to have a very sloppy look to his work, in the ring. He doesn't do anything overly impressive, or anything that sticks out.

Both WHC reigns have sucked, however ORtons will have to come out on top, thus far. He defeated Chris Benoit, in a clean win, after a big match. Punk picked up the scraps and kept the WHC on RAW.

Thus far, Punk's role has been the underdog champion, picking up cheap wins/DQs, to keep his title. ORton was up there wuith the big dogs, where as Punk was thrown from a failing tag-team storyline into the ME scene...

 

[Airfixx]

I say Ortons reign is better.

Cuz Punk defends the ECW belt (back when it was cool) in a PPV match with a rollup. Punk is worse then Orton on the mic. And Orton generates a ton of heat.

Apparently you didn't read/understand the premise of the thread.....

 

[btman]

Apparently you didn't read/understand the premise of the thread.....

I understand Punk's a crappy title holder period. I don't care if he holds the belt till Wrestlemania 25 (which we all know he won't). Other people pointed out most of what I had to say so I kept it short... But I'll add something.

his first defence was against a washed up JBL. And he held his title against Batista by DQ. His Summerslam defence is again, vs a washed up JBL.

Ortons reign is better thus far.