1:13 AM
ha
: 
Royal Rumble 2012 Results: Why a CM Punk Loss Would Have Been a Better Story
By Daniel Massey (Featured Columnist) on February 3, 2012 4,317 reads 20
Use your ← Ziggler is fast becoming one of the superstars who will lead the WWE into a prosperous future, setting examples for the next generation.
Up until 2011, this wasn’t really happening, but last year, many superstars developed quickly and effectively.
Sheamus, Wade Barrett, Dolph Ziggler and Cody Rhodes are just a selection of talent that have come a mighty long way in a year and though some would argue that they have not fully developed yet, I believe Sheamus and Dolph Ziggler are primed and ready to be the top champions on their respective brands.
Sheamus has won Royal Rumble 2012 and is likely to break the bad luck title challengers have faced at WrestleMania since 2007.
Last Sunday, Dolph Ziggler faced CM Punk for the top prize in the business and he lost, despite many people believing John Laurinaitis would screw CM Punk over.
I am here to tell you that it would have made for a better story if Ziggler had have won the WWE title from CM Punk.
John Laurinaitis was never going to work as a referee in that match so I’m glad he decided to take a back seat and let the proper referee do the officiating.
However, with CM Punk winning, it has put a full stop on a huge feud that seemed to be in its infancy for me.
I think John Laurinaitis and CM Punk could have been this generation’s Steve Austin and Vince McMahon.
Though some don’t like the references to the past, it’s hard to avoid when it’s so similar to what we have seen before.
That isn’t a problem though, because it worked before. So with the right people, it’s bound to work again—and it was until CM Punk retained his title.
Johnny’s job now hangs in the balance thanks to The Undertaker’s rude entrance.
Had Dolph Ziggler knocked off Punk at this pay-per-view, then it could have spelt big things for Punk and Laurinaitis.
With Punk angry at Laurinaitis for screwing him out of the title, Johnny could have offered him a spot in the Chamber match, but only after a long and arduous road due to obstacles put forward by Johnny.
It is a storyline we have all heard before, but as I said before, it works.
If this were to happen, it could only last until Elimination Chamber where Punk would have to regain the title much to Johnny’s dismay.
He has had a long reign with it already so I don’t think people would have claimed “hot potato” by giving Ziggler the title for a month.
At least it would be a longer reign than the one he had with the World Heavyweight Championship.
Giving the title to Ziggler would have had many benefits as he could have boasted that he beat the best in the world, etc.
Should CM Punk have retained his title?
Of course!
I'm not sure, you may have a point...
No way! Ziggler for President!
Submit Vote vote to see results
Chris Jericho could potentially be involved in this storyline and say that Ziggler hasn’t truly beaten the best in the world, securing his place in the chamber.
Punk vs. Jericho could be established in the chamber after Ziggler had been eliminated.
That way everyone is a winner and the WWE would have seen if Ziggler was ready to carry the company for an extended period of time, or whether he still needed improving in some areas.
More experience of being at the top is what he needs in my opinion and handing the title to him for a month would certainly give him the opportunity to show everyone what he is capable of when holding the strap.
I would then have Ziggler win Money in the Bank but that is irrelevant at the moment.
CM Punk and John Laurinaitis could still be feuding in the background as Jericho faced Punk at WrestleMania so that storyline, though lying low behind the prominent feud, could stay alive for when the time is right, much like Austin and McMahon.
The final reason I believe a Punk loss would have been better is because no one was expecting it.
I have heard many say that unpredictability is bad if it is just to swerve the IWC, but the reasons highlighted here for giving Ziggler a chance completely debunk that theory, so the swerve would be impactful, whilst retaining scope for furthering storylines and making sure no one gets lost in the mix.
Though this article has accidentally fallen a bit more into the fantasy aspect than I wanted it to, I believe I have highlighted the benefits that a CM Punk loss would have had on the Road to WrestleMania.
Royal Rumble 2012 Results: Why a CM Punk Loss Would Have Been a Better Story
By Daniel Massey (Featured Columnist) on February 3, 2012 4,317 reads 20
Use your ← Ziggler is fast becoming one of the superstars who will lead the WWE into a prosperous future, setting examples for the next generation.
Up until 2011, this wasn’t really happening, but last year, many superstars developed quickly and effectively.
Sheamus, Wade Barrett, Dolph Ziggler and Cody Rhodes are just a selection of talent that have come a mighty long way in a year and though some would argue that they have not fully developed yet, I believe Sheamus and Dolph Ziggler are primed and ready to be the top champions on their respective brands.
Sheamus has won Royal Rumble 2012 and is likely to break the bad luck title challengers have faced at WrestleMania since 2007.
Last Sunday, Dolph Ziggler faced CM Punk for the top prize in the business and he lost, despite many people believing John Laurinaitis would screw CM Punk over.
I am here to tell you that it would have made for a better story if Ziggler had have won the WWE title from CM Punk.
John Laurinaitis was never going to work as a referee in that match so I’m glad he decided to take a back seat and let the proper referee do the officiating.
However, with CM Punk winning, it has put a full stop on a huge feud that seemed to be in its infancy for me.
I think John Laurinaitis and CM Punk could have been this generation’s Steve Austin and Vince McMahon.
Though some don’t like the references to the past, it’s hard to avoid when it’s so similar to what we have seen before.
That isn’t a problem though, because it worked before. So with the right people, it’s bound to work again—and it was until CM Punk retained his title.
Johnny’s job now hangs in the balance thanks to The Undertaker’s rude entrance.
Had Dolph Ziggler knocked off Punk at this pay-per-view, then it could have spelt big things for Punk and Laurinaitis.
With Punk angry at Laurinaitis for screwing him out of the title, Johnny could have offered him a spot in the Chamber match, but only after a long and arduous road due to obstacles put forward by Johnny.
It is a storyline we have all heard before, but as I said before, it works.
If this were to happen, it could only last until Elimination Chamber where Punk would have to regain the title much to Johnny’s dismay.
He has had a long reign with it already so I don’t think people would have claimed “hot potato” by giving Ziggler the title for a month.
At least it would be a longer reign than the one he had with the World Heavyweight Championship.
Giving the title to Ziggler would have had many benefits as he could have boasted that he beat the best in the world, etc.
Should CM Punk have retained his title?
Of course!
I'm not sure, you may have a point...
No way! Ziggler for President!
Submit Vote vote to see results
Chris Jericho could potentially be involved in this storyline and say that Ziggler hasn’t truly beaten the best in the world, securing his place in the chamber.
Punk vs. Jericho could be established in the chamber after Ziggler had been eliminated.
That way everyone is a winner and the WWE would have seen if Ziggler was ready to carry the company for an extended period of time, or whether he still needed improving in some areas.
More experience of being at the top is what he needs in my opinion and handing the title to him for a month would certainly give him the opportunity to show everyone what he is capable of when holding the strap.
I would then have Ziggler win Money in the Bank but that is irrelevant at the moment.
CM Punk and John Laurinaitis could still be feuding in the background as Jericho faced Punk at WrestleMania so that storyline, though lying low behind the prominent feud, could stay alive for when the time is right, much like Austin and McMahon.
The final reason I believe a Punk loss would have been better is because no one was expecting it.
I have heard many say that unpredictability is bad if it is just to swerve the IWC, but the reasons highlighted here for giving Ziggler a chance completely debunk that theory, so the swerve would be impactful, whilst retaining scope for furthering storylines and making sure no one gets lost in the mix.
Though this article has accidentally fallen a bit more into the fantasy aspect than I wanted it to, I believe I have highlighted the benefits that a CM Punk loss would have had on the Road to WrestleMania.
Posted in: WWE
