CM Punk keeps his eye on the prize on WWE Superstars
So was world heavyweight champion CM Punk’s left eye partially closed at the end of Thursday’s episode of WWE Superstars because it was injured, or was he really winking at us because he had just pulled another fast one?
Punk, who suffered the (kayfabe) eye injury at last Sunday’s Bash pay-per-view, aggravated it during his non-title match with Edge Thursday. After Edge raked his eyes, Punk told the referee that he couldn’t continue, and Edge was awarded the match via forfeit.
Punk got a lot of heat from the crowd for conceding the match, as he took another step forward in his progression from tweener to heel. The announcers continued to play up the fact that there are two sides to every story and that Punk could really be hurt.
As I have said before, I think Punk is the most compelling performer in wrestling right now. As much as I’m enjoying his tweener phase, however, I think Punk is really going to get over once his heel turn is complete.
The other interesting thing about the Punk-Edge match is that Edge played subtle babyface. Edge is such an awesome heel that I hate to see him turn, but he hasn’t been a babyface in more than five years, so it will be a big deal when he does the turn at some point.
Other thoughts on Thursday’s show:
It’s so silly that WWE management has banned the announcers from saying the names of the referees. Most of the time it’s not a big deal, but referee Scott Armstrong was a key figure in Punk’s matches against Jeff Hardy at The Bash and Edge on Superstars, so to hear Jim Ross and Todd Grisham constantly referring to him as “this official” was ridiculous. I just don’t see how mentioning a referee by name on occasion in any way affects the product. …
The crowd seems to be gradually getting behind John Morrison, who followed up his big victory over Punk last week on Smackdown with a nice win over Charlie Haas. …
Santino Marella and The Brian Kendrick had a fun match, although it really demonstrated just how buried Kendrick is. Marella’s winning percentage is worse than the Washington Nationals’, yet even he beat Kendrick. I don’t understand why WWE just doesn’t put Kendrick on ECW and let him do his thing. …
It seems odd that Tyler Reks would lose in his first match on WWE television, against Zack Ryder. That's not exactly the best way to get new talent over.
Comments
I never thought I'd say this, but I think the WWE is putting out some of its worst programming in a long time. Subtle changes, I assume to secure the PG rating, have affected the shows in such obvious ways that it's nearly unwatchable, but, as you say pretty much every week, they seem incapable or unwilling to push the legitimate wrestlers in the company and that's even worse. Benjamin, Kendrick, MVP, etc. get stuck jobbing to newcomers or losing to the big guys in squash matches. I hope Vince knows what he's doing, because it's the real fans who are going to be dropping like flies when it comes to pay-per-view buyrates if this continues. Pandering to the kiddies can only get you so far.
Posted by: Mike | July 3, 2009 2:12 PM
"I just don’t see how mentioning a referee by name on occasion in any way affects the product. …"
______________________________
Neither do I. Next, WWE will prohibit announcers from saying "fans" and "crowd," and limit them to "WWE Universe" (if they haven't done so already).That company has some peculiar worries.
Posted by: Christopher | July 3, 2009 2:48 PM
other than the main event i just have been putting in a lot of nancy Grace time i don't know what the WWE is is doing they got me watching woman shows.
Posted by: frank form dundalk | July 3, 2009 2:53 PM
The whole Punk transformation is actually fun to watch. I get so used to the quick heel/face change that its nice to see a gradual unfoldging.
On an unrelated note --ECK, the wwe web site had a nice profile on Backlund. Any chance he may get his rightful place in the HOF?
RESPONSE FROM KE: I saw the Backlund piece. I do think he'll be in the Hall of Fame.
Posted by: Mark M. | July 3, 2009 3:31 PM
It seems odd that Tyler Reks would lose in his first match on WWE television, against Zack Ryder. That's not exactly the best way to get new talent over......
That's the kind of unpredictability that WWE needs to bring back, where is it written that when a new talent is wrestling in their 1st televised match and they have to win? Just in life there are ups and downs...WWE needs to bring back storylines that are no so easy to call correctly. Reks will have plenty of W's coming soon and why have a the new guy beat a seasoned vet in Zach Ryder, he was once paired with Edge and he needs to play off of that...
RESPONSE FROM KE: When a guy loses in his debut, some fans automatically write him off as someone not to care about. I'm not saying he had to beat Ryder. Why not match him up with someone not being used like DJ Gabriel and let him win?
Posted by: T.T. | July 3, 2009 4:22 PM
What is the rationale for not saying the referees' names on air? I don't understand that one.
Posted by: Sarah | July 3, 2009 5:32 PM
Well Kevin, why should Tyler be any different than R-Truth and Gail Kim?
Both I believe lost their first matches with WWE after being lauded by hardcore wrestling fans for great runs elsewhere.
I have for a long time thought that Vince and WWE Creative spat upon stars that they themselves didn't create. This only helps reinforce those thoughts.
Posted by: Daryll B | July 3, 2009 6:31 PM
Spanish announcers (namely Carlos Cabrera and Hugo Savinovich) don't care about WWE management and still acknowledges referees by their names. They also give out interesting trivia from wrestlers when outside WWE - they even pointed out that Chris Jericho once wore a mask when wrestling in Japan during the Mysterio/Jericho feud. You don't get to hear this stuff from the English announcers...
Posted by: JETZexc | July 3, 2009 8:08 PM
From what I hear, some of these new wrestlers are not guaranteed to remain on the main roster.
Maybe they didn't want to give the win to Tyler Reks because he hasn't guaranteed himself a spot on the main roster?
Posted by: Jack Windham | July 3, 2009 10:36 PM
Sorry I missed the Punk match. I have said Punk had top guy potential for a looooong time. Now I know that I was correct in my judgement.
Kevin, I noticed that someone on another post made a comment concerning the number of site hits and blog posts that you receive (which is quite amazing). I'm sure your bosses are pleased with your work!
Posted by: rob the barber | July 3, 2009 10:42 PM
I think Zack Ryder beating the new guy is a good thing because if makes Zack Ryder seem like a big deal and not just anyone can come into the WWE and beat people. It makes it more realistic for the noob to loose.
CM Punk was great as usual. Morrison vs. Haas could have been better I think, they showed that Haas is very close to a pink slip which is sad.
Posted by: Sery | July 4, 2009 9:14 AM
IF WWE creative would only live up to their name, they would be able to easily elevate many talented wrestlers to high levels. Either they aint so creative or do not care to. Probably a little of both in reality.
I knew Bruno was not in the Hall Of Fame but didn't realize Backlund was not either. What a farce!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: AMC | July 4, 2009 12:11 PM
I just don’t see how mentioning a referee by name on occasion in any way affects the product.
So, you're saying that you don't miss the early-90s when Gorilla Monsoon would yell at "the official" for making a mistake when it was Joey Marella in the ring?
RESPONSE FROM KE: Wasn't it great how Jesse Ventura would constantly mention to Monsoon how biased Joey Marella was?
Posted by: Mr. Sarcasm | July 4, 2009 1:15 PM
"Well Kevin, why should Tyler be any different than R-Truth and Gail Kim?
Both I believe lost their first matches with WWE after being lauded by hardcore wrestling fans for great runs elsewhere."
Truth and Gail didn't lose their first matches. Truth beat Kenny Dykstra, and Gail pinned Divas champion Maryse in tag team match.
Posted by: chris | July 4, 2009 3:30 PM
I'll second Rob the Barber: great blog. Sorry to be off topic, but we could use another Scott Steiner interview. A wrestling site referenced it, and that's how I discovered your blog back then.
Whatever happened to Zack Ryder's former tag partner? I'm not a fan of either, but still curious.
RESPONSE FROM KE: Curt Hawkins is still around. He's on the Smackdown roster but he's never used on TV.
Posted by: Another Wrestling Mark | July 6, 2009 1:12 AM
Does anyone remember a certain guy called John Cena who lost his first match against Kurt Angle? He turned out alright in the end. I've always felt that it would be way better if a new person loses their first match but still shows a good effort (Cena got loads of mileage out of the whole 'took Angle to the limit').That way fans are looking for the wins, as opposed to a 'winning streak' everytime. With that said I think if the debuting wrestler is a star from somewhere else (e.g. Rey Mysterio/CM Punk) and there's a lot of fan hype as opposed to an 'unknown.
Posted by: Alvin Hussey | July 6, 2009 6:10 AM