Loss Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I think it's more nuanced than that. Yes, I'm sure Punk was difficult, but that doesn't mean that he's wrong. Just like anything, there are also times when people have major problems with each other and both sides have both good and bad points. I for sure do not 100% agree with everything Punk said, but I did feel like I understood what makes the guy tick a lot more after hearing him explain himself. I think part of Vince's (and HHH's) job is to figure out the right way to appeal to all of these big egos. It's wrestling. By the way, he also admitted that he feels bad for how he talked to some people in the company toward the end, which by definition would not make him a sociopath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 By the way, he also admitted that he feels bad for how he talked to some people in the company toward the end, which by definition would not make him a sociopath. Sociopath was strong. Of course most sociopaths are pretty good at mimicking appropriate human behavior when it is in their best interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra Commander Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I called Punk a paranoid narcissist in another spot if we're evaluating the merits of applying terms to Punk here. Not sure if sociopath is the best term overall. Also, I'd have to re-read Bret Hart's book to figure out how many times Vince "owed him one". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 He's the new Randy Savage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvenStevenBooking Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Wasn't that awful Heyman feud last year mainly his work? He may be a creative person, but if stuff like that was really his idea, I can see why they'd stifle him. Also, for all the talk about Vince being senile, he sure was able to get "you can't bullshit me" Punk to do a lot of his bullshit. He's the new Randy Savage? This makes no sense at all. Either you're implying he shagged some kid or the reasons for their separation are somehow not well known. He's (despite being married to a twelve year old) neither in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra Commander Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 The fun thing about the massive WWE committee style? You can blame someone else fairly easily if the idea turns out to suck. There's not exactly a climate for actual accountability Wasn't that awful Heyman feud last year mainly his work? He may be a creative person, but if stuff like that was really his idea, I can see why they'd stifle him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Savage = paranoid narcissistic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Wasn't that awful Heyman feud last year mainly his work? He may be a creative person, but if stuff like that was really his idea, I can see why they'd stifle him. Not according to the interview. He said originally after the Taker match he planned to be gone until SummerSlam but they called him with their summer plans for him which included him feuding with Chris Jericho and then being turned on by Paul Heyman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvenStevenBooking Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Savage = paranoid narcissistic Well, if disappearing for the better part of the last 11 years of your life is being paranoid and narcissistic, Punk could stand to be more so. And I don't recall Punk saying it wasn't his idea. He may have wanted time off, but since he couldn't, he went with the Heyman feud. It was full of the typical "I was held back" Punk promo stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert S Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I still haven't heard it but I'm glad he gave the interview to Cabana and not RF or something like that....kudos to him for standing up for himself It's funny that they begin the interview with talking about how Punk wants everybody to hear his story without anyone having to pirate it (or something along the lines) and yet due to the broken download on Cabana's site I could only get the interview by, well, torrenting it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra Commander Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I just downloaded the mp3 from Cabana's site and listened to it from the file. That seemed to work out fine for me. Plus I hate how small the scroll bar is for MP3 audio (which could just be a Chrome thing, if it doesn't make sense) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbo Slice Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I think it's more nuanced than that. Yes, I'm sure Punk was difficult, but that doesn't mean that he's wrong. Just like anything, there are also times when people have major problems with each other and both sides have both good and bad points. I for sure do not 100% agree with everything Punk said, but I did feel like I understood what makes the guy tick a lot more after hearing him explain himself. I think part of Vince's (and HHH's) job is to figure out the right way to appeal to all of these big egos. It's wrestling. This is the part I agree with most in all the responses so far. It's one thing to be difficult, but at the same time, even if you're difficult and the guy is making you money, you can't say no to him making money for you. It's up to the guys in charge to make sure he's put in a good position. It does back up once again that the WWE really only cares about who they think are the top guys and if they aren't in their plans, you have to go above and beyond what's necessary to make yourself a part of them. There's plenty I disagreed with in the interview, but there's a lot more that I did agree with. Just because someone is an asshole by nature doesn't mean you dismiss him every time he brings something up because you don't necessarily agree with his point of view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert S Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 If the story with the doctor is even remotely true that guy should be stripped of his license. And the best quote of the interview: "I am dumb as fuck. I am sorry." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Is this the same doctor who saved Jerry or a different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra Commander Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Keith Sampson is the doctor mentioned in the Lawler stories: http://thedo.osteopathic.org/2013/10/ringside-at-wwe-matches-may-be-fake-but-injuries-are-real-most-of-the-time/ Amann is the doctor that Punk was railing on the most. Amann was recently quoted in a story mentioning that Roman Reigns was competing with a hernia before the emergency surgery Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I'm surprised that anyone finds any of this surprising. Stuff that's been talked about for a decade and a half now, in places like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I don't think anyone is surprised as much as they are surprised to hear it confirmed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I'm not surprised by it. I think it's getting more of a reaction because this time it's a top star AND an indy darling doing the talking, and in a free to download format, instead of a guy who was in the midcard doing an RF shoot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 It would be a bit like Dick Cheney admitting that they lied us into Iraq. It's not a surprise, nor a surprise to hear it. People shouldn't be surprised by any of this. Just thankful to Punk for confirming it in a colorful fashion. And in turn for people who aren't Punk marks for generally confirming what they think about Punk. I'm neither a mark nor a hater of his, so perhaps am a bit more objective to the two extremes when listing to this. My take on listening to what I've been able to (around the holidays) is generally: "No shit." Not really mind blowing. I think the only truly enlightening thing is the Wrestling Fanboy turned Aspiring Wrestler turned Big Time Wrestler turned Hater Of Wrestling life arch/path. Podcast isn't a great place to fully craft that narrative as opposed to touch on it or have it be an underlying theme that pops up from time to time. It's really something that I'd like to see him develop and explore in a book, especially if he's as insightful and self reflective as his biggest fans believe. Though... since they happen to still be wrestling fans, I'm not sure if it's the central theme they want to have anchor his bio, even if it is the arch of his life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Firing him on his wedding day and not treating his staph infection is fucked up. I'm not sympathetic to how pissed off he was because he never had to lose to The Rock. They gave him the option to lose the title to Daniel Bryan to avoid doing TWO things he didn't want to do: turn heel and lose to The Rock. He fucked himself out of his merchandise sales and put himself in the position to lose to a part timer which was something that he knew he didn't want to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpchicago23 Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I just downloaded the mp3 from Cabana's site and listened to it from the file. That seemed to work out fine for me. Plus I hate how small the scroll bar is for MP3 audio (which could just be a Chrome thing, if it doesn't make sense) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpchicago23 Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 ^^^^ I just tried downloading it from his site too with no success. Hopefully its fixed by the morning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra Commander Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 yeah, I downloaded the file around 12:30am. So I may have beaten some of the rush to that avenue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Guy seems like a complete sociopath. Funny how it's everyone's responsibility to get him to the top but he leaves the company when it's his turn to put over new talent like the Shield and Bryan. He did put over guys though. He may have bitched about it but he jobbed for HHH, Rock and Undertaker. It's not Punk's fault that that WWE decided to use him as the guy to put over established stars instead of younger talent. Other points from listening to the podcast: - Overall I'm behind Punk and the things he said, but if you want to try and find a flaw, I could've sworn that in one or two brief sentences he did kind of insinuate at one point that he wanted to become a Brock style part timer because he saw how the "business was changing". I don't have any problem with part time talent, but considering that Punk continues to have such strong objections over the pushes of part timers like Rock and Brock, it is kind of hypocritical. - I'm seeing people on other sites get up in arms about Punk saying he created the Shield. It was probably a poor choice of words on his part, as by his own account he just suggested three FCW guys to be his stable rather than established WWE guys. That said, I would give Punk credit for trying to turn a boring stable into an opportunity for three new guys, and Rollins and Ambrose maybe owe him a thank you for putting their names out there. At the same time I don't know if Punk had any more imput into their stable than that, and obviously the Reigns addition was WWE's idea and not his. - I wonder if WWE redoubles their efforts to make sure every guy released from here on out signs a non-disparagement clause. I realize that Punk is probably that 1 in 1000 guy who is a danger to speak his mind because he has money and no desire to ever return, but if I'm WWE I'm not only horrified at this podcast itself, but also that it is a story of how if you stand up to WWE legally, you can sometimes win. It'll be interesting to see if WWE tries to throw jabs at Punk on TV or if they leave him alone. If I'm WWE I never mention Punk's name again and hope that this podcast got it out of his system. Well, actually, if I'm WWE I build a time machine and promise Punk whatever it takes for him to sign a non-disclosure agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fakeplastictrees Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I had to pull it up on youtube. If anyone wants to listen to it: youtube dot com/watch?v=zxHRJnZsinQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.