I'm not even sure I want to respond to something that so blatantly missed the point of my post, or insinuated that Vince Russo of all people made believable wrestling. I will just say this:
1. I hope you don't like cruiserweights if you're so bent on size in wrestling.
2. The conceptual difference between Punk and prime HBK's movesets are negligible (and don't get me started on the believability of HBK's moveset post-'03. But we usually look past these things because of this thing called suspension of disbelief, if you've ever heard of it).
3. Nowhere did I talk about Punk's ability as a draw. Just the Kliq's, which you said nothing about.
Then shut the fukk up. Even arch-Kliq lover Henzo watched it, for fukk's sake. Arch-Punk hater TGO isn't in the thread. Please follow one of those two examples.
Your the one who is not understanding. My issue is with smaller guys beating bigger guys without using a good strategy. I have no problem with two cruiserweights fighting each other. Sh1t entertains me

Michael's moveset prior to his back injury in 1998 made his wins against bigger opponents more believable. Moves like the moonsault, top rope elbow, flying forearm smash and sweet chin music were all fast paced and made it difficult for his opponents to deal with. I bought it

And even post 2003, I could still buy Michaels beating bigger guys even though he had lost most of his speed because by then he had already built a reputation of being a giant killer. For example, this guy beat Yokozuna and Kevin fukin Nash, Im sure he can beat Dave Batista. It was believable and made sense.


Raven is very underrated, should be working for the E now. He could probably have helped Punk more relevant last summer after he bombed huge.

Probably the last classic moment we'll see in WWE. Good documentary but still gives you the
face when you think about what happened post MITB.
