I'm sorry, this is the DUMBEST thing I've ever heard. If Ryback thinks HE put PUNK over he's out of his god damn mind and should instantly be released because he doesn't know wrestling. Holy shit, that's dumb as fuck.

Ryback has never gotten anyone else over

Oh and John Cena and Dolph Ziggler didn't have to take bumps like this from Ryback

I see it as the other way around, tbh.

When someone says they "put them over", it usually means they did the job in terms of matches.

I think what he means is that he always did the job for Punk. Ryback has never defeated Punk in one on one action. Even tho most of their one on one encounters always ended in screwy finishes. But during their feud with their roles switched Ryback lost cleanly to Punk countless time.

^^ pretty much what dead said

Dead wrote:

When someone says they "put them over", it usually means they did the job in terms of matches.

That's like saying Zach Ryder puts everyone over on the roster

MooseNugget wrote:

Dead wrote:

When someone says they "put them over", it usually means they did the job in terms of matches.

That's like saying Zach Ryder puts everyone over on the roster

Cause he pretty much has. He did the job, the person went over, he put them over that night.

Over and job are two words that get tossed around a lot with different meanings

MooseNugget wrote:

Dead wrote:

When someone says they "put them over", it usually means they did the job in terms of matches.

That's like saying Zach Ryder puts everyone over on the roster

My only problem w/ this is Ryback talks as if he elevated Punk to new heights or something.

Drächen wrote:

MooseNugget wrote:

Dead wrote:

When someone says they "put them over", it usually means they did the job in terms of matches.

That's like saying Zach Ryder puts everyone over on the roster

My only problem w/ this is Ryback talks as if he elevated Punk to new heights or something.

Oh but he did.



See? If only Punk would have taken that bump properly

MooseNugget wrote:

Drächen wrote:

MooseNugget wrote:

Dead wrote:

When someone says they "put them over", it usually means they did the job in terms of matches.

That's like saying Zach Ryder puts everyone over on the roster

My only problem w/ this is Ryback talks as if he elevated Punk to new heights or something.

Oh but he did.



See? If only Punk would have taken that bump properly

That's a real kick in in the head right there

Dead and Bull are both right, when a wrestler says they put someone over, that's just another way of saying they lost to them. I've heard a lot of guys use the term that way in interviews and such in the past.

Man Punk did his job in that feud and did everything he could to get Ryback over. Ryback acting like Punk did anything other than that happened is insulting.

And saying what he did, in the context that he did, makes him sound ungrateful for what Punk did. Punk worked his ass off for his spot and did everything he could to help elevate Ryback who had earned nothing.

^ I didn't hear him say anything about Punk not doing his job. Ryback seems to be upset over Punk's comments, and specifically those comments, and I can't blame him. Even if everything Punk said is 100% true (and I find some of his accusations to be a bit paranoid, myself), it's still hard to hear something that bitter, especially coming from someone you considered a coworker and friend.

Ryback says Punk was never like that to his face which, if true, means a lot of Punk's comments about him are probably fresh wounds. Not saying Punk's comments are unjustified, Ryback obviously did rough Punk up in a few spots, but Ryback's clearly sore on the subject.

I completely agree with Nearphotison on this subject. Which is surprising since we tend to never agree on anything wrestling-related.

You guys must not be listening to the video. He sounds like he was doing Punk a favor the way he says it

MooseNugget wrote:

You guys must not be listening to the video. He sounds like he was doing Punk a favor the way he says it

That's not what I hear at all. Neither Ryback nor Punk booked the outcomes of the matches, he's just pointing out that Punk's career got more out of their feud than his did.

I don't know what Punk got out of it other than injury.

^ He got wins. That's what "I was the one that put him over time and time again" means, literally. How much value you put on that may be up for debate, but Ryback seems to think it's important. I'm sure Punk doesn't, he didn't need those wins after all, but to Ryback they were a big deal because he was coming off a pretty big winning streak.

I'm not trying to advocate one side over another here, but it's pretty clear both guys are seeing the situation through different lenses. I highly doubt either is 100% right in their view, but the events seem different to them because their careers were at very different places. Honestly, I don't think either of them are being terribly unreasonable, but there's some obvious hurt feelings (and ribs) to take into account.

I'd be making TJ jokes if I didn't like you so much

Punk's career got nothing out of any encounter with Ryback. Ryback got every positive aspect from any encounter.

Ryback main evented as many one-on-one title matches that didn't involve John Cena as CM Punk did while Punk was supposedly "a top guy"

^ You can say that about a lot of guys Punk faced and got nothing out of it during that. Jericho, Daniel Bryan. The only matches Punk got anything out of it was the match with Cena at MITB and to the rock.

And to be fair Ryback being the spot that he was in was WWE pushing the panic button in 2012. They just had to have a WWE title match at Hell in the cell so much they put a guy who wasn't ready into that spot. If anything Ryback and Punk both came out worst from it.

Jericho and Bryan to an extent were already established so the only thing they would of gotten out of Punk was a good match