Wrestling Forum banner

The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To WrestleMania - Good or bad?

5K views 88 replies 36 participants last post by  Simpsons Modern Life 
#1 · (Edited)


Hear me out on this first and have a think before you respond as I'm kind of indifferent on this to be honest, reason being is I don't think it's overly needed, sure I understand we're used to this now and it's kind of become tradition but it's not always been this way and to me, having this just makes the Rumble not only all the more predictable due to us knowing pretty much who's on the verge of a push but it completely eliminates that chance of an underdog or a surprise win winning the Rumble, which although rare, at least was possible, now, all this is eliminated and it's just never gonna happen while this is in place.

They could easily have the road to Wrestlemania regardless of the Rumble and it doesn't need to stem either from the winner, they could have a tournament or whatever (King Of The Ring type maybe) as a Rumble win is prestige in itself, I dunno, I kinda think taking that away from the Rumble would make it a little more surprising where as now, it completely eliminates who can actually win for us as a viewer.

Yeah, I know the WWE are often predictable but the Rumble pretty much add's to that more so, such as how we knew Reigns was going to win this year ... and he did, there is less surprise element there now.

So is it really needed? ..... or are we just so used to this now that we can't see anything different? .... thoughts?


EDIT : Not taking away the Royal Rumble, no way!! It's the best PPV of the year, I'm talking about the STIPULATION and it's tie in to Wrestlemania putting restrictions on this, read my first reply in this thread.​
 
See less See more
1
  • Like
Reactions: Chris JeriG.O.A.T
#2 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I agree actually. As entertaining as the Rumble can be sometimes, you pretty much always know who is going to win.

It is dumb anyway seeing as sometimes one guy can win with his Wrestlemania match set in stone and meanwhile, another wrestlers popularity skyrockets at the same time......then the WWe has to change the rules to put said popular wrestler into the main event (e.g. Mania 30). Sort of making the prestige of winning it pointless.
 
#4 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I agree actually. As entertaining as the Rumble can be sometimes, you pretty much always know who is going to win.

It is dumb anyway seeing as sometimes one guy can win with his Wrestlemania match set in stone and meanwhile, another wrestlers popularity skyrockets at the same time......then the WWe has to change the rules to put said popular wrestler into the main event (e.g. Mania 30). Sort of making the prestige of winning it pointless.
Exactly, there is that side of it also :)

Like for example, take Thwagger on here for example, she loves Jack Swagger, her favourite is never going to win while all this is in place, where as previously, although maybe unlikely, it was still possible and it also gives the said talent that accolade too, the others who are getting the big pushes are going to get accolades all over anyway, it's really not needed I don't think, or is it a good thing.

Yeah we all feel the WWE is predictable at times, but right now the Rumble is very, when you think out of 30 guys there is usually only a couple who might win it at best, or like this years one, one being the obvious push of Roman Reigns.

Which is no diss on Reigns cause he can still go ahead and have the push and his Mania moments, but I just feel it's really not needed and makes it worse to be honest, even if WWE wanted to make an underdog win it this year or a surprise win, they can't cause of this stupid stipulation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris JeriG.O.A.T
#3 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

When there was 2 world championships, it made it more unpredictable. Now that there's just one it's very predictable.

I like the Royal Rumble match, but it doesn't always have to be for the number 1 contendership at Wrestlemania.
 
#5 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

When there was 2 world championships, it made it more unpredictable. Now that there's just one it's very predictable.

I like the Royal Rumble match, but it doesn't always have to be for the number 1 contendership at Wrestlemania.
Yep, it should be a separate thing. it's prestige enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris JeriG.O.A.T
#7 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

The Royal Rumble can often be a lot of fun, but in recent years it's ended in nothing more than disappointment. The last 2 winners have been beyond obvious and the fans wanted neither headlining WrestleMania. I would be sad to see The Rumble go, but I hope in future years they actually listens to the fans and give the fans the winner that they want.
 
#8 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

The Money In The Bank is the new Royal Rumble. That is where the underdog wins, that is the interesting match, that is where the winner gets it done.

The Royal Rumble... what is special about the Rumble these days ? I mean, you get a title shot like once per month so why would you need it ? A title shot isn't special anymore, you just have to ask for it and you get it. That is the problem with the WWE, no competition like in theory, Neville could've beat Seth Rollins, the WWE Champion if it wasn't for the J&J Security so why didn't he asked for a title match ? Because there is no competition now but that is another debate...

The Royal Rumble just isn't interesting these days. I mean, these days, it isn't that great. You don't have big moments because most of what could've happened already happened on TV. That is the real problem, now, we just have so much product, the Royal Rumble just doesn't fit that era, right now, The Royal Rumble simply have no value.
 
#10 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

The Money In The Bank is the new Royal Rumble. That is where the underdog wins, that is the interesting match, that is where the winner gets it done.

The Royal Rumble... what is special about the Rumble these days ? I mean, you get a title shot like once per month so why would you need it ? A title shot isn't special anymore, you just have to ask for it and you get it. That is the problem with the WWE, no competition like in theory, Neville could've beat Seth Rollins, the WWE Champion if it wasn't for the J&J Security so why didn't he asked for a title match ? Because there is no competition now but that is another debate...

The Royal Rumble just isn't interesting these days. I mean, these days, it isn't that great. You don't have big moments because most of what could've happened already happened on TV. That is the real problem, now, we just have so much product, the Royal Rumble just doesn't fit that era, right now, The Royal Rumble simply have no value.
Absolutely! And given the choice I'd rather MITB be more predictable, the Rumble has 30 guys in it as opposed to a few in a ladder match.

I'm really surprised with the responses to be honest, I kinda expected many of us to be so used to this that it would differ to my feelings on it but you guys clearly get it also, why don't the WWE listen to us?

Or maybe they do .... who knows?
 
#12 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I like the idea of The Rumble winner getting to headline WrestleMania, it adds that extra incentive to go on and win and makes it seem like a bigger deal. I'm just not sure if it would really seem the same if if was just 30 guys fighting for nothing, it would feel closer to an ATG memorial battle Royal, rather than a Royal Rumble.
 
#13 · (Edited)
The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I like the idea of The Rumble winner getting to headline WrestleMania, it adds that extra incentive to go on and win and makes it seem like a bigger deal. I'm just not sure if it would really seem the same if if was just 30 guys fighting for nothing, it would feel closer to an ATG memorial battle Royal, rather than a Royal Rumble.

Not really, the Royal Rumble is a big enough win as it is, the first time they ever had the title involved was when Flair won it and even then after that winning the Rumble was a big thing, the Andre battle royal isn't anything close to what the rumble is, it's just basically a regular battle royal but with a name, the royal rumble has always been a very big and prestigious event on its own, it goes down in history as a huge milestone in a talents career, winning a battle royal doesn't.

It doesn't need to tie in with Mania and Mania is big enough it doesn't need the rumble to elevate it, this being tied in brings more minuses than pluses and just puts complete restrictions on it, at least 25 of the talents haven't got a cat in hells chance and we know that, without this Mania tie in crap, anything can actually happen but they've restricted that completely now, it's stupid. :)

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App
 
#14 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I feel like getting rid of the Royal Rumble won't change anything.

It won't change the fact that WWE has favorites that they want to main event Wrestlemania.

It won't change the fact that WWE will put that person in the main event.

I have no idea what you intend to replace the Royal Rumble but whatever it is whoever WWE wants to win it will come up on top. So in my opinion getting rid of the Rumble won't change anything, I know this may seem very pessimistic but looking at how incompetent WWE is at times I don't think getting rid of the Rumble will change anything or make it better or any less predictable.
 
#15 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I feel like getting rid of the Royal Rumble won't change anything.

It won't change the fact that WWE has favorites that they want to main event Wrestlemania.

It won't change the fact that WWE will put that person in the main event.

I have no idea what you intend to replace the Royal Rumble but whatever it is whoever WWE wants to win it will come up on top. So in my opinion getting rid of the Rumble won't change anything, I know this may seem very pessimistic but looking at how incompetent WWE is at times I don't think getting rid of the Rumble will change anything or make it better or any less predictable.

Not replace, no way, no one said that, taking away the stipulation, read again :)


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App
 
#16 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

If there were more successful pushes over the year more guys would be potential winners.

I do think that as with mitb we have got to a point where the crowd is so bored that we want the winner to be someone new to the main event scene. It leaves us with a small list of people that meet the criteria of: credible with fans/not objections from vince.
 
#17 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?



Hear me out on this first and have a think before you respond as I'm kind of indifferent on this to be honest, reason being is I don't think it's overly needed, sure I understand we're used to this now and it's kind of become tradition but it's not always been this way and to me, having this just makes the Rumble not only all the more predictable due to us knowing pretty much who's on the verge of a push but it completely eliminates that chance of an underdog or a surprise win winning the Rumble, which although rare, at least was possible, now, all this is eliminated and it's just never gonna happen while this is in place.

They could easily have the road to Wrestlemania regardless of the Rumble and it doesn't need to stem either from the winner, they could have a tournament or whatever (King Of The Ring type maybe) as a Rumble win is prestige in itself, I dunno, I kinda think taking that away from the Rumble would make it a little more surprising where as now, it completely eliminates who can actually win for us as a viewer.

Yeah, I know the WWE are often predictable but the Rumble pretty much add's to that more so, such as how we knew Reigns was going to win this year ... and he did, there is less surprise element there now.

So is it really needed? ..... or are we just so used to this now that we can't see anything different? .... thoughts?​
I'm sorry but that is such crap.

Nobody "knew" Roman Reigns was going to win this year. The majority of people thought Bryan was going to win.

A lot of fans thought Randy Orton would have a massive return in the rumble and had a chance of winning too.

The Rock showed up that weekend - a TON of fans the day of the rumble thought he might get involved and win.

The Royal Rumble this year was VERY unpredictable.

The end result - Reigns winning - may have been disappointing to a lot of fans (myself included) - but you can't really fault WWE for making it predictable. That is just 100% unfair, and untrue

If WWE can make the rumble as unpredictable as it was this year, every year, than I love its placement on the yearly schedule, and i have no problem with the winner main eventing mania.
 
#18 · (Edited)
The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I'm sorry but that is such crap.



Nobody "knew" Roman Reigns was going to win this year. The majority of people thought Bryan was going to win.



A lot of fans thought Randy Orton would have a massive return in the rumble and had a chance of winning too.



The Rock showed up that weekend - a TON of fans the day of the rumble thought he might get involved and win.



The Royal Rumble this year was VERY unpredictable.



The end result - Reigns winning - may have been disappointing to a lot of fans (myself included) - but you can't really fault WWE for making it predictable. That is just 100% unfair, and untrue



If WWE can make the rumble as unpredictable as it was this year, every year, than I love its placement on the yearly schedule, and i have no problem with the winner main eventing mania.

It was predictable as fuck! I never thought any of that for a start and regardless, the stipulation STILL puts limitations on only a very small handful of talents having a chance to even come close, so no, it's not crap at all, it makes a lot of sense!

I'm not just talking about this years Rumble either, that was an example of how limited it is, we know who's pretty much gonna get the push so at least 25 of them you can write off from the word go, why eliminate that due to a stipulation, it's not needed, the Royal Rumble is prestige enough without that and opens more doors for talents to win, not just talents on the verge of a push, hence more predictable!

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App
 
#19 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

@Bobholly39: The rumble was just as predictable as Bluetista winning.. Bryan being in the mix was just a diversion.
With that said; Kicking off the RTWM with Royal Rumble is a great idea gone bad. There was a time when it actually meant something to win it. Sure, we always knew that the filler entrants never stood a chance, but the midcard was a "maybe" and that was what brought excitement. + It´s always fun to see who the "surprise entrants" are (Bubba Ray surprised me this year).

The problem starts when WWE have already set the main event at Wrestlemania, so the buildup to the Rumble makes it rather obvious who´s gonna win it. Add to that a pointless PPV between the Rumble and Wrestlemania itself, and the Rumble become obsolete, or in best case nothing more than a way to showcase their golden boy of the year (yeah, i´m still mad that Reigns have beaten Kane in eliminations!)
 
#22 · (Edited)
The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

@Bobholly39: The rumble was just as predictable as Bluetista winning.. Bryan being in the mix was just a diversion.

With that said; Kicking off the RTWM with Royal Rumble is a great idea gone bad. There was a time when it actually meant something to win it. Sure, we always knew that the filler entrants never stood a chance, but the midcard was a "maybe" and that was what brought excitement. + It´s always fun to see who the "surprise entrants" are (Bubba Ray surprised me this year).



The problem starts when WWE have already set the main event at Wrestlemania, so the buildup to the Rumble makes it rather obvious who´s gonna win it. Add to that a pointless PPV between the Rumble and Wrestlemania itself, and the Rumble become obsolete, or in best case nothing more than a way to showcase their golden boy of the year (yeah, i´m still mad that Reigns have beaten Kane in eliminations!)


Spot on!!!! Specially about the mid card thing, that's exactly my point, all that is taken away now got a select few, it may as well be a 5 man Rumble at best!

Take for example, this stipulation isn't there, we can have Cesaro win this and have a prestige Rumble win, but no, he has to deal with a battle royal win that means nothing, it's nothing compared to the Rumble win which was, and still actually is to a degree, a prestige win.



Swagger even could win without the stipulation, Santino could have that year, Dean could, Dolph could, Barrett could, Bray could many could and they could have had this accolade under their belt too, but now with this stipulation, only Cena, Orton, Reigns or whoever we know is on the verge of a push, it's very very limiting now and pretty much eliminates the whole roster give and take a few talents, even the higher mid card talents barely have a chance now, yes, I know the WWE often push their main talents with this but regardless, it's still completely eliminated that, we know there is no chance in hell Barrett is gonna win, but if the stipulation wasn;'t there, there is actually a chance WWE could have done this, so why eliminate that, it takes it away not only from the event itself but our viewing also, who were the last few in the Rumble this year? We knew Dean wasn't going to stay in over Reigns cause we knew Reigns is having the push at Mania, take away the Mania thing, Dean could have won it, it makes a lot of sense to disband the Mania thing from the Rumble.



The Rumble is a big enough event itself, it holds it's own, a win of the Royal Rumble goes down in history anyway as a huge prestige win, so why not allow the possibility of every man in the event a chance to win it, as opposed to say the few who are getting the big push.



It might be likely who they're pushing gets the win anyway, but maybe they don't one year, so why restrict that due to a Mania predictive stipulation, it's not needed and takes away from the event a lot.



Great post by the way :)



I wish it wasn't so predictable.


Yep :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: yeahright2
#27 · (Edited)
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

It's actually funny when you think about the Royal Rumble. For one night every year, it's suddenly more of a challenge to throw people over the top rope, despite doing it with ease in almost every match/confrontation.

I enjoy the Rumble when there's actual uncertainty as to who will win or just simple surprises. For example, when Mr McMahon won the Rumble, I sure as hell didn't expect it. Or when Maven eliminated the Undertaker. Those moments make it fun to watch and a great PPV, which is why it hasn't been as good for the past 2-3 years. We knew Cena would win, we knew Batista would win, and we knew Reigns would win.

As for the build up, I prefer WrestleMania matches that actually have a believable reason for two guys to hate each-other, like Chris Jericho antagonising CM Punk and his family. It's easier to invest in personal feuds instead of a forged feud such as winning the Royal Rumble or having the MITB brief case.
 
#28 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

It's actually funny when you think about the Royal Rumble. For one night every year, it's suddenly more of a challenge to throw people over the top rope, despite doing it with ease in almost every match/confrontation.

I enjoy the Rumble when there's actual uncertainty as to who will win or just simple surprises. For example, when Mr McMahon won the Rumble, I sure as hell didn't expect it. Or when Maven eliminated the Undertaker. Those moments make it fun to watch and a great PPV, which is why it hasn't been as good for the past 2-3 years. We knew Cena would win, we knew Batista would win, and we knew Reigns would win.

As for the build up, I prefer WrestleMania matches that actually have a believable reason for two guys to hate each-other, like Chris Jericho antagonising CM Punk and his family. It's easier to invest in personal feuds instead of a forged feud such as winning the Royal Rumble or having the MITB brief case.

Haha, that's actually true about the eliminating thing, I've never thought of it like that lol

But yeah, everything you said was spot on, there shouldn't be no limitations in regards to who could win, wouldn't that also be more realistic too, considering its sports entertainment.

Even a lower carded talent should have the possibility of a fluke win, would make the whole thing so much better and compelling to watch, as opposed to the select few who we know will win, that's what this road to Wrestlemania stipulation causes.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App
 
#29 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I just think a heel should win it more frequently since the winner seems to get heel heat more often than not.

Imagine if Goldberg had won a Royal Rumble instead of climbing his way to the top in his WCW run, he never would have gotten as over.
 
#30 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

It's good to know I disagree completely with everybody regarding the Rumble. The Rumble is absolutely meaningless without the winner getting the Main Event slot at WM.

M-E-A-N-I-N-G-L-E-S-S!!!

Without this stip it's just another battle royal. It's the E's own fault they've killed their own gimmick but that's just what Vince does. They killed it by splitting the WWE title. They've killed it by booking the Elimination Chamber. They've killed it by continually putting over the wrong guy. They've killed it by having the winner not even wrestle as the last match. They've killed it as evidenced by people saying it should just be another battle royal.

It's not difficult to revive it's true importance either. Just take it back to it's roots: the right man going over, wrestling as the last match at WM and the babyface winning. Easy as that.
 
#32 ·
The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

It's good to know I disagree completely with everybody regarding the Rumble. The Rumble is absolutely meaningless without the winner getting the Main Event slot at WM.

M-E-A-N-I-N-G-L-E-S-S!!!

Without this stip it's just another battle royal. It's the E's own fault they've killed their own gimmick but that's just what Vince does. They killed it by splitting the WWE title. They've killed it by booking the Elimination Chamber. They've killed it by continually putting over the wrong guy. They've killed it by having the winner not even wrestle as the last match. They've killed it as evidenced by people saying it should just be another battle royal.

It's not difficult to revive it's true importance either. Just take it back to it's roots: the right man going over, wrestling as the last match at WM and the babyface winning. Easy as that.

Genuine question (not said in a sarcastic way or anything) but what were the first Royal Rumble's you watched? :)

It's bad now. With the current status of WWE creative, they go from mediocre to average(or in this year's case, awful to unwatchable). At WWE's peak in the Attitude Era, the product went from great to outstanding. Now, they put no effort into anything all year until it's time for the Rumble. They're effectively telling you that there's no reason to watch until around Summerslam, Survivor Series, and in between January and April This year however, Rumble to Fast Lane surpassed anything they did for the build to Wrestlemania itself. Bryan vs. Reigns felt more special than Reigns vs. Lesnar until the actual match started.

I actually felt they had a lot of missed opportunities this year too, not many great surprise returns, no NXT talents, I even thought J and J would have had a spot in there but nope, what did Kofi do now, I forget?


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App
 
#31 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

It's bad now. With the current status of WWE creative, they go from mediocre to average(or in this year's case, awful to unwatchable). At WWE's peak in the Attitude Era, the product went from great to outstanding. Now, they put no effort into anything all year until it's time for the Rumble. They're effectively telling you that there's no reason to watch until around Summerslam, Survivor Series, and in between January and April This year however, Rumble to Fast Lane surpassed anything they did for the build to Wrestlemania itself. Bryan vs. Reigns felt more special than Reigns vs. Lesnar until the actual match started.
 
#36 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I like the Rumble match itself, it's always been fun to watch. As for the PPV though they're destroying the quality of it year after year. If it wasn't for the Triple Threat, I'd grade this year's Rumble with a F.

Royal Rumble has become a joke now, the effort they put from January to March/April is low, the rest of the year is absent, except for SummerSlam / Survivor Series.
 
#38 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

Well, part of the problem with the Rumble is that it is sort predictable that a main eventer or a star that is getting pushed at the time will be the winner. It would be interesting, for least a Rumble, if someone like Sandow won, just based on the fact that it is unexpected and this is supposed to be a high stakes match, so they should be performing at their best to win.

There is also the factor that the RTWM is built upon face vs heel, instead of personality w/certain skill and wrestling style vs personality w/certain skill and wrestling style, and Wrestlemania is that final showdown. When you are working with the parameters that WWE does, it is hard to create unique main events, especially since this is more theatre than sport.

I did have an idea for the Rumble this past year that Lesnar should have defended to title in the Royal Rumble match. The story could have been that he had no contender’s left to face him, since everyone is afraid to fight him, so he would defend it in the match instead, billing it as a rare opportunity. Lesnar would have been the last entrant, and I would have booked him as the winner.

You could have easily solved the lack of a #1 contender by having a tournament at Fast Lane. Have all of the qualifying matches on Raw and Smackdown, and on the night of the PPV, have the 8 that qualified fight throughout the night to become the #1 contender. Having a one night tournament would show that the person who one earned the victory, and could have dealt with some of the complaints aimed at Reigns. Plus a few shenanigans that occur during the PPV(ex.Cena costing Rusev a match and vice versa) could have been used in the build to WM.
 
#39 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

Well, part of the problem with the Rumble is that it is sort predictable that a main eventer or a star that is getting pushed at the time will be the winner. It would be interesting, for least a Rumble, if someone like Sandow won, just based on the fact that it is unexpected and this is supposed to be a high stakes match, so they should be performing at their best to win.

There is also the factor that the RTWM is built upon face vs heel, instead of personality w/certain skill and wrestling style vs personality w/certain skill and wrestling style, and Wrestlemania is that final showdown. When you are working with the parameters that WWE does, it is hard to create unique main events, especially since this is more theatre than sport.

I did have an idea for the Rumble this past year that Lesnar should have defended to title in the Royal Rumble match. The story could have been that he had no contender’s left to face him, since everyone is afraid to fight him, so he would defend it in the match instead, billing it as a rare opportunity. Lesnar would have been the last entrant, and I would have booked him as the winner.

You could have easily solved the lack of a #1 contender by having a tournament at Fast Lane. Have all of the qualifying matches on Raw and Smackdown, and on the night of the PPV, have the 8 that qualified fight throughout the night to become the #1 contender. Having a one night tournament would show that the person who one earned the victory, and could have dealt with some of the complaints aimed at Reigns. Plus a few shenanigans that occur during the PPV(ex.Cena costing Rusev a match and vice versa) could have been used in the build to WM.
Bingo! The Royal Rumble should be completely separate from Wrestlemania now, like it used to be and when anyone could actually have a chance of winning it.

That's what we want and need basically, otherwise it may as well just be a 5 man battle royal or something, even thought it's unlikely for some talents to win as opposed to others, it was still possible, but now, it isn't and it's silly, it takes a lot away from it.

As I mentioned earlier, winning the Rumble was a big thing in itself, it goes down in history as a big thing also, Wrestlemania being tied to it not only limits this a lot now, it also takes away the compelling viewing as we know that only a small selection at best can win this.

What's the point in that, I'd like to know that anyone can win it, no matter how big or small :)
 
#43 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

Once upon a time the Rumble being leading into to Wrestlemania was good so it not either good or bad. Just depends on the booking.
 
#44 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I'd never want to see it go. I look forward to the rumble more than Mania! And despite it increasing in predictability, these past couple of years it has set a high in regards to controversy. Deep down we all enjoyed the shitstorms that proceeded the last two Rumbles haha.

I agree that maybe the stipulation should be changed. Might be fun for the WWE to actually put the title on the line again? Or even just winning a rumble could be prize enough, I feel like you'd have to win something though, it's just too huge of a match. The main reason I'd personally want the stipulations changed is because my guy is Kane, and despite his accolades within the match, given its outcome he has no chance of winning it now that there's only one title.
 
#47 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I'd never want to see it go. I look forward to the rumble more than Mania! And despite it increasing in predictability, these past couple of years it has set a high in regards to controversy. Deep down we all enjoyed the shitstorms that proceeded the last two Rumbles haha.

I agree that maybe the stipulation should be changed. Might be fun for the WWE to actually put the title on the line again? Or even just winning a rumble could be prize enough, I feel like you'd have to win something though, it's just too huge of a match. The main reason I'd personally want the stipulations changed is because my guy is Kane, and despite his accolades within the match, given its outcome he has no chance of winning it now that there's only one title.
Yeah, the Rumble prize is a big enough win alone, it's the Royal Rumble :)

It's just the crowds who has changed, they want to be contrarian, different. If it was the Attitude-Era sure it was predictable that SCSA would've won the rumble, but they would have booed him out of the building because of it.
It's not about the boo's or the cheers or the crowds, it's about how having this stipulation means there are no chance of any other talent being able to win, 3 - 5 guys at tops because it's a mania push, which takes away any anticipation in it being anyone who can win this, as opposed to the predictability of one, two, or three guys, it's no longer anyone's game and may as well be a 5 man match.

Crowds aren't anything to do with it, it's the stipulation that takes away the anticipation of it being anyone's game, Cesaro (for example) ain't gonna win this, wouldn't you prefer the anticipation of it being anyone who can win the Rumble again, as it used to be?
 
#45 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

It's just the crowds who has changed, they want to be contrarian, different. If it was the Attitude-Era sure it was predictable that SCSA would've won the rumble, but they would have booed him out of the building because of it.
 
#48 ·
Re: The Royal Rumble being the lead of the Road To Wrestlemania - Good or bad?

I don't think some people are understanding what this threads about, the winning factor basically of it being any man's game is no longer there due to this stipulation.

This takes away compelling viewing for us of it being anyone's game (instead of a choice of 1 - 5 guys at best), it takes away any opportunities for the talents (meaning again only a top card talent can win again) and it's completely lost it's spark when it comes to who can win this due to this road to Wrestlemania thing.

It hasn't always been like this in the history of the Rumble, the Rumble wasn't even made for this they've just brought it in over time, now only a top card talent can win, where as before anyone could grab it.

A royal rumble win is a prestige and big win regardless, it's a huge PPV, one of the big four and goes down in the history books as a massive accolade on it's own, it doesn't need to be tied into Mania which only limits all this.
 
#49 ·
Another problem with the royal Rumble is that it becomes the only way to set up the Wrestlemania main event.

It takes away storytelling options.

It doesn't need to be for the Wrestlemania main event for many people in the "special attraction" era just being on the card would be a prize.

It takes away suspense from the push. Instead of each and every Roman Reigns match mattering. Only the rumble win matters and then Wrestlemania.

Imagine instead of Goldberg's rise to power. He just won a Royal Rumble and got put in the main event of Starcade.
 
#50 ·
Yeah that's true, it needs to be detached as soon as really and have it as the event it always was (and still is), winning the Rumble is a great thing and can be aside from the Mania thing and who's main eventing, it needs to happen as mentioned throughout the thread :)
 
#51 · (Edited)
I'm curious when any men could win it? Since 1990 it hasn't been the case. The only time it was really a surprise was when Yokozuna won it. The drawback of the Rumble is if there's a clear cut Mania match you know who's winning. That was the case in 92 and it's still the case today.

Oh and Goldberg going undefeated and then winning the Rumble to challenge to Hogan. I imagine that would lead to the biggest match in history. Very bad example.
 
#52 ·
I knew someone was going to say this, but my point is it could happen, you don't know as such like you do now, for example when Hogan won and Earthquake was in, Knobbs of the Nasty Boys, Rude and Perfect people all thought at the time, one of these could win and Hogan might not.

Now, in that scenario, we know that Hogan is the only one who could, the WWE can't even switch it up anymore or give us that surprise win, when it could actually happen with a twist, but can't now cause they ain't gonna headline Mania, which is what takes all this away.

It doesn't matter about who's won in history, Hacksaw Jim Duggan did, Big John Studd did, now this can't happen and the stipulation takes away our anticipation as there's not even no 'What if' anymore, which was ALWAYS there before, so it still stands completely!

It needs to go basically does the stipulation thing they now have, it's just ruined all this anticipation now.
 
#54 ·
IMO, the only problem with the Rumble is that the winner is so damn predictable these past number of years. WWE practically telegraphs whose going to win that damn thing months in advance. They need to not make it so obvious going forward. The guy that does win the Rumble, perhaps shouldn't be booked so strong going into the Rumble that it's obvious who's going to win. That's really the only way they can make the Rumble somewhat unpredictable. I know this goes against how they traditionally book the Rumble in having the guy booked strong as hell going into it, but maybe they should book 2-3 guys just as strong going into it or someone completely unpredictable. Otherwise, it's going to be the same thing we've gotten in recent years, and it's clear that it has hurt the Rumble in recent years.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top