Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,508 Posts
The only real battle royal match that is fun to watch is the Royal Rumble, because there's excitement in wondering who's coming out next. Plus, there is room to tell stories within the match.

WCW tried to excite fans with their World War III three-ring battle royals, but it's just not appealing to me.
 

·
#TEAMFIT
Joined
·
7,953 Posts
If they are gonna do their own Battle Royal they NEED to give it it's own twist. Battle Royals nowadays tend to just come off as "Royal Rumbles without the entrances".

I fail to see what real original twist they could give it seeing as if it was a good a idea the WWE or WCW in the past would have tried it by now. Personally I think they should stay away unless they give it a TRULY unique twist that isn't illogical. Unlike that retarded "Reverse Battle Royal" they once had.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
574 Posts
If TNA are allowed to simply copy the whole Royal Rumble idea and make no changes to it, I would be happy just having a TNA type Royal Rumble PPV
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,737 Posts
TNA just need 6 PPVs and they need to be on the road

February - Victory Road
April - Lockdown
June - Slammiversary
August - HardCore Justice or Whatever you calling this battle royal PPVs with the winning going to Glory
October - Bound for Glory
December - Destination X
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,195 Posts
Anyone remember the Impact that was just one big battle royale for the KO, Tag, X, and World titles?

TNA needs to stay as far away from Battle royales as possible. Same with big stables and authority figures. TNA needs to re-define wrestling and that shit isn't the way to do it especially considering the first is used by the company as a part of lazy booking and just a way to get everyone on TV without it meaning anything. Remember when they had that hardcore Battle Royal with Kevin Nash getting eliminated during a commercial break.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,581 Posts
This idea I have is called, Survivor Royale! (original, I know) but check it out,

Do a royal rumble concept where two guys come out at a time but they're not random, they're entered in a ranking system based on likely hood of winning...the most likely guys come in first. Also if bitter rivals they come in at the same time (Jarrett and Angle). So guys likely to win a match where someone goes over the top would be big men. They are hard to throw over, but get this,..their most formidable opponent is also coming out at the same time. So probably Abyss, Morgan, Terry, Hernandez, Brother Ray, Brother Devon, and on and on...it starts off with a bang! Then lighter guys than them Joe, Angle, Jarrett, Kaz, Williams, Beer Money, RVD, and on and on...then lighter, MCMG, Shannon Moore, Gen Me, Kiyoshi, Shark Boy...come in last because of weight and likely hood. It's a balanced match.

A stipulation I've always wanted to see in the WWE Royal Rumble was a 5 count to get back into the ring should someone go out of the ring in any fashion other than the top rope. So for instance, guy gets pushed out through the middle rope...ref starts counting 1! 2! 3! 4! 5! (guy had better get his ass up in a hurry) or if that is too fast then a 10 count but the point being some way that guys can't just camp (gaming term) outside the ring and avoid conflict. If the ring-out expires they are eliminated. It's still every man for himself and do what WWE is doing and make it 40. 2 men enter every 2 minutes = 40 minutes until everyone is in the ring. Bring in guys from ROH and the best indy talent to fill some spots. Have a strong undercard with the regular TNA guys. Forward this to Dixie's twitter if it sounds good, I'm not on twitter. Love the idea though.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top