Has the concept of the Rumble match run its course?

[RoadWarriorBaigy]

Does wwe need to move on from the Royal Rumble concept? For years this was my favourite match of the year, until 2013 when Cena/Rock became twice in a lifetime. The two matches since then have also down right sucked and have been butchered by hot crowds.

So does anyone agree that this concept has died and wwe needs to rethink and reinvent the road to wrestlemania? If so, how do you think they should go about it?

 

[FightOwensFight]

So, it has been your favorite event for years and since it has had a couple bad outings the last two years they should just scrap the whole thing?

To answer your question, no, I don't think they should change it. The issue isn't the Rumble itself, but rather, the "hot crowds" not getting what they want and it being used in the last two years to push someone the fans have been pretty clear about not wanting to see. If Bryan or Ziggler or Ambrose had won last night I don't think you would be saying the Rumble is done.

 

[RoadWarriorBaigy]

I'm not upset that Reigns won, I don't mind that one bit. I just don't think the rumble match works in 2015. Every year there are 2 favourites, Bryan and Reigns this year, and 2 dark horses, Ziggler and Wyatt this year imo. That leaves 26 people with no chance really.

We have all heard from wwe over the years that they evolve with the times so I'm wondering that in 2015, has this concept run its course? Does today's audience want to see a 30 man battle royal featuring 26 guys with no chance of winning? The last 3 events tell me no.

 

[MartialHorror]

As much as I hate to say it, I kind of think it has...It seems like the Rumble has become too predictable. It's too easy to find out the guest entries on the web, so they aren't as surprising and WWE can't plan too much in advance because fans might turn on the person they want to push. If they have to force someone like Bryan in the main event AGAIN, then I'd say...yeah. Either WWE has to constantly backpeddle or cater to the fans wishes...which isn't always a good thing.

 

[GeminiGarlord]

Last five minutes aside I actually really liked this rumble. Wyatt's stuff was great, the final kaneshow vs shield showdown was cool as hell. If Ambrose would have won and Rocky Maivia would have stayed home this could have easily been the best rumble of the latest years.

 

[dkorolenchuk]

"Perhaps its just me but is getting an automatic Title berth at WrestleMania a good idea for the Rumble match winner? Am I over thinking this matter or does the stipulation really narrow the field to only a small handful of viable candidates?”


When there was 2 brand belts letting the Rumble winner choose left some options open but not any more.
Maybe change it to a title shot at the now lame duck PPV's in between rumble and mania instead?

 

[TheICChampion]

If it ain't broke....

But honestly, sure there may only be a few viable contenders for the title each year but it doesn't stop the Rumble from being the second most exciting PPV of the year. And what does getting a title shot at another PPV really change? There are still only a few guys who fans could buy getting that title shot.

 

[The Warlord]

Call me a traditionalist....but if they change it they will ruin the entire concept of the Rumble

Why??? Because some butthurt fans couldnt deal with Reigns winning?? Who gives a flying fuck?!

The only thing that needs to change is whoever booked the rumble match itself. The piss poor eliminations on the bigger stars; Kane and Big Show; bringing Reigns back too early, etc.

The Royal Rumble should always be what it is, and thats the 2nd biggest ppv of the year (Sorry SummerSlam).

 

[dkorolenchuk]

Good points,but they usually don't really even stick with the automatic title shot lately anyway.If I'm not mistaken the last two rumble winners Batista and Cena got screwed.Cena had to defend his spot at mania even after winning the rumble and Batista ended up in a triple threat match?

 

[Reflection]

I disagree. The title shot makes the Rumble match feel that much more important- "the winner will headline Wrestlemania- the grandest stage of them all." Take that away and replace it with "The winner will challenge Brock Lesnar at Fast Lane"- doesn't feel nearly as important. Plus with symbolic "Road to Wrestlemania" starting at the Rumble with logo hanging in the background, the long history that this match has, the concept of coming out on top of 29 other competitors to earn that World title shot- it all makes sense. It should remain the way it is.

 

[PeterSellersSTL]

There's nothing wrong with the Rumble format, and there was nothing wrong with Reigns winning - it was the right move.

I'm going back and forth on awarding an IC title shot to maybe the guy who lasts the longest or finishes second but the focus of the Rumble needs to remain a WWEWHC shot and headlining Wrestlemania.

God if I were the WWE I swear you marks would hate it and I'd troll you to death.

I would have hit CM Punk's music, the roof would have exploded and I would have had HHH grab the mic and announce that the 7th spot is reserved for CM Punk should he want to come out for his chance to get that Mania main event he's always wanted. Of course Punk having left on salty terms wouldn't have come out and the IWC would be crying yet again. I'd leave the 7th spot reserved for CM Punk for the rest of time to troll the IWC. Rumble after Rumble CM Punk's music blaring and no return.

I hate you fucking crybabies that much.

 

[kadroan]

I think it's fine. I wouldn't change anything about it. Being the guy to win it all makes it special.

 

[pipebomber]

I think if you take away the title stipulation from the royal rumble and only make it for bragging rights you end up with the Andre the Giant battle royal, which was fun to watch, but did absolutely nothing for Cesaro's career.

 

[MERPER]

Yes, he's right. Of course. Because in this day in age, when fans are able to figure out storylines ahead of time, it leaves you knowing only 3-5 guys realistically stand any chance and as those guys get eliminated or you wind down to the final group in the ring it's hard to sell.

Last night, only 5 guys stood any chance to win: Bryan, Wyatt, Reigns, Ambrose, Rusev. Bryan goes out early. Wyatt then gets tossed. Rusev isn't even involved for the last 10 minutes or so and most thought he was out. The moment Ambrose was tossed and it was down to 3, you knew Roman was winning, leaving no suspense for the very end and very little suspense for the lat 5-10 minutes.

There are ways to shake this up. Off the top of my head:

1) Winner doesn't go straight to WrestleMania, make Fast Lane bigger. Winner gets a spot in the main event of Fast Lane. Who does he face?

2) The individual with the most eliminations in the Rumble. (Yes, this will take some clever writing as a lot of this has to be done by where a person enters and the amount of guys left in the ring.) But it can be accomplished.

OR

3) Of the Final 5 left in Rumble, the winner gets the Fast Lane main event. The other 4 compete in a tournament style event for the other spot. Starting at RAW the next night... 5 vs. runner up at Rumble and 3 vs. 4 based on elimination. 1 week later, the 2 winners fight for right to face Rumble winner.

This all builds suspense and gives fans matches of interest in weeks leading up to Fast Lane. I don't need 62 days of Lesnar/Reigns build up.

 

[Zycho32]

There's nothing wrong with the Rumble format, and there was nothing wrong with Reigns winning - it was the right move.

I'm going back and forth on awarding an IC title shot to maybe the guy who lasts the longest or finishes second but the focus of the Rumble needs to remain a WWEWHC shot and headlining Wrestlemania.

God if I were the WWE I swear you marks would hate it and I'd troll you to death.

I would have hit CM Punk's music, the roof would have exploded and I would have had HHH grab the mic and announce that the 7th spot is reserved for CM Punk should he want to come out for his chance to get that Mania main event he's always wanted. Of course Punk having left on salty terms wouldn't have come out and the IWC would be crying yet again. I'd leave the 7th spot reserved for CM Punk for the rest of time to troll the IWC. Rumble after Rumble CM Punk's music blaring and no return.

I hate you fucking crybabies that much.

The sad thing? That would actually be a more appealing part of the product than what is currently being delivered.

Not that it'd be smart- while the die-hards are probably a representation of the "1%" joke, if that, I'm sure you'd love trying to swim through the fickle nature of the casuals outside of the bubble after you've jettisoned those you hate. But it would be more interesting.

As to the Rumble itself, I'm not bothered by it. Taking away the WM Main Event prize is really only worth doing if you replace it with something greater- the WWE Title itself. Make the Rumble a form of bragging rights- not unlike the King of the Ring- lowers the importance and impact of the PPV.

 

[rge2010]

The dirtsheets and the IWC ruin the Royal Rumble, infact they ruin Wrestling all together.

Rumours and speculation make everything completely anti climatic nowadays. The obsession with 'peeking behind the curtain' is an obsession which ruins it for the hardcore viewer.

Turn the internet off, leave the forums - you will enjoy the product SO MUCH MORE.

 

[OYDK]

No. I really hope the WWE never scraps the Royal Rumble as it is basically the only show I really look forward to other than Mania. Just because the crowd has shit on the past two or three Rumbles does not mean that they should just scrap one of the BIG 4 PPV's and the best gimmick match they have. Use it to your advantage... had WWE played off the crowd in the right way instead of the wrong way we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Also, judging from the discussions that have been going on, on this site, the Royal Rumble still creates the most interest of the year. We can say we knew Reigns was going to win and that it was predictable, but did you REALLY know who was going to win that match? My opinion throughout changed from Bryan to Reigns to Ziggler to Rusev and back to Reigns. Had it not been for Big Show and Kane dominating at the end and the crowd shitting on the majority of the match, I would have thoroughly enjoyed this years Rumble match.

 

[Wald]

No but it does need to be booked better.

Going in this year everyone figured it was Roman Reigns winning with a possibility of it being Daniel Bryan. Last year it was Batista with a possibility of Daniel Bryan. For a Royal Rumble to be great there needs to be a minimum of five superstars who people think can legit win it from a story point angle. By that I don't mean that you want Dolph Ziggler to win and hope he will. I mean that heading in to the Rumble you have storylines based around a minimum of five guys potentially getting to the main event of Wrestlemania.

This year you had Roman Reigns being the young new star hoping to solidify himself in the main event and you had Daniel Bryan on the comeback trail. You could have also built up Dean Ambrose versus the Authority through his programme with Seth Rollins and had him fighting the machine. Bray Wyatt could have had better storyline backing heading in to make it seem like he's on a roll. You could have given guys like Ziggler and Ryback an outside chance of winning. You could have had Randy Orton returning to put doubt in fans' minds during the match and you could have also had Lana cut promos about Rusev deciding that the best way to upstage America is to have win the title at Wrestlemania. Right there that's five guys & two potentials that you could have built up as potential winners. Have that and Daniel Bryan being eliminated isn't as big a deal as the winner doesn't become so totally obvious.

Really what the WWE needs to do is realise that they can't phone in their creative from September through to December. We all know they do and they know they do and it needs to end. Both Ambrose and Wyatt were ultimately hurt, Ambrose especially, by their so-so feud heading in to 2015. Rusev has also been threading water for a while now and last year they made a real mess of Daniel Bryan's path, of Randy Orton's character and even John Cena wasn't doing a whole load either. All of that effects the Rumble and the start of the Road to Wrestlemania and they need to realise that.

 

[timothy26]

The IC and U.S titles are essentially meaningless nowadays and it would ruin the point of having the rumble as a PPV main event just for some mid carder to win it and get a shot at these. They could perhaps go with a winner forgoing his World title shot and instead facing an opponent of his choosing and perhaps hold that as a co main event at WM. Just because the rumble was poorly done this year doesn't mean it will be in years to come and I think changing it's format would devalue the PPV.

 

[Navi]

The IC and U.S titles are essentially meaningless nowadays and it would ruin the point of having the rumble as a PPV main event just for some mid carder to win it and get a shot at these. They could perhaps go with a winner forgoing his World title shot and instead facing an opponent of his choosing and perhaps hold that as a co main event at WM. Just because the rumble was poorly done this year doesn't mean it will be in years to come and I think changing it's format would devalue the PPV.

This I agree with. They've screwed up the Rumble for the last two years and that's no excuse to change the format. Changing the bookers would be a much better idea overall. To reformat one PPV because they bookers can't do their jobs is a band aid solution. You have to get to the problem at the root, and it's either the writers or McMahon. There is no doubt something has to change.

 

[hatehabsforever]

Gotta disagree with JR here. The whole point of the Royal Rumble is that it (supposedly) guarantees the winner of the Rumble a shot at the WWE World Heavyweight Championship on the grandest stage of them all. I'm a traditionalist at heart so I'm not a proponent of deviating from this very basic concept. As soon as you do, it just becomes another random over the top rope Battle Royal, which happen over the course of the year anyway. You cannot kick off the Road to Wrestlemania without having the end of the road be at Wrestlemania. In my opinion, Survivor Series used to be an excellent PPV when it was comprised almost entirely of team competitions. They deviated from it's basic premise and in doing so, turned it into just another random PPV, no different from any of the other mundane secondary PPV's that happen pretty much every month. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I would not be in any hurry to destroy the very thing that makes the Royal Rumble special.

Having said all of this, I wouldn't be opposed to seeing, on occasion, the Royal Rumble winner lose their title opportunity as they travel down the road to Wrestlemania. Have the RR winner put his title shot on the line against some opponent due to some scenario that occurs between late January and late March/early April. Have some authority figures get involved in this somehow. Or have the MITB briefcase winner somehow interfere with the whole matter. I think the winner of the Royal Rumble should have a "guaranteed" title opportunity at Wrestlemania, but on occasion, it should play out that it's not as "guaranteed" as you may think. And by no means should it be a given that the winner of the Royal Rumble is always successful on the grandest stage of them all. Predictability is the worst thing to occur in WWE, and if the winner of the Royal Rumble is predictable (as it often is), he never loses his shot along the way, and he always wins (sort of like the MITB winner), that can be problematic. There are ways of keeping some guesswork in the road to Wrestlemania, but I don't think that changing the most basic premise of the Royal Rumble is the appropriate way to do so.

 

[chicagokmc]

While I would keep the basic premise the same there are several tweaks I would make going forward:
1. I would dial back the “avoid elimination” moves. They were cool when they were few and far between. I don’t sit here wondering each year what someone like Kofi is going to do to avoid getting tossed (we all know he isn’t going to win it any way). Less is definitely more.
2. No more one-time nostalgic returns. If someone is coming back to the roster for awhile, I’m ok with that. I got nothing out of seeing DDP or even Bubba for that matter (unless he’s going to stay around in the tag team division). I’m not saying get rid of surprise entrants. They just shouldn’t be the senior circuit talent.
3. There should be more qualifying matches to get into the Rumble. Not the crap we saw from the Authority angle but real qualifying matches. The rumble should be a big deal. We shouldn’t just have people entering themselves into the match.

 

[Reflection]

The dirtsheets and the IWC ruin the Royal Rumble, infact they ruin Wrestling all together.

Rumours and speculation make everything completely anti climatic nowadays. The obsession with 'peeking behind the curtain' is an obsession which ruins it for the hardcore viewer.

Turn the internet off, leave the forums - you will enjoy the product SO MUCH MORE.

Tried that with the Rumble this year actually. Ended up feeling even worse. Apart from the triple threat match, it was a piece of shit Rumble and not because of the dirt sheets or the live crowd, but because of a terrible script. At least, had I checked the net and the forums, I would have known not to waste 3 hours of my evening behind this crap.

 

[laodaron]

Any and all booking that is done like the Rumble, as in the winner of some big event gets a title or a chance at the title is shitty and poor and lazy booking. The Rumble, MitB, KotR, EC - all lazy booking. I detest the idea that someone gets a chance at a title without there being a semblance of a feud beforehand.

That being said, the Rumble is iconic, and nostalgic, and who in the shit DIDN'T pop out of their rustled jimmies when Bubba Ray's music hit, or when a 60 year old DDP came out and hit about 9 cutters?

 

[NegativeFeedback]

It's been outdated for a while, simply because the decision-makers in WWE are so hard-headed that they don't want to ever go off-course which leads all the obvious people to win. Batista, Benoit, Rey, Undertaker, Orton, Edge, Del Rio, Sheamus, Cena, Batista... They were all obvious and everybody knew about them before they happened. Other than Cena's win in 08, every single Rumble has gone along as planned which has been boring. Yeah, it's always fun to speculate as to who are the dark horses. Jeff Hardy is hot in 2008, maybe he has a shot now? Morrison is hot in 2012, maybe he has a shot? Punk is hot... Ziggler is hot... Bryan is hot... Guess what, they never happen. Whatever is the obvious pick is always the one who wins. The Rumble's biggest surprise has been JOHN CENA. Just let that sink in. The face of the company and the central focus of the show for 4 years straight at the time was the biggest shocker in the past decade. If that doesn't reek of an outdated concept, I don't know what does.

Now, I don't think the Rumble itself has to be done away with, but the "automatic title shot" concept does. With 2 world titles, we knew which 2 matches were happening at Mania, but any of the two could win the Rumble. Now, it's only 1 guy and that's just boring. What they could do is have the Rumble winner get a match at Fast Lane. Like that, it literally could be anybody since it could easily be a contender who's going to put over the champ on his road to Mania, or it could be someone else who's going to shake up the title picture right before the grandaddy of them all.

Fast Lane is a stupid PPV name though, so if they move Night of Champions to February, I would endorse this move. It could easily be explained in storyline as next year's winner NOT WANTING TO WAIT TIL WRESTLEMANIA.