The consesus seems to be that 1992 was the best Royal Rumble, but let's put that to the test. Here's my criteria for determing the best Royal Rumble of all time:
--Contenders: How many of the participants had a legitimate chance to win? The more potential winners there are makes for a better Rumble as opposed to a Rumble filled with tag team guys and jobbers. A point will be given for each contender in the match.
--Memorable moments: Rumbles are usually filled with plenty of memorable moments. Which one had the most? A match gets 1 point for each memorable moment.
--The Winner: Was the right man selected to win that year? Or should it have been someone else? A point is awarded for getting the right winner
MY RANKINGS (quick version, from best to worst): 1)1989 (Best)/ 2) 1992/ 3) 1990/ 4) 2004/ 5) 2011/ 6)1991/ 7)1988/ 8)2005/ 9)2006/ 10)1997/ 11)2001/ 12) 2009/ 13)1994/ 14)2002/ 15)2008/ 16)1996/ 17)1999/ 18)2007/ 19)2010/ 20)1995/ 21)2000 22)2003/ 23)1998/ 24)1993 (Worst)
And here is the long version with in depth analysis of each Rumble. Rumbles are listed by year so you can scroll down to whatever year was your favorite.
1988:12 pts
8 contenders: Jake Roberts/Harley Race/Don Muraco/Hacksaw/Hillbilly Jim/ Dino Bravo/ Warrior/ O.M.G (the rest were jobbers and tag team guys). The field was wide open in 88. No one knew what to expect. Some of these guys might not seem like likely candidates to win a rumble, but keep in mind there had never been a rumble before and there were no former or current champions involved. Sort of like Money In The Bank today.
MOMENTS:1st rumble ever/ OMG sets record for eliminations/ Bret sets record for time being in rumble
WINNER: Hacksaw. Good decision having a midcard guy win since there was nothing at stake such as a wrestlemania title match. Gave viewers the thought that anyone could actually win.
1989: 16 pts
8 Contenders: Andre/Jake Roberts/Bad News/ Savage/ Hulk/ Brutus/ Studd/ DiBiase (the rest were tag team guys and jobbers) Bad news was undefeated at the time and feuding with macho man, so he does in fact count as a contender.
MOMENTS: Hogan breaks OMGs record for eliminations, eliminated 10 men. 8 of them consecutively/ Curt hennig breaks Bret's record for longevity in a rumble/ Warlord sets record for shortest time in a rumble/ Dibiase buys the 30th spot/ Andre eliminates himself, running away from damian/ Mega powers explode/ Ax and Smash enter at 1 & 2/ 30 participants instead of 20
WINNER:Studd. He was making his return to the wwf and so having him win the rumble was a good way to bring him back. But in retrospect he left the wwf again shortly there after, so it seems like kind of a waste to give him this victory. Also, a rumble where studd and andre were both participants should have included a confrontation between the two long time rivals. A better winner would have been Hogan. The big story following this rumble was the breakup of the mega powers. Having Hogan inadvertantly eilminate Savage and then go on to win the match would mean that they could have ended the ppv with Savage confronting Hogan after the match, feeling as though he was robbed. Instead that spot took place in the middle of the rumble and felt a little awkward. Having that take place after the match was over, complete with security and refs trying to separate them would have made for a more climactic ending.
1990: 14 pts
10 contenders: DiBiase/ Jake/ Macho/ Piper/ Andre/ Earthquake/ Warrior/ Hogan/ Rude/ Perfect (the rest were tag team guys and jobbers) 10 contenders is the most of any of the Rumbles. Which makes 1990 the best Royal Rumble in terms of the quality of the participants involved. All 10 of these guys were legitimate main eventers who could have won. Some might say only Warrior and Hogan had any real shot, but keep in mind that the previous 2 Royal Rumble winners up to this point were both midcard guys who had never held the wwf title. In other words, the field was more wide open during this time because the winner of the rumble wasn't guaranteed a title shot at Wrestlemania. You will notice a substantail drop off in the number of contenders in the Royal Rumbles starting in 1993 when they introduced that stipulation. Once that stipulation was introduced it took away any chance of a midcard guy winning the event.
MOMENTS: Dibiase breaks Hennig's record for longevity/ Warrior and hogan EPIC showdown/ Demolition eliminate the Giant/ Earthquake sets record for the number of wrestlers required to eliminate him (5)
WINNER: Hogan. He should have won the year before. 1990 should have been warriors year. A Rumble win for the Warrior would have helped to build him up for the match with hogan at wrestlemania. They had Hogan inadvertantly eliminate the Warrior in this match, which was basically what they did the year before with Hogan and Savage. To change things up, it should have been the other way around with Warrior inadvertantly eliminating Hogan.
1991: 13 pts
8 contenders: Martel/ Jake/ Undertaker/ Bulldog/ Macho/ Hogan/ Earthquake/ Perfect (the rest were jobbers and tag team guys)
MOMENT: Macho no shows/ Martel breaks DiBiase's longevitiy record/ Hogan becomes first repeat rumble winner/ Valentine gives strong showing/ Luke marches in, luke marches out
Winner:Hogan. Should have been Macho Man. Warrior should have retained the title against Slaughter and then the Macho KING wins the ROYAL Rumble. This would have led to savage vs warrior at wm7 for the title. Where its title vs career. That way Savage and Elizabeths reunion could have ended wrestlemania. That's the moment that people remember not hogan vs slaughter, which had enough heat with the exploitation of the gulf war that it didnt require the belt being on the line. But warriors belt vs machos career would have made sense.
1992: 15 pts
9 contenders: Bulldog/ Flair/ Piper/ Jake/ Undertaker/ Savage/ Hogan/ Sarge/ Sid (the rest were tag team guys and jobbers.) This was the first Rumble to have a stipulation attached to it regarding the WWF title. The winner would become new wwf champion. One would think that would narrow the list of realistic potential winners to only 2 or 3. That would certainly be the case nowadays. But surprisingly all 9 of these guys had a shot. Hogan, Savage, Taker, Sarge were all former champions. Sid, at the time, was considered the next big thing in the WWF. Meanwhile, Jake, Piper and Bulldog were all enjoying the biggest push of their careers. It might seem obvious in hindsight that Flair was going to win, but up until this event a heel had never won the Rumble and NWA guys in general (dusty, tully, arn) hadnt had much success in the wwf.
MOMENTS: Flair breaks Martels longevity record/ Hogan booed/ Bobby Heenan's hilarious commentary/ Sid becoms first man to be eliminated by someone who was already eliminted (hogan)/ Sid-Hogan showdown post match
Winner:Flair. This is definitely fair to flair. No one else could have won this Royal Rumble. Defintiely Flairs year.
1993: 6pts
3 contenders: Undertaker/ Yoko/ Macho (the rest were jobbers and tag team guys.) Flair and Perfect were in this royal rumble but i do not consider them contenders as wwf had already advertised a loser leaves wwf match between the two of them for the next night on raw, and everyone knew flair was leaving wwf at the time.
MOMENTS: Take becomes first man to be eliminated by a non entrant (Giant Gonzales)/ Bob backlund breaks flairs longevity record
Winner:Yokozuna. Only logical choice. Yoko was new and this was a good way to build him up as the next coming of Andre. Unfortunately Yokos win was incredibly obvious from the start when you look at the rest of the roster.
1994: 10 pts
6 contenders: Diesel/ Savage/ Crush/ Shawn/ Luger/ Bret (the rest were jobbers and tag teamers)
MOMENTS: Booger sick/ The Bret & Luger finish/ Diesel eliminates 7 men consecutively/ Mable breaks Quakes record when it takes 7 men to eliminate him
Winners: Bret & Luger. Should have just picked one of them. The co-winners thing was anti-climactic. Even little kids were booing.
1995: 8 pts
6 contenders: Shawn/ Bulldog/ Owen/ Bundy/ Luger/ Backlund (the rest were tag teamers and jobbers.) Backlund was coming of a wwf title run, albeit a very brief one, and at the time was the record holder for longest time spent in a rumble, so he was a legitimate candidate to win. Bundy had recently come back to the wwf after many years, similar to the situation with Big John Studd in 89 who ended up winning, so Bundy was also a potential winner.
MOMENTS: Shawn and Bulldog begin and end the rumble together/ Only one of Shawn's foot touches
Winner: Shawn. Should have been Undertaker. Undertaker wasn't even in this Rumble but he should have been. Shawns entering at #1 and going on to win it all should have been saved for the following years Royal Rumble. Think about it, Shawn enters at 1 and goes all the way to 30 and wins it all after lasting 60 minutes. Wouldn't that have been a perfect way to build him up as the man to beat in a 60 minute iron man match at Wrestlemania? He goes 60 minutes in the Rumble, then 60 minutes vs Bret at Mania. Perfect booking. But in 95 his feud with Diesel was a midcard match at best. Diesel was rushed to main event status. Undertaker on the other hand would have made a great Rumble winner and a great opponent for Bret at Mania. A battle between the two biggest babyfaces at the time.
1996: 9 pts
6 contenders: Yoko/ Vader/ Owen/ Shawn/ Diesel/ Bulldog (rest were jobbers and tag teamers)
MOMENTS:1st rumble to play the music of each participant as they entered/ Jake The Snake makes surprise return
Winner: Shawn. Right choice. But as I said earlier, what happened in 1995 with him entering at 1 and lasting all the way to 30, should have been done in 96 for the buildup to the iron man match. Seeing as how it was 2 minute intervals in 96, that would mean Shawn would have set the longevity record by lasting over 60 minutes which would have served as a perfect setup for the 60 minute iron man match at mania with Bret.
1997: 11 pts
6 contenders: Ahmed/ Austin/ Bret/ Mankind/ Vader/ Undertaker (the rest were tag team guys and jobbers)
MOMENTS: Austin is elminated but sneaks back in/ Austin in rumble for 50 plus minutes; 3rd highest time at that point behind flair and backlund/ Austin ties hulk hogan for number of eliminations with 10/ Ahmed,mascaras and faarooq eliminate themselves
Winner: Austin. Not only was he the right choice, but having him win in such a sneaky, dastardly fashion was brilliant. Really helped to set him up as the ultimate anti-hero. Not only is he getting the big superhero push by eliminating 10 men thus tying Hogans record, but he then wins in cheap heel fashion, thus perfectly combining the elements of both a heel and face rumble winner
1998: 7 pts
4 contenders: Rock/ Owen/ Shamrock/ Austin (the rest were tag teams and jobbers.) Frankly, I'm being generous here. Austin was the only true candidate to win this Rumble. Rock was still an IC level wrestler, Owen was being given a push as the black hart who vowed revenge on Dx but realistically there was no way Owen was going to headline Mania. As for Shamrock, he had already faced Shawn in a brief feud at the ppv prior to Rumble 98, and its unlikely theyd rehash that feud for Mania. So Austin was the only logical choice. So in reality this Rumble's score could be much lower than 7.
MOMENTS: All 3 faces of foley entr the Rumble/ Rock lasts over 50 minutes
Winner: Austin. Clearly the right choice. Without this rumble win the austin era cant officially get underway at mania. UInfortunately this was probably the most predictable rumble win ever. There were more tag team guys in this royal rumble than in any other or any since.
1999: 9 pts
5 contenders: Austin/McMahon/Kane/Shamrock/HHH (the rest were midcarders, tag teams, and jobbers)
MOMENTS: Austin and Mcmahon begin and end rumble. Both last over 55 minutes although they werent even in the ring half the time as this was during wwfs hardcore wrestling phase and the majority of their "in ring" time was spent backstage, outside the ring, etc./ Kane eliminates himself/ Mabel eliminated by 3 non entrants/ Chyna is the first female Rumble entrant
Winner:Mcmahon. Should have been Austin. Would have made Austin the first ever 3peat rumble winner. He went on to face Rock at Mania anyway, so you might as well have him win the rumble. Although I would have settled for anyone other than McMahon. Russo may have booked himself to win the wcw title but McMahon booked himself to win the rumble, so if youre gonna call russo an idiot, which he is, then you cant let McMahon off the hook.
2000: 7 pts
3 contenders: Jericho/ Rock/ Big Show (the rest were tag teams and jobbers)
MOMENTS: Rikishi & too cool dance/ Backlund makes suprise appearance/ Taka and Funaki repeatedly try to enter rumble and are repeatedly eliminated, including one epic Taka faceplant elimination
Winner: Rock. (Correct choice. Although there wasn't really any other choice)
2001: 11 pts
6 contenders: Kane/ Rock/ Big Show/ Undertaker/ Austin/ Rikishi (the rest were tag teams, jobbers and Drew Carey)
MOMENTS: Kane spends over 50 mins in ring/ Kane sets record for most eliminations with 11/ Drew carey eliminates himself/ Honkytonk man cameo
Winner: Austin. Right choice again. A tad predictable seeing as how he was making his wwf return, but it had to be done in order to set up austin-rock at mania.
2002: 10 pts
6 contenders: Undertaker/ Austin/ HHH/ Angle/ Big Show/ Kane
MOMENTS: Maven elims Undertaker/ Austin has career rumble elimination #36, which sets a record/ Goldust and Mr.perfect make wwf returns
Winner: HHH. Way too predictable. The lead up to this rumble was all about hhh returning to the ring after surgery. A less predictable yet no less effective way to get him over as a babyface, would have been to have Stephanie cost him the match by sending someone in on her behalf to elimiante him. This was the year where Hogan-Rock met at Mania. That match should have gone on last. Which means the title match could have been secondary, meaning you dont need a big name to win the belt or the rumble. So why not go with Edge. Mania was in Toronto that year and a match between him and fellow Canadian Jericho for the belt would have been nice. And theres a nice tie in with Edge, as he was at skydome for wm6 as a child. Also, Edge had won the King Of The Ring a few months earlier, which had been a pre cursor to winning the Royal Rumble for Bret and Austin in the past.
2003: 7 pts
7 contenders: Shawn/ Jericho/RVD/BookerT/ Kane/ Lesnar/ Undertaker (rest were midcard and tag teams)
Winner:Lesnar. Brock winning setup the match between him and Angle at Mania, which I wouldn't change. So I suppose Brock is the only choice. Although I would have prefered Angle win the Rumble and go on to face Brock, not the other way around. Just seems like Angle should have won a Rumble at some point.
2004: 14 pts
9 contenders: Benoit/ Orton/ Kane/ Angle/ Big Show/ Jericho/ Cena/ RVD/ Goldberg (rest were jobbers and tag teams)
MOMENTS: Foley makes surprise appearance, eliminates himself/ Lesnar, a non entrant, eliminates Goldberg/ Benoit breaks backlunds 1993 record for longevity in a rumble
Winner:Benoit. Nothing to change here. Benoit and Guerrero going on to win the titles at mania was the moment of the year.
2005: 12 pts
8 contenders: Edge/ Guerrero/ Benoit/ Jericho/ Kurt/ Cena/ Kane/ Batista
MOMENTS: Hbk eliminated by kurt who had already been eliminated/ Nunzios number stolen by angle/ Finish restarted after Batista/cena hit at same time. (thats what should have happened with bret/lex, guess they learned there lesson)
Winner:Batista. Right choice. This needed to happen to set up the breakup with HHH.
2006: 12 pts
7 contenders: HHH/ Rey/ Big Show/ Lashley/ Benoit/ Shawn/ Orton (rest were midcarders and tag teams)
MOMENTS: RVD returns/ Rey sets all time longevity record 1:02:12/ HHH spends over an hour in ring/ HHH and Rey begin event and are both there in final 3/ Shawn eliinated by non Shane, who was a non entrant.
Winner: Rey. Clearly original plans were for Orton to win and go on to face Angle. But after Eddies death, Rey was given the win as a way to pay tribute to Eddie. Good decision. Just a shame they didnt have Rey vs Angle one on one at mania. Adding orton and making it a triple threat ruined what could have been a mania classic. Especially since you consider Angle was the man Eddie beat for the belt at the previous Wrestlemania.
2007: 9 pts
5 contenders: Edge/Orton/Benoit/Shawn/Undertaker (rest were midcard and tag teams)
MOMENTS:Kane sets record for all time rumble appearances with 11/ Viscera breaks a record he previously set himself as Mabel, when it takes 8 men to eliminate him/ Undertaker becomes first #30 entry to win rumble
Winner: Undertaker. Long overdue. Should have happened as far back as 95, but better late than never.
2008: 10 pts
5 contenders: Taker/ Shawn/ Batista/ HHH/ Cena (Rest were midcarders and tag teams)
MOMENTS: Foley, Piper, and Snuka make surprise legend apperances/ Cena makes surprise return
Winner: Cena. This is the only thing Cena has ever done that I enjoyed. Like most, I was legitimately surprised when he showed up. Although I would have had him enter a little bit earlier in the match, maybe around 20. I believe he entered last. What are the odds of that? I mean, come on.
2009: 11 pts
6 contenders: Rey/ HHH/ Orton/ Jericho/ Undertaker/ Big Show (rest were midcard and tag team)
MOMENTS: Big Show eliminates Taker after himself had already been eliminated/ Duggan & RVD make surprise appearances/ Santino sets all time record for shortest time spent in a rumble at 0:00:01
Winner:Orton. Fine choice. He'd been a main eventer for several years at this point, so you knew he was gonna win one of these things eventually.
2010: 9 pts
6 contenders: HHH/ Shawn/ Cena/ Jericho/ Edge/ Batista
MOMENTS: Beth second woman to particpate/ Shawn sets a record 39th career elmination beating the record set by Austin/ Edge makes surprise return
Winner: Edge. Returning from injury always seems to equal rumble win. a bit too predictable for my taste. I would have given it to Shawn. It was his last year and he had made his mark in the wwf by winning two rumbles in the 90s, so why not let him go out with one more. Also, I would have had Shawn announce on raw that even though he won the rumble, he doesnt want a title shot at wrestlemania. Instead he wants to use his rumble win for something else: a match with the Undertaker. I like this idea just because it changes up the usual formula. Also, in this scenario, Taker would not have been champion at the time.
2011: 14 pts
8 contenders: Cena/ Sheamus/ Rey/ Barrett/ Big Show/ Alberto/Orton/Kane
MOMENTS: First ever 40 man rumble/ Punk eliminates 7 men consecutively/ Miz, a non entrant, eliminates Cena/ Santino as a finalist (I admit, for a second i thought "oh your god. Santinos gonna win!" lol)/ Booker and Diesel make surprise appearances
Winner:Alberto Del Rio. Right choice. Some may say it was a bit too soon for such a newcomer, but his character is the alleged son of royalty and so winning the royal rumble fits well. It's better than the predictable 'guy comes back from injury to win' angle that they'd been doing with cena, edge and others. If not Del Rio, I think Kane would have been a good choice. Hes been in so may rumbles and had so many rumble moments, would have been cool to see him finally win won. At the time he was coming of a world title reign so the timing seemed right. But Del Rio works.
------
Overall I found that Royal Rumble 1989 is where you get the most bang for your buck. While 1993 was by far the worst.
--Contenders: How many of the participants had a legitimate chance to win? The more potential winners there are makes for a better Rumble as opposed to a Rumble filled with tag team guys and jobbers. A point will be given for each contender in the match.
--Memorable moments: Rumbles are usually filled with plenty of memorable moments. Which one had the most? A match gets 1 point for each memorable moment.
--The Winner: Was the right man selected to win that year? Or should it have been someone else? A point is awarded for getting the right winner
MY RANKINGS (quick version, from best to worst): 1)1989 (Best)/ 2) 1992/ 3) 1990/ 4) 2004/ 5) 2011/ 6)1991/ 7)1988/ 8)2005/ 9)2006/ 10)1997/ 11)2001/ 12) 2009/ 13)1994/ 14)2002/ 15)2008/ 16)1996/ 17)1999/ 18)2007/ 19)2010/ 20)1995/ 21)2000 22)2003/ 23)1998/ 24)1993 (Worst)
And here is the long version with in depth analysis of each Rumble. Rumbles are listed by year so you can scroll down to whatever year was your favorite.
1988:12 pts
8 contenders: Jake Roberts/Harley Race/Don Muraco/Hacksaw/Hillbilly Jim/ Dino Bravo/ Warrior/ O.M.G (the rest were jobbers and tag team guys). The field was wide open in 88. No one knew what to expect. Some of these guys might not seem like likely candidates to win a rumble, but keep in mind there had never been a rumble before and there were no former or current champions involved. Sort of like Money In The Bank today.
MOMENTS:1st rumble ever/ OMG sets record for eliminations/ Bret sets record for time being in rumble
WINNER: Hacksaw. Good decision having a midcard guy win since there was nothing at stake such as a wrestlemania title match. Gave viewers the thought that anyone could actually win.
1989: 16 pts
8 Contenders: Andre/Jake Roberts/Bad News/ Savage/ Hulk/ Brutus/ Studd/ DiBiase (the rest were tag team guys and jobbers) Bad news was undefeated at the time and feuding with macho man, so he does in fact count as a contender.
MOMENTS: Hogan breaks OMGs record for eliminations, eliminated 10 men. 8 of them consecutively/ Curt hennig breaks Bret's record for longevity in a rumble/ Warlord sets record for shortest time in a rumble/ Dibiase buys the 30th spot/ Andre eliminates himself, running away from damian/ Mega powers explode/ Ax and Smash enter at 1 & 2/ 30 participants instead of 20
WINNER:Studd. He was making his return to the wwf and so having him win the rumble was a good way to bring him back. But in retrospect he left the wwf again shortly there after, so it seems like kind of a waste to give him this victory. Also, a rumble where studd and andre were both participants should have included a confrontation between the two long time rivals. A better winner would have been Hogan. The big story following this rumble was the breakup of the mega powers. Having Hogan inadvertantly eilminate Savage and then go on to win the match would mean that they could have ended the ppv with Savage confronting Hogan after the match, feeling as though he was robbed. Instead that spot took place in the middle of the rumble and felt a little awkward. Having that take place after the match was over, complete with security and refs trying to separate them would have made for a more climactic ending.
1990: 14 pts
10 contenders: DiBiase/ Jake/ Macho/ Piper/ Andre/ Earthquake/ Warrior/ Hogan/ Rude/ Perfect (the rest were tag team guys and jobbers) 10 contenders is the most of any of the Rumbles. Which makes 1990 the best Royal Rumble in terms of the quality of the participants involved. All 10 of these guys were legitimate main eventers who could have won. Some might say only Warrior and Hogan had any real shot, but keep in mind that the previous 2 Royal Rumble winners up to this point were both midcard guys who had never held the wwf title. In other words, the field was more wide open during this time because the winner of the rumble wasn't guaranteed a title shot at Wrestlemania. You will notice a substantail drop off in the number of contenders in the Royal Rumbles starting in 1993 when they introduced that stipulation. Once that stipulation was introduced it took away any chance of a midcard guy winning the event.
MOMENTS: Dibiase breaks Hennig's record for longevity/ Warrior and hogan EPIC showdown/ Demolition eliminate the Giant/ Earthquake sets record for the number of wrestlers required to eliminate him (5)
WINNER: Hogan. He should have won the year before. 1990 should have been warriors year. A Rumble win for the Warrior would have helped to build him up for the match with hogan at wrestlemania. They had Hogan inadvertantly eliminate the Warrior in this match, which was basically what they did the year before with Hogan and Savage. To change things up, it should have been the other way around with Warrior inadvertantly eliminating Hogan.
1991: 13 pts
8 contenders: Martel/ Jake/ Undertaker/ Bulldog/ Macho/ Hogan/ Earthquake/ Perfect (the rest were jobbers and tag team guys)
MOMENT: Macho no shows/ Martel breaks DiBiase's longevitiy record/ Hogan becomes first repeat rumble winner/ Valentine gives strong showing/ Luke marches in, luke marches out
Winner:Hogan. Should have been Macho Man. Warrior should have retained the title against Slaughter and then the Macho KING wins the ROYAL Rumble. This would have led to savage vs warrior at wm7 for the title. Where its title vs career. That way Savage and Elizabeths reunion could have ended wrestlemania. That's the moment that people remember not hogan vs slaughter, which had enough heat with the exploitation of the gulf war that it didnt require the belt being on the line. But warriors belt vs machos career would have made sense.
1992: 15 pts
9 contenders: Bulldog/ Flair/ Piper/ Jake/ Undertaker/ Savage/ Hogan/ Sarge/ Sid (the rest were tag team guys and jobbers.) This was the first Rumble to have a stipulation attached to it regarding the WWF title. The winner would become new wwf champion. One would think that would narrow the list of realistic potential winners to only 2 or 3. That would certainly be the case nowadays. But surprisingly all 9 of these guys had a shot. Hogan, Savage, Taker, Sarge were all former champions. Sid, at the time, was considered the next big thing in the WWF. Meanwhile, Jake, Piper and Bulldog were all enjoying the biggest push of their careers. It might seem obvious in hindsight that Flair was going to win, but up until this event a heel had never won the Rumble and NWA guys in general (dusty, tully, arn) hadnt had much success in the wwf.
MOMENTS: Flair breaks Martels longevity record/ Hogan booed/ Bobby Heenan's hilarious commentary/ Sid becoms first man to be eliminated by someone who was already eliminted (hogan)/ Sid-Hogan showdown post match
Winner:Flair. This is definitely fair to flair. No one else could have won this Royal Rumble. Defintiely Flairs year.
1993: 6pts
3 contenders: Undertaker/ Yoko/ Macho (the rest were jobbers and tag team guys.) Flair and Perfect were in this royal rumble but i do not consider them contenders as wwf had already advertised a loser leaves wwf match between the two of them for the next night on raw, and everyone knew flair was leaving wwf at the time.
MOMENTS: Take becomes first man to be eliminated by a non entrant (Giant Gonzales)/ Bob backlund breaks flairs longevity record
Winner:Yokozuna. Only logical choice. Yoko was new and this was a good way to build him up as the next coming of Andre. Unfortunately Yokos win was incredibly obvious from the start when you look at the rest of the roster.
1994: 10 pts
6 contenders: Diesel/ Savage/ Crush/ Shawn/ Luger/ Bret (the rest were jobbers and tag teamers)
MOMENTS: Booger sick/ The Bret & Luger finish/ Diesel eliminates 7 men consecutively/ Mable breaks Quakes record when it takes 7 men to eliminate him
Winners: Bret & Luger. Should have just picked one of them. The co-winners thing was anti-climactic. Even little kids were booing.
1995: 8 pts
6 contenders: Shawn/ Bulldog/ Owen/ Bundy/ Luger/ Backlund (the rest were tag teamers and jobbers.) Backlund was coming of a wwf title run, albeit a very brief one, and at the time was the record holder for longest time spent in a rumble, so he was a legitimate candidate to win. Bundy had recently come back to the wwf after many years, similar to the situation with Big John Studd in 89 who ended up winning, so Bundy was also a potential winner.
MOMENTS: Shawn and Bulldog begin and end the rumble together/ Only one of Shawn's foot touches
Winner: Shawn. Should have been Undertaker. Undertaker wasn't even in this Rumble but he should have been. Shawns entering at #1 and going on to win it all should have been saved for the following years Royal Rumble. Think about it, Shawn enters at 1 and goes all the way to 30 and wins it all after lasting 60 minutes. Wouldn't that have been a perfect way to build him up as the man to beat in a 60 minute iron man match at Wrestlemania? He goes 60 minutes in the Rumble, then 60 minutes vs Bret at Mania. Perfect booking. But in 95 his feud with Diesel was a midcard match at best. Diesel was rushed to main event status. Undertaker on the other hand would have made a great Rumble winner and a great opponent for Bret at Mania. A battle between the two biggest babyfaces at the time.
1996: 9 pts
6 contenders: Yoko/ Vader/ Owen/ Shawn/ Diesel/ Bulldog (rest were jobbers and tag teamers)
MOMENTS:1st rumble to play the music of each participant as they entered/ Jake The Snake makes surprise return
Winner: Shawn. Right choice. But as I said earlier, what happened in 1995 with him entering at 1 and lasting all the way to 30, should have been done in 96 for the buildup to the iron man match. Seeing as how it was 2 minute intervals in 96, that would mean Shawn would have set the longevity record by lasting over 60 minutes which would have served as a perfect setup for the 60 minute iron man match at mania with Bret.
1997: 11 pts
6 contenders: Ahmed/ Austin/ Bret/ Mankind/ Vader/ Undertaker (the rest were tag team guys and jobbers)
MOMENTS: Austin is elminated but sneaks back in/ Austin in rumble for 50 plus minutes; 3rd highest time at that point behind flair and backlund/ Austin ties hulk hogan for number of eliminations with 10/ Ahmed,mascaras and faarooq eliminate themselves
Winner: Austin. Not only was he the right choice, but having him win in such a sneaky, dastardly fashion was brilliant. Really helped to set him up as the ultimate anti-hero. Not only is he getting the big superhero push by eliminating 10 men thus tying Hogans record, but he then wins in cheap heel fashion, thus perfectly combining the elements of both a heel and face rumble winner
1998: 7 pts
4 contenders: Rock/ Owen/ Shamrock/ Austin (the rest were tag teams and jobbers.) Frankly, I'm being generous here. Austin was the only true candidate to win this Rumble. Rock was still an IC level wrestler, Owen was being given a push as the black hart who vowed revenge on Dx but realistically there was no way Owen was going to headline Mania. As for Shamrock, he had already faced Shawn in a brief feud at the ppv prior to Rumble 98, and its unlikely theyd rehash that feud for Mania. So Austin was the only logical choice. So in reality this Rumble's score could be much lower than 7.
MOMENTS: All 3 faces of foley entr the Rumble/ Rock lasts over 50 minutes
Winner: Austin. Clearly the right choice. Without this rumble win the austin era cant officially get underway at mania. UInfortunately this was probably the most predictable rumble win ever. There were more tag team guys in this royal rumble than in any other or any since.
1999: 9 pts
5 contenders: Austin/McMahon/Kane/Shamrock/HHH (the rest were midcarders, tag teams, and jobbers)
MOMENTS: Austin and Mcmahon begin and end rumble. Both last over 55 minutes although they werent even in the ring half the time as this was during wwfs hardcore wrestling phase and the majority of their "in ring" time was spent backstage, outside the ring, etc./ Kane eliminates himself/ Mabel eliminated by 3 non entrants/ Chyna is the first female Rumble entrant
Winner:Mcmahon. Should have been Austin. Would have made Austin the first ever 3peat rumble winner. He went on to face Rock at Mania anyway, so you might as well have him win the rumble. Although I would have settled for anyone other than McMahon. Russo may have booked himself to win the wcw title but McMahon booked himself to win the rumble, so if youre gonna call russo an idiot, which he is, then you cant let McMahon off the hook.
2000: 7 pts
3 contenders: Jericho/ Rock/ Big Show (the rest were tag teams and jobbers)
MOMENTS: Rikishi & too cool dance/ Backlund makes suprise appearance/ Taka and Funaki repeatedly try to enter rumble and are repeatedly eliminated, including one epic Taka faceplant elimination
Winner: Rock. (Correct choice. Although there wasn't really any other choice)
2001: 11 pts
6 contenders: Kane/ Rock/ Big Show/ Undertaker/ Austin/ Rikishi (the rest were tag teams, jobbers and Drew Carey)
MOMENTS: Kane spends over 50 mins in ring/ Kane sets record for most eliminations with 11/ Drew carey eliminates himself/ Honkytonk man cameo
Winner: Austin. Right choice again. A tad predictable seeing as how he was making his wwf return, but it had to be done in order to set up austin-rock at mania.
2002: 10 pts
6 contenders: Undertaker/ Austin/ HHH/ Angle/ Big Show/ Kane
MOMENTS: Maven elims Undertaker/ Austin has career rumble elimination #36, which sets a record/ Goldust and Mr.perfect make wwf returns
Winner: HHH. Way too predictable. The lead up to this rumble was all about hhh returning to the ring after surgery. A less predictable yet no less effective way to get him over as a babyface, would have been to have Stephanie cost him the match by sending someone in on her behalf to elimiante him. This was the year where Hogan-Rock met at Mania. That match should have gone on last. Which means the title match could have been secondary, meaning you dont need a big name to win the belt or the rumble. So why not go with Edge. Mania was in Toronto that year and a match between him and fellow Canadian Jericho for the belt would have been nice. And theres a nice tie in with Edge, as he was at skydome for wm6 as a child. Also, Edge had won the King Of The Ring a few months earlier, which had been a pre cursor to winning the Royal Rumble for Bret and Austin in the past.
2003: 7 pts
7 contenders: Shawn/ Jericho/RVD/BookerT/ Kane/ Lesnar/ Undertaker (rest were midcard and tag teams)
Winner:Lesnar. Brock winning setup the match between him and Angle at Mania, which I wouldn't change. So I suppose Brock is the only choice. Although I would have prefered Angle win the Rumble and go on to face Brock, not the other way around. Just seems like Angle should have won a Rumble at some point.
2004: 14 pts
9 contenders: Benoit/ Orton/ Kane/ Angle/ Big Show/ Jericho/ Cena/ RVD/ Goldberg (rest were jobbers and tag teams)
MOMENTS: Foley makes surprise appearance, eliminates himself/ Lesnar, a non entrant, eliminates Goldberg/ Benoit breaks backlunds 1993 record for longevity in a rumble
Winner:Benoit. Nothing to change here. Benoit and Guerrero going on to win the titles at mania was the moment of the year.
2005: 12 pts
8 contenders: Edge/ Guerrero/ Benoit/ Jericho/ Kurt/ Cena/ Kane/ Batista
MOMENTS: Hbk eliminated by kurt who had already been eliminated/ Nunzios number stolen by angle/ Finish restarted after Batista/cena hit at same time. (thats what should have happened with bret/lex, guess they learned there lesson)
Winner:Batista. Right choice. This needed to happen to set up the breakup with HHH.
2006: 12 pts
7 contenders: HHH/ Rey/ Big Show/ Lashley/ Benoit/ Shawn/ Orton (rest were midcarders and tag teams)
MOMENTS: RVD returns/ Rey sets all time longevity record 1:02:12/ HHH spends over an hour in ring/ HHH and Rey begin event and are both there in final 3/ Shawn eliinated by non Shane, who was a non entrant.
Winner: Rey. Clearly original plans were for Orton to win and go on to face Angle. But after Eddies death, Rey was given the win as a way to pay tribute to Eddie. Good decision. Just a shame they didnt have Rey vs Angle one on one at mania. Adding orton and making it a triple threat ruined what could have been a mania classic. Especially since you consider Angle was the man Eddie beat for the belt at the previous Wrestlemania.
2007: 9 pts
5 contenders: Edge/Orton/Benoit/Shawn/Undertaker (rest were midcard and tag teams)
MOMENTS:Kane sets record for all time rumble appearances with 11/ Viscera breaks a record he previously set himself as Mabel, when it takes 8 men to eliminate him/ Undertaker becomes first #30 entry to win rumble
Winner: Undertaker. Long overdue. Should have happened as far back as 95, but better late than never.
2008: 10 pts
5 contenders: Taker/ Shawn/ Batista/ HHH/ Cena (Rest were midcarders and tag teams)
MOMENTS: Foley, Piper, and Snuka make surprise legend apperances/ Cena makes surprise return
Winner: Cena. This is the only thing Cena has ever done that I enjoyed. Like most, I was legitimately surprised when he showed up. Although I would have had him enter a little bit earlier in the match, maybe around 20. I believe he entered last. What are the odds of that? I mean, come on.
2009: 11 pts
6 contenders: Rey/ HHH/ Orton/ Jericho/ Undertaker/ Big Show (rest were midcard and tag team)
MOMENTS: Big Show eliminates Taker after himself had already been eliminated/ Duggan & RVD make surprise appearances/ Santino sets all time record for shortest time spent in a rumble at 0:00:01
Winner:Orton. Fine choice. He'd been a main eventer for several years at this point, so you knew he was gonna win one of these things eventually.
2010: 9 pts
6 contenders: HHH/ Shawn/ Cena/ Jericho/ Edge/ Batista
MOMENTS: Beth second woman to particpate/ Shawn sets a record 39th career elmination beating the record set by Austin/ Edge makes surprise return
Winner: Edge. Returning from injury always seems to equal rumble win. a bit too predictable for my taste. I would have given it to Shawn. It was his last year and he had made his mark in the wwf by winning two rumbles in the 90s, so why not let him go out with one more. Also, I would have had Shawn announce on raw that even though he won the rumble, he doesnt want a title shot at wrestlemania. Instead he wants to use his rumble win for something else: a match with the Undertaker. I like this idea just because it changes up the usual formula. Also, in this scenario, Taker would not have been champion at the time.
2011: 14 pts
8 contenders: Cena/ Sheamus/ Rey/ Barrett/ Big Show/ Alberto/Orton/Kane
MOMENTS: First ever 40 man rumble/ Punk eliminates 7 men consecutively/ Miz, a non entrant, eliminates Cena/ Santino as a finalist (I admit, for a second i thought "oh your god. Santinos gonna win!" lol)/ Booker and Diesel make surprise appearances
Winner:Alberto Del Rio. Right choice. Some may say it was a bit too soon for such a newcomer, but his character is the alleged son of royalty and so winning the royal rumble fits well. It's better than the predictable 'guy comes back from injury to win' angle that they'd been doing with cena, edge and others. If not Del Rio, I think Kane would have been a good choice. Hes been in so may rumbles and had so many rumble moments, would have been cool to see him finally win won. At the time he was coming of a world title reign so the timing seemed right. But Del Rio works.
------
Overall I found that Royal Rumble 1989 is where you get the most bang for your buck. While 1993 was by far the worst.
same tension revolving around HBK clawing his was from start to finish along the way being mere millimeters from being eliminated numerous times but he managed to Honky Tonk his way through it winning the right to go onto Mania XI and face Diesel, which set in stone the duo of Nash and HBK as friends onscreen and offscreen, HBK turning face eventually leading to a championship run, the Click and DX. that Rumble showcased some great talent both old and new and the ending with the 2 guys that started it being the 2 that ended it and both looking great in the process was good. Though Bulldog did get the short end of the stick