Format Change For The Royal Rumble

[Jack-Hammer]

As we all know, the Royal Rumble ppv saw, for the first time ever, the WWE Champion defending his title in the Royal Rumble match itself. This added a nice twist to the stale format of the winner going onto WrestleMania to face the champion. I'm thinking the format for the Rumble should be changed going forward, maybe alternating the format every other year or so to something a bit different.

For instance, one idea I had was to have two separate Royal Rumble matches at the ppv each year, each match consisting of 15 to 20 stars. Alter the format of the matches by having a new entrant come out every 2.5 minutes/ The winners of those two Rumble matches then face off in a series of matches with various stipulations; the first two couple of bouts could be traditional matches, the third could be a steel cage, the fourth a LMS or FCA match, etc.and the final match happens at Fastlane and it could be something along the lines of an Iron Man match. The winner of this series goes to WrestleMania to challenge for the WWE Championship. I feel this would give Fastlane something of a more "must see" feel, though the triple threat main event is helping with that this time around.

The year after that, maybe they could have the champ defend in the Rumble once again, they could return to the traditional format the year after that and just sort of rotate things a bit. I dunno, just thought it'd be something entertaining.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

I wouldn't be against the format of the Royal Rumble changing a bit. It definitely has become stale over the last few years, especially with the fans being unhappy with the winner several times recently.

I'd be interested to see your idea of the winners of 2 smaller Royal Rumble's colliding in a best of 5 series to determine the number 1 contender for the title at WrestleMania. It would definitely freshen up a tired concept. Like you say, starting the "best of" series with regular matches, and moving into the stipulation/gimmick matches as we move closer to the February PPV.

 

[ShinChan]

I really liked this year's concept of Royal Rumble of winner becoming the WWE World Heavyweight Title. And I agree that concept of Royal Rumble is getting stale due to overuse.

Interestingly, I love your suggested new concept of Royal Rumble. It will surely freshen up things and more importantly, Winner of Royal Rumble gets to showcase his credibility in his future bouts with the winner of another Royal Rumble and vice-versa. This would ensure a thing in our minds that the win wasnot a fluke victory.

​

 

[FromGlasgow]

I always enjoy the Royal Rumble and is my second favourite wrestling event of the year behind Wrestlemania so I don't believe it gotten stale, Only thing I would change is the winner going on to Wrestlemania to face the champion as I think it limits who is going to win and makes it quite predictable instead of having an anyone can win it feel. Due to the stipulation realistically theres only a handfull of guys who could win it each year instead of any of the 30 participants.

 

[Azane]

I don't like the format, because I feel like the more on the line, the more predictable it is.

With the Facing champion at Wrestlemania, I could narrow the Royal Rumble down to 5-6 people, that's plenty of variety, names like Ambrose, Kevin Owens, Brock Lesnar, Undertaker or even AJ styles, with the Championship on the line, Its Triple H or Roman Reigns, the only 2 that could win it.

Now, that's not to say they can't make it less predictable by not having brain dead creative, but I feel like Being Champion at Wrestlemania is a higher duty than being challenger, as the challenger has time to be built up, and can fail to win it all, making it less of an investment then a hot potato Reigns style title run.

I like the concept of the best of 5 between 2 more, but I always have this reservation about x out of y falls programs, because we all know it's going to the final fall, like all the matches are pointless technicalities until fast lane. People bring up the 3 stages of hell match, but the final fall was all that mattered. It's pretty much a Chekhov's gun.

I'm still not tired of the Original Format of the Rumble, I still peg it as my top PPV of the year, I prefer it over Wrestlemania most years (last few being exceptions). I will say, I'm tired of how the booking has handled it the past few years however, which has nothing to do with the format, and everything to do with them jumping the gun and building up the winner as early as Survivor's Series, which is making the predictarumble stale.

If anything, I'd remove the Fast Lane PPV entirely, so we don't have all these issues involving the pointless pay per view.

 

[Prince Vee]

I don't necessarily fancy the idea of two Royal Rumbles. It'll be a tad underwhelming to have one of the greatest event of the year, twice. On the other hand I do love the idea of the Series of matches to determine the #1 contender for the world title. That can be really interesting.

I really do love this idea of having two Traditional bouts, a steelcage match and then a stipulation match, followed by the Iron man Match headlining fast lane. It might can keep the fans on the edge of their seat throughout the road to Wrestlemania. Nice idea!

 

[Piss Bucket]

As we all know, the Royal Rumble ppv saw, for the first time ever, the WWE Champion defending his title in the Royal Rumble match itself. This added a nice twist to the stale format of the winner going onto WrestleMania to face the champion. I'm thinking the format for the Rumble should be changed going forward, maybe alternating the format every other year or so to something a bit different.

For instance, one idea I had was to have two separate Royal Rumble matches at the ppv each year, each match consisting of 15 to 20 stars. Alter the format of the matches by having a new entrant come out every 2.5 minutes/ The winners of those two Rumble matches then face off in a series of matches with various stipulations; the first two couple of bouts could be traditional matches, the third could be a steel cage, the fourth a LMS or FCA match, etc.and the final match happens at Fastlane and it could be something along the lines of an Iron Man match. The winner of this series goes to WrestleMania to challenge for the WWE Championship. I feel this would give Fastlane something of a more "must see" feel, though the triple threat main event is helping with that this time around.

The year after that, maybe they could have the champ defend in the Rumble once again, they could return to the traditional format the year after that and just sort of rotate things a bit. I dunno, just thought it'd be something entertaining.

Thing is though, technically it WASN'T the first time, remember the 1992 Rumble? Which Ric Flair won as I recall? They put the WWF Title on the line for that one.

It's on the Network.

 

[midgensa]

Thing is though, technically it WASN'T the first time, remember the 1992 Rumble? Which Ric Flair won as I recall? They put the WWF Title on the line for that one.

It's on the Network.

It was the first time a Champion DEFENDED his title ... just as JH said. Are you adding anything to the conversation here? Or just trying to look like you're smarter than everyone? Because it seems that you did neither.

As for the original post ...

I still like the rumble, but it has had some weak winners as of late (Sheamus, Del Rio, Reigns) and, more importantly, it has winners that are not going on to be champions. It has had some win, and then immediately put their WM spot on the line (Cena) and has had a crowd hate the winner for like six years in a row.

I don't get it. It is like the WWE thinks the entire point of the Rumble is to troll its fans. Jericho should have won to face CM Punk, why the hell not? Bryan should have won instead of Batista and/or Reigns ... certainly instead of Batista. HHH winning to try, yet again, to desperately get Roman Reigns over? Really? That is the best we got?

Just seems that it leaves too much to be desired every year and that the E is basically giving us a giant middle finger. I think the last time I was surprised was the winner was when Cena was No. 30, and then he immediately put it on the line at the next PPV and ruined it. I loved the Mysterio win. It worked. Hell, even when I knew Benoit and Edge were going to win, those worked.

It isn't just that it is stale ... it is that it is clearly the time of year when WWE wants to say, "F U. This is how we want to do it and we are doing it our way!"

 

[Mustang Sally]

I always favored the idea of a modified, old-style Survivor Series match for the Rumble, in which three captains are appointed 1-2 months ahead of the Rumble and spend that time gathering teams of 10 people each.

At the January event, the teams work in concert, having developed strategies to eliminate people, with the 3 captains directing efforts while trying to stay in contention themselves.

By the way, I see no reason a few divas couldn't be sprinkled amongst the 3 teams. They could pull off a few surprises without damaging fragile male egos.

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

It's a great concept so stay with it. No reason to change anything.

 

[ianrapleyuk]

If you want unpredictability in the royal rumble match then instead of the winner faces the wwe champion at wrestlemania have the winner choose the title he wants to go for at wrestlemania. that way instead of it being 2-3 people can win it would change it to "anyone could win"

 

[L@RISANO]

If you want unpredictability in the royal rumble match then instead of the winner faces the wwe champion at wrestlemania have the winner choose the title he wants to go for at wrestlemania. that way instead of it being 2-3 people can win it would change it to "anyone could win"

Why would any sane person choose a lower tier title in such a case? That would make no sense whatsoever.

 

[Navi]

Thing is though, technically it WASN'T the first time, remember the 1992 Rumble? Which Ric Flair won as I recall? They put the WWF Title on the line for that one.

It's on the Network.

Yes but as mentioned it was the first time the champion was in the match defending his title. When Flair won the title at the Rumble it was vacant at the time.

As for the OP's suggestion, it's a good one but I would say they have to be able to just book one Rumble correctly first. They've screwed it up the last 3 years in a row.

What I would like to see is a Rumble that isn't so predictable. One that we can all sit there and say "Holy shit didn't see that coming!" This year HHH won, as most said he would, and we now know that at the upcoming Fastlane, Reigns/Ambrose/Lesnar will feud for a chance to face him at Mania.

I think the cat is out of the bag as to who will win, so I don't even know why we are bothering to have this PPV to begin with. Just put Reigns in the Mania main event and be done with it.

So next year WWE let's have a completely unpredictable Royal Rumble and then we can go with changes after that. In other words get your thumbs out of your arses's and put your creative caps on and give the fans a reason to watch Fastlane and get a proper build to Mania.

Sorry went on a bit of rant there.

 

[Reflection]

I am of the opinion that there should be only one Royal Rumble match... THE Royal Rumble match. Once in a year, 30 men, 1 dream. That's what it is, and it never gets old. And look at the variety of superstars that enter the match- favourites, serious contenders, jokes, legends, debutants, and so on... If you have two Rumble matches, you have a good chance of seeing a situation similar to what we have seen in multiple MITB matches, Survivor Series matches and Elimination Chamber matches- one match will have all the heavyweights and main eventers, and the other match will have mostly mid carders. And that will suck out a good part of the excitement, in my opinion.

Also, I liked that they changed the prize for the Royal Rumble victory this year, and I feel that they should keep adding a different stipulation from time to time. However, in general, I feel that the setting of the winner going on to main event Wrestlemania is perfect. The road and season starts at the Royal Rumble, and it ends at Wrestlemania. I hate it when they stare or point at the logo before a match or fight starts, but apart from that, it's all good.

 

[LDubz]

I'd like them to change up the stipulation on it from time to time, they can easily make it so Wrestlemania becomes a Triple Threat one year, or Fatal Fourway. Maybe one time we could get the winner having to use his title shot at Fastlane.

I do think though that the Fastlane PPV is more trouble than its worth though, given the choice I'd rather there were no PPV in between Rumble and Wrestlemania but can't see them ever doing that.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The only change to make to the Rumble would be to remove the Mania stipulation - if it's only gonna go "on the line" at Fast Lane anyway, it's redundant.

One possible idea links into my idea for Night of Champions - move it to December and have the IC Champion guaranteed to face the World champion, title for title... The IC title is thus always up for grabs in the Rumble...

The rub being that the IC champ has to defend it from January to December to get their title shot... whoever has the belt on that night in December gets the shot...

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

I agree to an extent that the Royal Rumble needs some fresh ideas to make it "must see", but I don't really like your suggestion and neither would a board of directors. Think about the "Royal Rumble" concept - 30 man inside the ring, the last one standing gets to go to WrestleMania. It's simple, it's marketable and it's easy to promote to either long time fans or new ones.

What changed from years prior was the fact that the winner got to choose between the WWE Title or the World Title, therefore the match was more unpredictable because we would have at least two favorites going in, and more so, it was a special event that saw Raw and SmackDown main event stars collide. That made the Royal Rumble a lot special when I was growing up.

Now, it's the returns, the debuts, the cameos and the short stories told inside of it. It has no "big fight feel". So, I get that a change is necessary no doubt. I think that the most effective way and simple one is to have the last four guys standing in the Royal Rumble, only being eliminated by pinfall or submission. The last four survivors, let's call it that way, would have a standard match. That's someting I could see happen and it would be the way to go.

There's also a swerve that WWE could turn in, by locking the remain four inside the squared circle in a Steel Cage match. 26 eliminated, and then 4 locked. It would be more simple and effective than Two Rumble Matches, Two Winners, Five Matches spreaded out until Fastlane where one guy could already go there as the winner with a fantastic 4 wins streak.

Not trying to be a douche, but your idea would fit really well with something like New Japan, and god knows they need something fresh. But in WWE's world, there's no way.

 

[Jeff Deliverer of Mail]

Nothing major happens at Royal Rumble matches anymore. Remember when Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan eliminated everyone and they were the only two left in the ring? Talk about an electric moment....brother.

I don't know what WWE could do now-a-days as everyone fights each other 15 times in between shows so that kind of special moment is out.

Here's what I'd do anyway:

Have a couple more legends to add a little nostalgic moments. Big Poppa Pump, Kevin Nash and Ken Shamrock, maybe even have JBL enter and wail somebody with a clothesline from hell.

Have a major face/heel turn. Maybe Dolph Ziggler comes out to different music and black hair. He immediately attacks Ambrose or a crowd favorite and eliminates him, continues post elimination attack in vicious manner, have commentary sell the new heel attitude of Ziggler. Have Ziggler do a post match promo announcing he's done with the fans...while The Rumble is still going...he does the interview on the ramp.

Have Undertaker in the Rumble. Establish Taker's Wrestlemania opponent when he clears the ring....

Have Brock Lesnar's Wrestlemania opponent established as well ( Not Undertaker) Have Lesnar's elimination turn into an epic (never seen before meltdown of a wrestler) take place. Brock Lesnar loses his mind and jumps back in the ring, he F5's six to ten wrestlers, he knocks out another ten officials who try and calm him down, he then destroys the ring ropes, leaving no ropes in the ring. - The Rumble has to be stopped to fix the ring -

Bubba Ray Dudley is in the ring, Devon is coming down after his music plays, Bubba tells him to get the tables...Devon immediately throws in a few tables. Dudley Boys put three mid card guys through tables with top rope powerbomb and 3D...Bubba Ray tosses out Devon after the carnage is over.

Somebody gets superplexed off of the top rope, to the outside for an insane double elimination.

Xavier Woods goes on commentary early after getting eliminated third....he stays at the table for the remainder of the match.

Have somebody horrible win The Royal Rumble, somebody completely unexpected that will get the fans angry and roaring bullcrap. Maybe it comes down to John Cena, Roman Reigns and The Miz...and The Miz does the old double yank on the teetering legs for the double elimination.

Nobody would expect it, then The Miz celebrates for a solid 5 minutes, the commentary team are signing off saying this has been a shocking Royal Rumble, then the Money in the Bank winner's music hits...whoever it is at the time, Kevin Owens...he comes down and CASHES in his MOTB briefcase, powerbombs The Miz over the top rope and gets a gigantic pop from the crowds. Kevin Owens is going to Wrestlemania !

 

[THTRobtaylor]

I can see the logic, but the truth is still removing the Mania part is the best option... get the Rumble back to being it's own thing - if you win it, it's as big as their "fake" Andre Battle Royal... or bigger in truth... that whole deal started because they are basically scared to not have The Rumble as the start of "The Road To Wrestlemania TM"

The Shane stuff might lead to this (if he won), "It's stale, and it was a bad idea to begin with... from here on out, no more Rumble/Mania... the TRUE #1 contender will go to Wrestlemania... the guy who wins the Rumble... he's in the hunt..."

That alone would reboot it and get people interested....