Royal Rumble: 30 or 40?

[scottyshowman82]

I gotta admit and I hate being a buzz kill but in my opinion WWE has not done enough to get me hyped for this year's match. Good emphasis has been put on the individual matches but the Rumble match itself has not been promoted as well as it can be. It annoys me how after TLC ended they were actually almost afraid to even talk about the Rumble match at all. Load me with information on the Rumble match please! Give me interviews with participants. Make me believe that they really want to win the thing!

Last year just seemed so much more intriguing 40 men, it was new so many unanswered questions. Who would the extra ten guys be? How would the pacing of the match go? Could someone last from numbers 1-5 to the end?
Will the Rumble always be 40 from now on?

Well we got the answer to that last question, but even that information took weeks to get out on WWE TV. Last year there was so much talk and speculation on the first 40 man Royal Rumble.

Did you enjoy the first ever 40 man Royal Rumble? Do you prefer the 40 or the traditional 30?

All in the all though I do think the match does sell itself on some level, just wish there was more effort put into the big match and I'm sure tomorrow night will be a fun night.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Some things I think they should stick to tradition on. In this case I believe they should keep it a 30 man rumble. However, the occasional 40 man rumble like once a decade isn't a bad idea. Just something to hype it up a little more for that year. But you're right, the match almost sells itself. It's always fun to watch the Rumble, at the very least just to see the order, the competitors who are in it and the winner.

However, they have not hyped it up much. Only recently did they start running the statistics ad. Only 2 or 3 weeks ago did the wrestlers really start cutting promos talking about how they were going to win it. Honestly, the lack of hype really has made it even more difficult to figure out who the likely winner will be. Last year I picked ADR right away because he was in the perfect position for it AND he was one of the earliest, if not the first, to start talking about it was his "destiny" to win the Rumble. Very few wrestlers talking about it this year.

But it should still be an entertaining match nonetheless. I'm still very interested to see how it plays out. Would it be ironic this year that since there's been such little talk about it, that the wrestler who's talked the least, Jericho, won it?

 

[hatehabsforever]

I would definitely prefer having 30 guys in he traditional manner, rather than the 40 as per last year. In my opinion, 40 was too many and it just made things too much of a jumble. Realistically, in any given year, there are only 5 or 6 guys with a realistic shot at winning. The other 25 or so guys are filler, which is not a bad thing, but there's no real need for an additional 10 filler guys. Why add 10 more Yoshi Tatsu's or Curt Hawkins's when they really add nothing of tangible value to the match? I would rather 30 guys, having more time to compete, rather than having 10 more guys for no reason.

 

[The Average Guy]

The only reason the Rumble was 40 guys last year was so they could put the Corre and New Nexus into the match. That was there only reason for it . 30 is fine unless you like random jobbers like JTG running in and getting 15 seconds of offense before he gets thrown over. 40 this year wouldnt work or there would be to much pointless talent.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

It doesn't matter anymore really, 20, 30, 40....the Royal Rumble doesn't matter like it used to. It only gets undermined by that stupid Elimination Chamber pay per view anyway. With the way things are booked today the Royal Rumble might as well not even be for a title shot anymore I think. Especially if they go and do something laughable like when Hacksaw Jim Duggan drew Number 29 in the 2009 Rumble, hell maybe he'll do it again this year, and maybe just maybe there's a chance he could pull the ultimate upset and on the 25th anniversary of the event tomorrow night win the WHOLE thing like he did back in 1988...*YAWN*.

Ever since they introduced the two World Title system the whole intrigue of the event has lost its luster to me, it was interesting when Benoit made the jump to RAW and decided to go for the WHC instead of the WWE title when he won in 2004 but otherwise with the Elimination Chamber event sandwiched in between the Rumble and Mania I find this whole idea very uninteresting, the Elimination Chamber takes away any semblance of storyline magic from the Royal Rumble winner.

At this point, I say fuck the Royal Rumble.

 

[scottyshowman82]

It doesn't matter anymore really, 20, 30, 40....the Royal Rumble doesn't matter like it used to. It only gets undermined by that stupid Elimination Chamber pay per view anyway. With the way things are booked today the Royal Rumble might as well not even be for a title shot anymore I think. Especially if they go and do something laughable like when Hacksaw Jim Duggan drew Number 29 in the 2009 Rumble, hell maybe he'll do it again this year, and maybe just maybe there's a chance he could pull the ultimate upset and on the 25th anniversary of the event tomorrow night win the WHOLE thing like he did back in 1988...*YAWN*.

Ever since they introduced the two World Title system the whole intrigue of the event has lost its luster to me, it was interesting when Benoit made the jump to RAW and decided to go for the WHC instead of the WWE title when he won in 2004 but otherwise with the Elimination Chamber event sandwiched in between the Rumble and Mania I find this whole idea very uninteresting, the Elimination Chamber takes away any semblance of storyline magic from the Royal Rumble winner.

At this point, I say fuck the Royal Rumble.

It's sad to hear when wrestling fans lose faith in the product. But I understand your frustrations. Hopefully for everyone's sake WWE will puts on an interesting show tomorrow night.

 

[Raiden46]

I don't care if you put WWE's entire line of employees in the ring (1000 or so). Everyone and their mother knows that only 4 people have a chance to win any given year.

 

[tomthebodz]

I liked the 40 man Rumble. It was booked really well, it felt like there were 2 halves to it. Early on The Nexus controlled the match, and then after Cena entered it had a completely different feel to it.

I would like them to do it again, but as others have said only from time to time.

 

[Pedigree1]

the whole concept of the royal rumble is for the winner to be guaranteed a shot at his chosen champ at WM correct??? With the elimination chamber match in between the RR and WM the royal rumble has lost its luster!! I think this years Royal Rumble is the most predicatable there has been in a long time!! Its in St louis we already know who resides from there!! There is only like 4 or five WWE superstars that have a chance of winning the whole thing!! I think 30 people is plenty more than that its just a complete mess. The WWE IMO needs to do away with the two world title systems and the EC!! That would at least make the Royal rumble match mean something..

 

[thebarber]

40 is fine, good chance to showcase some of the up and coming guys in Florida or feeder company. Also able to bring back Legends who can still go in the ring. But I hate the idea of guys already beinmg on the card then being in the Rumble match itself. Overkill alright. I dont mind 40 at al, as long as guys like Slaughter, Piper and Snuka are not invovled. Imagine the nostalgic pop at a Rumble if a RoadDogg or Steamboat or Demolition Smash hit the ring, UNANNOUNCED. No spoilers, just good old fashioned surprise. Fills out the 40, no chance of winning. Ive read reports of Duggan being in it this year. Fucken hell, he is not the sort of guy Id be bringing back......but Im no booker

 

[bioshock]

I agree with whats said above. The 40 man Rumble makes it better, the match is longer, more feuds and so forth can be played out, gives a better chance for stars to be born ect.. Rumble can be a great match for people to take notice, like for instance in 1991 I think, Martel, in 1993 I think it was Backlund going 50+ minutes which lead to him becoming champion later that year. Or how Diesel became a star in the 94 Rumble. So if 40 gives some younger unknown guys from the FCW or NXT a chance in the match then so be it.

We all know only 4 or 5 guys will win or content to win, I think having wrestlers who are in singles matches in adds to it, because thats 3 or 4 extra wrestlers with a good chance to win, where as in the past you had Rumble events that had Brock, HBk, Triple H and others in singles matches, imagine how much better those Rumble events would of been with those guys in it.

Also agree on the legends bit. They need like some kind of "legends rule" lol (JOKING) where these legends who get in the Rumble cant return in the Rumble again. ONE TIME DEAL. I don't want to see Piper, Snuka, Steamboat, Duggan, and most of all Slaughter in the damn Rumble match. Its cool when Diesel returns, it would be lame if Diesel returns this year too. Bring in a legend we don't normally get to see, Ultimate Warrior return that would be epic, or maybe Virgil, Mankind in his old Corporation attire, not the same old stupid Cactus Jack sweat pants. Maybe bring back as said about Smash from Demolition, then have like Warlord come in next or have Ax come in afterwords. I just hate to see the same old legends like Slaughter. No one likes Slaughter to start with.

 

[Paralyzer Z]

To me it really doesn't matter the # of guys in it but rather that the match is entertaining.

That being said I lean towards 40-men slightly more that 30-men rumble matches. I just enjoy the match better when it's longer and gives more feuds time to showcase themselves in the match. Sure the useless guys like Slater, JTG, and other jobbers still get thrown over quick, but most of the feuds that matter are drawn out in the match. You look at the Nexus dominance last year or the Punk/Bryan showoff, you wouldn't have the time to develop these things in a 30-man match. Somethings in the rumble match will always feel rushed like jobbers appearances, and to a lesser extent surprise entries, but having more time gives you more to do with the main feuds going in. The tradition factor here doesn't mean much to me either.

Like I said before 40 or 30 I will still watch it, but I just like to enjoy the match for a longer period of time.

 

[Dagger Dias]

The 40 man version of the match can work if everyone is booked properly. It is a good opportunity for the WWE that they miss out on each year. If they had stuck with the 40 man version of the match then more guys have the chance to make it onto the card. Usually the only other way for everyone to be present is during Lumberjack matches or segments where everyone comes out during a promo. The Royal Rumble is the perfect place for someone who might normally not get to make an appearance to go put there and showcase what they can do.

I prefer having a larger number, within reason. They should try the 40 man Rumble again and it would be better because then the entire roster can make it onto the card whether that be in the world title matches, the filler matches, or the Rumble itself. They could also have some surprise entrants by legends wanting to do a nostalgic spot for the night, or even call up some guys from developmental to see if the fans react to them. This could work and I would not be against seeing it again for that reason. Everyone deserves that chance to show what they are capable of.

 

[TLK]

In the mid-90s they had a hard time filling all 30 slots. Now that they have an expansive roster with numerous talents in FCW waiting to be called up, I think it's justifiable to have a 40-man Rumble. Everybody knows that only a handful of superstars have a realistic shot of winning anyway, so you may as well showcase some of the younger talents that don't normally get much airtime. As Dagger Dias pointed out, it's a great way of seeing how the fans react to certain competitors, and to build subplots within the Rumble that could lead to matches at Wrestlemania. The Royal Rumble is always a great way to plant the seeds for 'Mania feuds.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

I think 30 participants is fine, especially after seeing that comedy jobber debacle from last year. I'm not necessarily opposed to going to a permanent 40 person match so long as they utilize the talent properly. I mean, if they expand it to 40 just so they can bring back Doink the Clown and Big Dick Johnson, then it's totally pointless. IF however, they expand it to include young, up and comers and actual talent on the roster (with of course, a few old timers/legends), then I say, hell yeah go to 40 participants.

I just don't think they'd do it right and we'd end up with the comedy freakshow like we had last year. Ricardo Rodriguez in his tighty whities? Give me a break!

 

[MCMG]

40. Royal Rumble matches are meant to be long. Who cares how long it goes on for as long as it is entertaining. It also allows more people to get into the match in terms of both jobbers and legends. It is definitely better having 10 more guys in the roster.

 

[Owen 3:16 says I just stole your Slammy!!]

I like it when the Rumble has 40. More wrestlers are better. I also like when some of the legends make un-announced apperances.