WWE Officials Already Discussing 2014 Royal Rumble Winner?

[Jack-Hammer]

According to a report at wrestlinginc.com, cited originally from F4WOnline.com, WWE officials are already discussing the winner for next year's Royal Rumble. I know several people who have been hoping for WWE to merge the WWE & World Heavyweight Championships at WM XXX but, if this report turns out to be at all accurate, it looks as though that won't happen.

Allegedly, the favorite to win the Rumble match in 2014 is CM Punk. The report states that one of Punk's unfulfilled dreams is to close out a WrestleMania main event. This is something that was brought up during Punk's excellent promo segment with Paul Heyman this past Monday on Raw, hinting that the seeds MAY have been planted for Punk to do exactly that. As a result of winning the Royal Rumble, the idea would be for CM Punk to challenge for the WWE Championship.

Whether or not this comes to pass, Punk winning the Rumble and going onto challenge for the top strap isn't exactly a guarantee that he'll be closing out WrestleMania XXX. As of right now, one of the rumored headlining matches for WrestleMania XXX is The Undertaker vs. John Cena. Unless Cena truly does take a bit of a step back as far as being WWE's top overall star, then the odds are very strong that his match will close WrestleMania XXX whether it's against The Undertaker or not.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

Interesting, this has always been the one thing that I think genuinely separates CM Punk from being seen as a top guy in the WWE. Closing out WrestleMania is a big deal, and it does show that the company has faith in you to "bring it home" at their biggest event. It may not always be the best match, obviously. But I think that's the signal that you made it in the WWE.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

CM Punk would be a great choice to win the Rumble as it's really the last thing in WWE that he hasn't done (that and closed out Wrestlemania). A LOT can and probably will change though.

I strongly believe that they'll do Undertaker vs. John Cena in streak match. If that's the case, then it won't be for the belt, meaning Punk, if he wins the Rumble, could still fight for the WWE title.

However, despite what some marks may try to claim, Undertaker vs. Cena would close out that card, no matter what other matches are on the card.

I wouldn't rule out a title unification, even if Punk wins the Rumble. What if he wins the Royal Rumble, then wins the World title at the Elimination Chamber? Then he could say that he still gets his shot at the WWE title at WM. However, I still think Cena vs. Undertaker, in WWE's eyes, is bigger than a title unification.

 

[streicher187]

If Cena was going to win that would close the show to stop riots.. If Taker is going to win it would be earlier...

They could still unify the titles if the Rumble winner hold the money in the bank - they could win one championship then later on in the night cash in the money in the bank and win the other one.

Isn't Punk a free agent soon so maybe that's why they want him to win.

 

[JustAnotherJames]

CM Punk deserves to have a Rumble win under his list of achievements and he certainly deserves the Main Event spot at Wrestle Mania. This year Undertaker's match was immense and the best match of that PPV but I'm going to go as far as to say I thought that because of CM Punks involvement. Don't get me wrong, WM 28 Triple H vs Undertaker was the greater match of that PPV as well however, I'd have no interest and I don't know about all of you but Undertaker - Cena I think I'll watch with very little interest.

I'd rather see tradition of the Rumble winner main eventing Mania being fulfilled as it should be whether its good for business or not, no matter who it was that won. See at least this year they done that but WM28 wasn't the case as we all know.

 

[CmPunker]

come on man, i heard a rumor that cm punk will retire in 2015. if he doesnt main event this year because of fucking john cna, he better main event in 2015 because that will be his last wrestlemania. also, when cmp unk fought undertaker, it didnt close, but if undertaker fights cena, then it will close? what the fuck is this shit..

cm punk was treated like shit on the road to wrestlemania. first, he lost to the rock 2 ppvs in a row, then he lost to john cena on raw, then he lost to kane on raw. okay.. how do 4 losses make him credible??? IF YOU ARE GOING TO FIGHT THE UNDERTAKER AT WRESTLEMANIA, U HAVE TO BE CREDIBLE. HOW IS LOSING 2 PPVS IN A ROW, no matter WHAT PERSON, is still not credible. it doesnt matter if it is the rock.. people will think, "if this guy cant beat the rock, how can he beat undertaker?"

its fucking ridiculous. but i guess its okay to book punk like that because hes punk, right? but if he was cena, then he will be super protected! fucking wwe logic is so stupid.

 

[MCMG]

I think the obvious choices are indeed Punk or Taker. Other names could be someone like Lesnar or Daniel Bryan but I believe it will be the Undertaker.

Punk simply because he was WWE champion for so long and he is now clearly a top guy in the WWE. The idea of Punk v Cena or Bryan at WM30 is very interesting and either would be terrific matches.

Presuming this is his last year: Taker winning the Rumble would be fantastic, especially if done as a surprise. He is a legend and him perhaps winning his last match at WM30 for the WWE Championship would be a lovely send off. Have him retire on the Raw after Mania which would definitely top this years Raw.

The idea of unifying the World Titles is something I am against but it could work well for WM30. I like the idea of a MITB winner going on to win the Royal Rumble. The only problem with this I'm not sure who would be the right candidate. Daniel Bryan, Sheamus and Orton are the only names that could possibly get the honor but very unlikely.

And to "CmPunker": John Cena is a bigger superstar than CM Punk will ever be. Punk has feuded with The Rock, Undertaker and Brock Lesnar - he is clearly well respected and appreciated. Punk is incredible, he may well be the "Best In the World", but he is not Cena.

 

[CmPunker]

I think the obvious choices are indeed Punk or Taker. Other names could be someone like Lesnar or Daniel Bryan but I believe it will be the Undertaker.

Punk simply because he was WWE champion for so long and he is now clearly a top guy in the WWE. The idea of Punk v Cena or Bryan at WM30 is very interesting and either would be terrific matches.

Presuming this is his last year: Taker winning the Rumble would be fantastic, especially if done as a surprise. He is a legend and him perhaps winning his last match at WM30 for the WWE Championship would be a lovely send off. Have him retire on the Raw after Mania which would definitely top this years Raw.

The idea of unifying the World Titles is something I am against but it could work well for WM30. I like the idea of a MITB winner going on to win the Royal Rumble. The only problem with this I'm not sure who would be the right candidate. Daniel Bryan, Sheamus and Orton are the only names that could possibly get the honor but very unlikely.

And to "CmPunker": John Cena is a bigger superstar than CM Punk will ever be. Punk has feuded with The Rock, Undertaker and Brock Lesnar - he is clearly well respected and appreciated. Punk is incredible, he may well be the "Best In the World", but he is not Cena.

but how does that excuse the fact that cm punk was booked like fairly weak on the road to wrestlemania.. 2 ppv losses in a row and 2 raw losses does not help AT ALL. no matter what person, no matter how hard he tried.. because casuals remember MORE of the result of the match instead of how the opponent faired..

 

[MCMG]

come on man, i heard a rumor that cm punk will retire in 2015. if he doesnt main event this year because of fucking john cna, he better main event in 2015 because that will be his last wrestlemania. also, when cmp unk fought undertaker, it didnt close, but if undertaker fights cena, then it will close? what the fuck is this shit..

but how does that excuse the fact that cm punk was booked like fairly weak on the road to wrestlemania.. 2 ppv losses in a row and 2 raw losses does not help AT ALL. no matter what person, no matter how hard he tried.. because casuals remember MORE of the result of the match instead of how the opponent faired..

"Because of fucking John cna" yes, because John Cena is the bigger star. There is just no way that Punk/Taker would ever go after Cena/Rock for the belt and if you think it should have then you are wrong and quite possibly an idiot. Cena/Taker, if it happens, will close WM30 because it will have the Number One guy and a legend of the business and WM itself. Moreover, there is chance, granting Taker wins the Rumble, it will be for the WWE Championship. To stay relevant to the thread: I strongly believe that Taker will win the Rumble to set him up against Cena at WM30 for the WWE championship.

Punk main evented RR and EC when he faced The Rock and yes he lost but losing to "The great one" is hardly a bad thing. The casual fan is thinking that he lost to a very worthy opponent. The casual fan was reminded constantly that he was WWE Champion for 400+ days. The casual fan remembers Punk standing over Taker with an the urn. Punk had to drop the belt to the Rock to add the John Cena feud (once more Cena/Rock > Punk). In my opinion Punk was built very well after EC leading up to Mania.

 

[rerun406]

It would be a nice send off for Punk to finally close the show @ Wrestlemania, and on that note do any think the WWE are holding off on letting Punk close out a Mania because it's the one of his dream goals, and fulfilling that .. he might decide to leave the WWE

as for title unifying, given the right talent, it would work best at a Wrestlemania particularly if it was Daniel Bryan vs Punk that would just be awesome, they've put on spectacular matches in the past, and with all the gold on the line it wouldn't be too hard to generate interest

as for the rest:

"I'd have no interest and I don't know about all of you but Undertaker - Cena I think I'll watch with very little interest."

Cena-Taker on paper is a marquee match don't get me wrong, but after the super negative reception Cena got during last Wrestlemania vs The Rock

I don't understand why Taker would want any part of a Cena match. And then there's the possibility of Cena ending the streak which of course is polarizing as is

with some fans going as far as saying Cena's the only superstar out their who's capable of ending the streak. Not bashing the opinion, I just don't get the logic behind it

which brings me to the last comment ..pay attention to the bold

John Cena is a bigger superstar than CM Punk will ever be. Punk has feuded with The Rock, Undertaker and Brock Lesnar - he is clearly well respected and appreciated. Punk is incredible, he may well be the "Best In the World", but he is not Cena.

Cena might be a bigger superstar compared to Punk, but on that note maybe it's a good thing Punk isn't Cena

because when I think of Cena I think of dedicated worker who's on the whole very boring

^ so that's a positive for Punk not being Cena.

 

[CmPunker]

"Because of fucking John cna" yes, because John Cena is the bigger star. There is just no way that Punk/Taker would ever go after Cena/Rock for the belt and if you think it should have then you are wrong and quite possibly an idiot. Cena/Taker, if it happens, will close WM30 because it will have the Number One guy and a legend of the business and WM itself. Moreover, there is chance, granting Taker wins the Rumble, it will be for the WWE Championship. To stay relevant to the thread: I strongly believe that Taker will win the Rumble to set him up against Cena at WM30 for the WWE championship.

Punk main evented RR and EC when he faced The Rock and yes he lost but losing to "The great one" is hardly a bad thing. The casual fan is thinking that he lost to a very worthy opponent. The casual fan was reminded constantly that he was WWE Champion for 400+ days. The casual fan remembers Punk standing over Taker with an the urn. Punk had to drop the belt to the Rock to add the John Cena feud (once more Cena/Rock > Punk). In my opinion Punk was built very well after EC leading up to Mania.

he lost to kane and john cena on the road to wrestlemania and the only win he had was against randy orton.. how was that well built? no huge wins before facing the undertaker. clean loss to cena, wow i bet thats giong to make him credible! yeah i know cena is the #1 face of the company, but casuals will still remember the result of the match, they will most likely forget how the opponent faired.

 

[MCMG]

The loss to Kane was due to the "gong" sounding and Punk being distracted. Raw ended that night with Kane on the mat and Punk mocking the Undertaker with the urn. The lasting image is Punk taking out Kane and outsmarting The Undertaker. I'd disagree with you, I feel that the casual fan won't remember who won the match; but what happened after. At the end of the night Punk was made to look powerful.

His loss to Cena was similar to him losing to the Rock. There is nothing wrong with losing to someone of such stature. Indeed, his match with Cena was a classic so there was no shame in losing to Cena. Punk was champ for 400+ days - OF COURSE HE WAS A CREDIBLE OPPONENT.

 

[CmPunker]

The loss to Kane was due to the "gong" sounding and Punk being distracted. Raw ended that night with Kane on the mat and Punk mocking the Undertaker with the urn. The lasting image is Punk taking out Kane and outsmarting The Undertaker. I'd disagree with you, I feel that the casual fan won't remember who won the match; but what happened after. At the end of the night Punk was made to look powerful.

His loss to Cena was similar to him losing to the Rock. There is nothing wrong with losing to someone of such stature. Indeed, his match with Cena was a classic so there was no shame in losing to Cena. Punk was champ for 400+ days - OF COURSE HE WAS A CREDIBLE OPPONENT.

yeah, but dont u want to make him EVEN MORE credible. lets face it, facing undertaker and chalelnging for the wwe championship are on completely different levels that require a different credibility..

omg are u serious? are u saying that u can lose to john cena and the rock 1000 times and still be credible? because baesd on ur logic, yeah. LOSING does not help build credibility. ALMOST WINNING does not build credibility. because in the end, casuals dont care about how their opponent faired because they usually dont remember it. they care about the RESULT and HOW they won (clean or not clean). and BY THE FUCKING WAY, casuals are thinking, "how can punk beat undertaker if he CANT even beat cena or rock?"

 

[MCMG]

One loss to Cena and two to the Rock really doesn't hurt his credibility that much. These two are in double numbers for world title reigns. I'm not suggesting it helps but it really doesn't hurt as much as you seem to think. He was WWE champion for so long which made him a massive star. 3 losses to John Cena and The Rock doesn't change that.

 

[CmPunker]

One loss to Cena and two to the Rock really doesn't hurt his credibility that much. These two are in double numbers for world title reigns. I'm not suggesting it helps but it really doesn't hurt as much as you seem to think. He was WWE champion for so long which made him a massive star. 3 losses to John Cena and The Rock doesn't change that.

yes it fucking does. how ignroant can u get?

remember what the casuals are thinking, not what u think. how do people expect punk to beat taker if he cant even beat the rock or john cena. look at how HHH was booked when he fought undertaker, okay.. he needed a win against punk at night of champions in order to look credible to face the undertaker. even look at edge, he was booked very carefully even though he was a chickenshit heel.

why doesnt punk get that same booking? 3 losses in 3 IMPORTANT matches. u cant lose 3 of ur most important matches of ur career. or else casuals will think punk cant go toe to toe with top stars. punk didnt even get a SINGLE win against the rock, which means that the rock is better than him kayfabe. so if punk cant beat the rock or john cena, how do they expect him to beat undertaker? it does matter because it was very recent and VERY VERY important matches for punk's career.

wait, wait. the rock is in double numbers? hes a fucking 8 time wwe champion. didnt know eight was a double number. plz do some research before posting, u clearly just hurt your own credibility, kid.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

IF they go with Cena vs. Undertaker at WM XXX it won't be for the belt and Cena won't win BUT it will still close out the card no matter what. They will hype that match bigger than other match, even more than Rock vs. Cena because they will want all the 12 year olds to believe that Cena might actually break the streak.

Even if Punk is fighting for the belt, having won the royal rumble, there's no chance he's closing out the event if Cena-Taker is on the card. Zip. Zero. Zilch. This isn't about who's "better" or who "deserves" it, it's about business. How can they not have Cena vs. Undertaker, in what is likely Taker's final match, NOT be the last match?

Again, I'm not saying Cena is better than Punk or that Punk doesn't deserve it. I'm looking at strictly from the business sense.

Only way punk has a shot at main eventing the entire thing is if Taker isn't fighting John Cena or The Rock. That's the only way.

 

[CmPunker]

IF they go with Cena vs. Undertaker at WM XXX it won't be for the belt and Cena won't win BUT it will still close out the card no matter what. They will hype that match bigger than other match, even more than Rock vs. Cena because they will want all the 12 year olds to believe that Cena might actually break the streak.

Even if Punk is fighting for the belt, having won the royal rumble, there's no chance he's closing out the event if Cena-Taker is on the card. Zip. Zero. Zilch. This isn't about who's "better" or who "deserves" it, it's about business. How can they not have Cena vs. Undertaker, in what is likely Taker's final match, NOT be the last match?

Again, I'm not saying Cena is better than Punk or that Punk doesn't deserve it. I'm looking at strictly from the business sense.

Only way punk has a shot at main eventing the entire thing is if Taker isn't fighting John Cena or The Rock. That's the only way.

yeah, but they didnt think the same way last year. they wanted people to know that undertaker would win. if they wanted to increase suspension, they would have made taker vs punk the main event of WM 29.. but instead, they made the rock and john cena the main event, for john cena's 1000000th title win is more important, i guess. i guess that makes sense from a business perspective, RIGHT WWE MONKEY CReATIVE TEAM *sarcasm*. THEY EVEN HAD FUCKING LESNAR VS HHH WITH HIS CAREER ON THE LINE. IF THEY WANTED TO SUSPEND EVEN MORE BELIEF OF HHH'S CAREER, MAKE THAT THE FUCKING MAIN EVENT!!!!!!! but noooooo, i guess john cena's 100000th title win is so much more important, right? like we never seen that before xD..

 

[GaryORLFC]

So, I guess the CM Punk Vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin match won't happen if they are discussing CM Punk winning the 2014 Royal Rumble. Unless SCSA becomes WWE Champion, which we all know won't happen.

 

[Барбоса]

Personally, I think it is a bit early to be looking at who is going to win the Royal Rumble, especially with the rumours of Rocky not being around for Wrestlemania. For me, a lot of plans hinge on his presence and likely showdown with Brock Lesnar.

Without the Rock, I could see Punk as the Rumble winner and going on to challenge Cena for the WWE title with Lesnar getting the Streak match.

If we have Cena/Taker and Rock/Brock, what exactly do we have Punk doing?

wait, wait. the rock is in double numbers? hes a fucking 8 time wwe champion. didnt know eight was a double number. plz do some research before posting, u clearly just hurt your own credibility, kid.

You do your research.

The Rock is a 10 time world champion.

 

[CmPunker]

Personally, I think it is a bit early to be looking at who is going to win the Royal Rumble, especially with the rumours of Rocky not being around for Wrestlemania. For me, a lot of plans hinge on his presence and likely showdown with Brock Lesnar.

Without the Rock, I could see Punk as the Rumble winner and going on to challenge Cena for the WWE title with Lesnar getting the Streak match.

If we have Cena/Taker and Rock/Brock, what exactly do we have Punk doing?



You do your research.

The Rock is a 10 time world champion.

we could have punk feud with HHH and give punk his deserved win back.. in Night of champions 2011, HHH stopped some of punk's momentum. doesnt matter how much interference or how many finishers he kicked out of, because casuals usually remember the result of the match instead of how the opponent faired..

and it doesnt matter how many championships u won.. it doesnt really help to be honest. doesnt change the fact that cm punk was treated liek shit on the road to wrestlemania. 3 losses, 3 of the biggest matches of punk's career. doesnt matter how punk faired, casuals dont look at how the opponent faired, they look at the fucking Result of the match. and if punk cant beat rock or cena, how can he beat taker?

 

[MCMG]

yes it fucking does. how ignroant can u get?

remember what the casuals are thinking, not what u think. how do people expect punk to beat taker if he cant even beat the rock or john cena. look at how HHH was booked when he fought undertaker, okay.. he needed a win against punk at night of champions in order to look credible to face the undertaker. even look at edge, he was booked very carefully even though he was a chickenshit heel.

why doesnt punk get that same booking? 3 losses in 3 IMPORTANT matches. u cant lose 3 of ur most important matches of ur career. or else casuals will think punk cant go toe to toe with top stars. punk didnt even get a SINGLE win against the rock, which means that the rock is better than him kayfabe. so if punk cant beat the rock or john cena, how do they expect him to beat undertaker? it does matter because it was very recent and VERY VERY important matches for punk's career.

wait, wait. the rock is in double numbers? hes a fucking 8 time wwe champion. didnt know eight was a double number. plz do some research before posting, u clearly just hurt your own credibility, kid.

You seem to think that losing three times turned the WWE champ of 400+ days into Heath Slater. He was made to look strong by "winning" the mind games against the Undertaker. Punk was the one standing over Taker. Taker was made to look vulnerable and that Punk could beat him. You and I were 99.9% sure Punk would lose but the casual fan watched Punk stand over Taker and may think that he could beat him.

I can't say but the casual fan may well think that Cena or The Rock is a stronger opponent than the Undertaker. I don't know?

Please, Please correct me if I am wrong but The Rock has also held the World Heavyweight Championship (WCW, BIG SHINY GOLD ONE) twice. 8+2 = 10. 10 is double figures. No? Yes?

Just to reiterate: I think Punk is great and I'm sure he will have a great match at WM30 but at this moment I feel Taker will win the RR and face Cena for the WWE championship at WM30 - which will close the show.

 

[CmPunker]

You seem to think that losing three times turned the WWE champ of 400+ days into Heath Slater. He was made to look strong by "winning" the mind games against the Undertaker. Punk was the one standing over Taker. Taker was made to look vulnerable and that Punk could beat him. You and I were 99.9% sure Punk would lose but the casual fan say Punk stand over Taker and may think that he could beat him.

I can't say but the casual fan may well think that Cena or The Rock is a stronger opponent than the Undertaker. I don't know?

Please, Please correct me if I am wrong but The Rock has also held the World Heavyweight Championship (WCW, BIG SHINY GOLD ONE) twice. 8+2 = 10. 10 is double figures. No? Yes?

Just to reiterate: I think Punk is great and I'm sure he will have a great match at WM30 but at this moment I fell Taker will win the RR and face Cena for the WWE championship at WM30 - which will close the show.

dude, u know anybody can be booked like that, even a mid carder who uses mind games? a mid carder can do that too, it doesnt matter. its WINS that matter more because mid carders dont beat rock or cena.. so i think at least ONE big win would benefit moer than using mind games. b ecause everybody knows the mind games dont matter .

 

[MCMG]

dude, u know anybody can be booked like that, even a mid carder who uses mind games? a mid carder can do that too, it doesnt matter. its WINS that matter more because mid carders dont beat rock or cena.. so i think at least ONE big win would benefit moer than using mind games. b ecause everybody knows the mind games dont matter .

Punk would have needed a "big" win on the Road to Wrestlemaina if he wasn't the WWE champ for so long. That title reign, including victories over Cena, Bryan and Chris Jericho made him look strong. There were many big victories within this title reign.

If you lay out your opponent several times than you look stronger than him. Often, the result of your last big match is irrelevant. Look at Ryback. He lost to Henry but one attack on Cena and I'm sure many viewers thought he could become WWE champion.

 

[BelieveInTheShield]

note: CMPunker is clearly a dribbling cm punk mark who thinks it's cool to constantly bash cena, he also does not account for rocks whc reigns, wow.

Anyway, logically I see Punk winning the Rumble and challenging Daniel Bryan who will be the WWE Champion and no.3 in the company at this time. This will of course be a tremendous match, most likely the best match on the night. However Cena/Taker which I feel will also be a brilliant match is a guaranteed certainty to end the night if it is on the card. Even Brock/Rock if it also happens will not beat this.

 

[Барбоса]

As much as I like Punk, he gets treated as a lesser star than John Cena and the Rock for the very simple reason that he is a lesser star than John Cena and the Rock.

While I question planning it so far in advance, he was never going to retain against Rocky. If anything, it was the safeguarding of Punk and the plan for him to drop the title to the Rock at the Rumble through the Shield after a mammoth reign that did more harm to Punk (and Ryback) than him losing to two all-time greats in six weeks.

Again, I think it is far too early to be making plans for the Rumble. Maybe in six months time, we are looking at Daniel Bryan as the favourite to win it and go on to Wrestlemania to challenge the WWE Champion, CM Punk, after Punk wins it from him. Or maybe some other young face like Dolph Ziggler wins it.

It really is far too early and to put plans in place this early could see a repeat of the debacle of the CM Punk chickenshit heel turn and the burying of Ryback.