Royal Rumble Pre Show Thread *30 competitors again!!*

gerrybbadd

Guys - a bit confused... Is it 30 or 40 this year? I know it had been announced as 40, but has that changed now?

Stereomaniac

Yeah. A bit like the WWE Network in the UK, they just pretended that they never said anything.

CastorTroy

Any word yet on if the Rumble will be the main event or mid show?

chopperbyrne

Has to be the main event.

rovert

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Has to be the main event.

Brock is most likely beating Cena so the title match probably isn't going on last on that basis alone.

Stereomaniac

I think that the championship match should be the last match on every single card they have.

Lord TSC

Stereomaniac wrote: »

I think that the championship match should be the last match on every single card they have.

I agree, but with one exception, and thats the Rumble. The Royal Rumble is the main event of the Royal Rumble PPV; it's what everyone is tuning in for. Not Brock/Cena 4(-ish). The Rumble is the one match every year which, imo, succeeds the title match as the main event.

Stereomaniac

I don't necessarily agree with that, as I have grown older. The Royal Rumble match holds less and less intrigue for me each year that I watch it, with more predictability around the winners.

Lord TSC

Stereomaniac wrote: »

I don't necessarily agree with that, as I have grown older. The Royal Rumble match holds less and less intrigue for me each year that I watch it, with more predictability around the winners.

True, but world title matches excite me far, far less :P

CastorTroy

And even though we may know the Rumble winner, at least we can sometimes be surprised with surprise entrants.

Beefy78

The Rumble match is the one match I look forward to even in years when i'm not actively following the product. It should always go last.

mrkiscool2

The Rumble match itself is always good. Obviously I'd much prefer to not have a clue who is winning it (the last 3 have been predictable, before that not so much) but all the same it has so much. Surprise entrants (both legends an NXT stars), some good spots, countdowns and just fast paced, tense action. Can't go too far wrong with that!

Also, the Woolshed will make it that much better

Ageyev

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

The Rumble match itself is always good. Obviously I'd much prefer to not have a clue who is winning it (the last 3 have been predictable, before that not so much) but all the same it has so much. Surprise entrants (both legends an NXT stars), some good spots, countdowns and just fast paced, tense action. Can't go too far wrong with that!

Also, the Woolshed will make it that much better

Imagine the lights go out, Finn Bálor's music hits, all action in the ring stops and he makes one of his mad entrances.

CastorTroy

Ageyev wrote: »

Imagine the lights go out, Finn Bálor's music hits, all action in the ring stops and he makes one of his mad entrances.

If he did that, he'd get to the ring after number 30. Even The Undertaker would pass him out.

Vision of Disorder

Stereomaniac wrote: »

I don't necessarily agree with that, as I have grown older. The Royal Rumble match holds less and less intrigue for me each year that I watch it, with more predictability around the winners.

The path taken by the WWE title has been largely predictable for generations. If you watch enough wrestling you'll almost automatically pick up an ability to anticipate what will happen next. One of the few joys left to veteran wrestling fans is seeing how accurate their predictions are.

Also the people bemoaning the presence of guys like R-Truth and whoever else in the Rumble are missing the point IMO. It's like saying the Premiership is diminished because the likes of Hull City, Crystal Palace or Liverpool have no chance of winning it.

In the wrestling sense the likes of Heath "Burnley" Slater or Curtis "West Brom" Axel serve an important purpose. When they get dismantled by a Dean Ambrose or whoever it makes Ambrose look strong. If you cut out the filler and go with less guys you're only damaging potential challengers by removing their opportunities to look credible and further weakening the already stressed mid-card by relegating them to complete jobber status for the Rumble.

orestes

Vision of Disorder wrote: »

The path taken by the WWE title has been largely predictable for generations. If you watch enough wrestling you'll almost automatically pick up an ability to anticipate what will happen next. One of the few joys left to veteran wrestling fans is seeing how accurate their predictions are.

Also the people bemoaning the presence of guys like R-Truth and whoever else in the Rumble are missing the point IMO. It's like saying the Premiership is diminished because the likes of Hull City, Crystal Palace or Liverpool have no chance of winning it.

In the wrestling sense the likes of Heath "Burnley" Slater or Curtis "West Brom" Axel serve an important purpose. When they get dismantled by a Dean Ambrose or whoever it makes Ambrose look strong. If you cut out the filler and go with less guys you're only damaging potential challengers by removing their opportunities to look credible and further weakening the already stressed mid-card by relegating them to complete jobber status for the Rumble.

The Rumble isn't like the Premiership though, if we're using your football analogy I'd say it's more like the F.A. Cup, which anyone can win, and even though the vast majority of the time it's won by a big club it's still awesome every year to watch the little guys go up against the big guys (and occasionally beating them too).

mrkiscool2

orestes wrote: »

The Rumble isn't like the Premiership though, if we're using your football analogy I'd say it's more like the F.A. Cup, which anyone can win, and even though the vast majority of the time it's won by a big club it's still awesome every year to watch the little guys go up against the big guys (and occasionally beating them too).

Best analogy ever! The year Mysterio won (while I had no fcuks to give) was like the perfect underdog story!

Ridley

Stereomaniac wrote: »

I dunno, I reckon A.J could have a good match with someone like Kofi Kingston if given the chance. But in the current roster of females, the only one for the Rumble could be Natalya really.

Well now I want Natalya and Tyson Kidd to end up in the match together.

Vision of Disorder

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Best analogy ever! The year Mysterio won (while I had no fcuks to give) was like the perfect underdog story!

Mysterio winning was like Spurs winning the FA Cup, not a major shock by any stretch. It is a good metaphor though. Santino came second in the Rumble not so long ago, a la Cardiff reaching the final. It hasn't happened in recent history that either the Royal Rumble or the FA Cup has been won by somebody from outside the top tier.

Stereomaniac

Ridley wrote: »

Well now I want Natalya and Tyson Kidd to end up in the match together.

Yeah I think at some point we need to see Natalya beat the **** out of Tyson Kidd and take custody of the cats and maybe shack up with Antonio Cesaro as well.

Lithium93_

I hope Roman Reigns does win the Royal Rumble match and gets that golden ticket to Wrestlemania for a match against Brock Lesnar, simply for the promos that entail the build up to Mania, and feuding with Brock usually means feuding with Paul Heyman who will simply destroy Reigns in terms of promos.

ERG89

Lithium93_ wrote: »

I hope Roman Reigns does win the Royal Rumble match and gets that golden ticket to Wrestlemania for a match against Brock Lesnar, simply for the promos that entail the build up to Mania, and feuding with Brock usually means feuding with Paul Heyman who will simply destroy Reigns in terms of promos.

Reigns & WWE should be more concerned about a lethargic Lesnar performance on the night if Lesnar doesn't renew his contract tbh. Whoever he faces could be hampered by a phoned in performance no matter who it is

Stereomaniac

Well hasn't it been almost taken as a given that Brock Lesnar isn't going to be continuing on afterwards? I really hope WWE don't start making any reference to Roman Reigns having a streak.

Lithium93_

Reigns to beat Lesnar at Wrestlemania for the title, cue Reigns celebrating said title win only to have Seth Rollins cash in and crash the celebration.

Diabhal Beag

Lithium93_ wrote: »

simply for the promos that entail the build up to Mania, and feuding with Brock usually means feuding with Paul Heyman who will simply destroy Reigns in terms of promos.

So you want a main event match to happen because the babyface will look really bad in comparison to one of the best talkers ever? That's a bit weird if I read that properly.

Lithium93_

Diabhal Beag wrote: »

So you want a main event match to happen because the babyface will look really bad in comparison to one of the best talkers ever? That's a bit weird if I read that properly.

Well if it means Paul Heyman getting more screen time, then yes i want Reigns to look bad compared to the best talker in the business.

Diabhal Beag

Lithium93_ wrote: »

Well if it means Paul Heyman getting more screen time, then yes i want Reigns to look bad compared to the best talker in the business.

I hope not. He has potential IMO and if he fails we're back to Orton/Cena more so than Dolph or Ambrose being the top faces post Mania.

Lithium93_

Diabhal Beag wrote: »

I hope not. He has potential IMO and if he fails we're back to Orton/Cena more so than Dolph or Ambrose being the top faces post Mania.

Reigns does have potential, but he is NO-WHERE near ready enough to win the Royal Rumble or headline Wrestlemania.

Diabhal Beag

True. He's less dangerous than a Ryback and less **** than a Henry so I'm fascinated to see how this could end up if their guy stays injury free and wins the title at Mania.

Stereomaniac

I wish that Mark Henry had beaten John Cena in 2013. I guess he'll be a surprise entrant in this?