How Unique was the Royal Rumble? And Does it Still Work?

[Kronos]

After reading Bix's article about which WCW PPVs to watch first on the Network, I started GAB '89. It opens with a fairly complicated 2-ring battle royal (with a crap ending).

 

It got me to thinking: They threw 14 guys in the ring with no intro and had them start rumbling. Even the commentary didn't always know who was who, by their own admission. It was a mess and thoroughly boring. Battle Royales certainly were nothing new in 1988 when the Royal Rumble started, But I have to think they were more like this GAB match - a dull mess that simply wastes everyone's time.

 

Was the Rumble format a new concept? If so, it was a brilliant idea that allowed for some great drama (once they got the kinks worked out within a few years).

 

I recently watched one of the recent ones, that ended with Sheamus. It had its moments, but it also had a looooooooooot of downtime full of "I could care less about these people" action.

 

Do you think ithe Rumble has run its course as a format?

[(BP)]

A lot of it has to do with roster depth on a given year. There was that year where they had forty entrants, and they were really scraping the bottom of the barrel to fill it in. I haven't watched all of this year's Rumble, but this is arguably their best roster in some time. There's a reason 92' is often considered the best, besides Flair and Heenan being awesome, and it's that a lot of the biggest stars of the 80's/early 90's intersected with the guys that would be on top of the company for the rest of the decade. So, it's possible that some of these most recent Rumbles will seem like a much bigger deal later from a historical perspective. It still seems to bring in lapsed and casual fans, so I'm sure it's not going away soon.

[flyonthewall2983]

Every so often I get excited to watch the new ones. There have been some good ones in the last ten years. The one in 2007 with Undertaker and Shawn at the end, and the one where the ring filled up with guys who just refused to be thrown out.

 

The concept match that will probably never come back is War Games, and with good reason. It's a pretty stale concept compared to the Rumble and Survivor Series. All the great War Games matches and ones that I have seen were all designed to keep the babyfaces in peril, which lead to the top guy coming in last which lead to The Match Beyond.

[sek69]

The Rumble wasn't unique in the sense that they weren't the first to do it, but the first several ones were definitely a big deal. The one that started with Ax and Smash as #1 and #2 made it clear this was such a big deal even tag partners will fight for the chance to win one.

 

I think giving the winner a Mania title shot took a lot of steam off the Rumble in the sense that now there's only a handful of guys you can reasonably expect in that position every year. You won't see any winners like Jim Duggan as long as that's in place.

[Moonsault Marvin]

 

I think giving the winner a Mania title shot took a lot of steam off the Rumble in the sense that now there's only a handful of guys you can reasonably expect in that position every year. You won't see any winners like Jim Duggan as long as that's in place.

You're totally right. It has taken almost all of the suspense out of the Rumble.

[Kronos]

It's a good point. I could tell that in the 2012, as they were getting down to the wire it became pretty clear that unless they wanted to repeat Orton, it was going to Sheamus. Jericho seemed unlikely -- although he made a good go of it when he and S got to the last two. And it will apparently never go to Show. I think they were the final 4.

 

At least unlike this year, they gave it to a rising star instead of an old "favorite".

 

That 40-man year was a serious chore to get through.

[Timbo Slice]

When there are multiple players in the mix to win and not a guaranteed winner because they booked themselves into a corner, it's my favorite match. Patterson really was a genius at booking it by letting all these angles play out during the match to keep things interesting, but there really hasn't been lately that would stand up as a top tier Rumble match. The only thing that caught my attention was when Santino was with Del Rio at the end of the 2011 Rumble. If he had won that, it would have changed the Rumble forever as a match where truly everyone had a shot, and they missed an opportunity there, I feel.

[Johnny Sorrow]

I agree with that 100%

Since the whole title shot deal can be rewritten like mad, it was a blown opportunity to not have had Santino win. It would have been a giant burst of happy that would have lasted 24 hours as Del Rio would beat him on RAW the next night to get the title shot

[Zenjo]

I always wonder why nobody else tried the ingenious Mr McMahon tactics from 1999?

[Coffey]

It would be cool if they actually had the Rumble be random one year. Like, put all the balls in the lottery style wheel. People the wrestlers draw the numbers, have the powers that be decide what number they want to win. Then have the wrestlers shoot draw numbers. Whomever draws, let's say 29, gets to win.

 

Heath Slater for Royal Rumble 2015!

 

I do miss the vignettes showing the wrestlers drawing their numbers. Ted DiBiase paying someone else for their high number drawn was so genius.

 

I think the Rumble still works it just works differently. It used to just be a gimmick match on a gimmick PPV. Now it sort of starts the official Wrestlemania build. So like others before me said, a lot of the intrigue & suspense goes away.

 

It's still fun to see who comes out when to me.

[Loss]

I don't like it being for the title shot either. I think you should have to pin or submit other wrestlers to earn a title shot at Wrestlemania, not throw them over a top rope and hope you draw a good number.

[Coffey]

What if the winner of the Rumble was guaranteed a spot in the Chamber & the winner of the Chamber got the title shot at Mania?

[Blazer]

It would be cool if they actually had the Rumble be random one year. Like, put all the balls in the lottery style wheel. People the wrestlers draw the numbers, have the powers that be decide what number they want to win. Then have the wrestlers shoot draw numbers. Whomever draws, let's say 29, gets to win.

 

I'm reminded that WCW shoot-booked the old Battle Bowl matches in the early 90s. They knew who would win, but the pairings were all drawn legit, which in a way is comforting becauase they couldnt have sucked any more if they tried.

[PeteF3]

I could MAYBE buy that a few of those early BattleBowls they did a shoot drawing weeks beforehand and then booked around the results, but there's no way those were random, improvised matches. At least one guy at the first BattleBowl, I forget who, got up and started heading toward the ring before his name was announced. And what would happen if Sting and Luger were drawn on opposite sides?

[Kronos]

It does work fairly well as a bookend to Mania season, which used to end with the Backlash epilogue.

[Matt D]

Another huge thing here, as with Survivor Series, is that in any given year we see almost every wrestler interact with every other wrestler due to the nature of the weekly TV. With the old Rumbles and Survivor Series, it was usually the one time a year where certain guys would come anywhere near each other. WWE was so regimented and planned out back then (look at the house show results relative to JCP) that it was great to see something so outside the usual formula and made it seem like we were looking at one coherent world instead of what we usually had.

[flyonthewall2983]

One difference between now and then I like is that they're vague about who's in, where before every week on Superstars or Challenge (later Raw) they'd announce several of the entrants leading up to right before the show. The way it's done now allows for more surprises, again where before sometimes they'd announce people who'd wind up no-showing for whatever reason.

[Kronos]

One difference between now and then I like is that they're vague about who's in, where before every week on Superstars or Challenge (later Raw) they'd announce several of the entrants leading up to right before the show. The way it's done now allows for more surprises, again where before sometimes they'd announce people who'd wind up no-showing for whatever reason.

 

Part of that has to be so they can bring back classic stars. When did that practice start happening?

 

It usually one of the more entertaining parts of the match for me, the surprise of wondering who might show up.

[flyonthewall2983]

I'm guessing it was whenever they stopped those news and interview segments that were hosted by Sean Mooney, Alfred Hayes, Monsoon, and Pettengill (ugh).