Guest Human Fly Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 With the roster split and two "World" titles now how do they do the Royal Rumble? Will they put Raw and SD wrestlers in an if (let's say) Kane wins he gets a shot at HHH at 'Mania? Or if (let's say) Chris Benoit wins he gets a shot at Brock come 'Mania? They are talking like they really want to keep the titles seperate or else I would say that the winner of the Rumble could be put into a little Wrestlemania X style tournament. Takes on HHH first (if he's a Raw wrestler, he takes on Brock first if he's SD) then whoever wins the first match takes on the other Champ to unify the titles. I was just thinking about the Rumble a little bit ago and was wondering how they were thinking of trying to pull it off this year.
Guest BoboBrazil Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 You think WWE has thought that far ahead?
Guest DiabloIIFreak1010 Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 I've been thinking "What about the 'Rumble?" for weeks.
Guest ftwdevils2469 Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 They've yet to think of The Rumble at all. I say they should have a Raw Rumble and a Smackdown Rumble.
Guest papacita Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 Double rings maybe? Winner gets Main Event at Mania... Nah.
Guest Brian Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 I figure, Bischoff will have already broken off by then and Daddy will give it to Steph, with Bishoff having limited entries or something.
Guest razazteca Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 World War 3 format with the re-reformation of ECW. All of the ECW guys eliminate the RAW and Smackdown guys then take one for the team as 4 of the ECW guys jump out of the ring leaving Raven as the champion. Wednesday Night Thund.....er.....Hardcore ECW new show on FX, call your local cable company for local availbality
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 They've yet to think of The Rumble at all. I say they should have a Raw Rumble and a Smackdown Rumble. Exactly. Have two Rumbles on the card, and this will be the first show I will order in a long time.
Guest ftwdevils2469 Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 For The Rumble show since a Rumble takes about an Hour Each they should just have Two Regular Matches. A Raw Title Match, and a Smackdown Title Match
Guest Chuck Woolery Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 And take away the part of the PPV that usually, you know, actually sells the PPV. Great idea, dude.
Guest evenflowDDT Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 And take away the part of the PPV that usually, you know, actually sells the PPV. Great idea, dude. I think he means those two and the two rumbles and that's it. Anyway, a rumble wouldn't take an hour if it only had half the roster on it. The two mini-rumbles would probably take the same amount of time as the one regular rumble.
Guest bob_barron Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 Two rumbles would kick ass!!!! Or go with my idea of a 60 man rumble and just decide the other with a #1 contender match on RAW or SD!
Guest ftwdevils2469 Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 And take away the part of the PPV that usually, you know, actually sells the PPV. Great idea, dude. I ment Two Rumbles and two world title matches. If they want to they could have two actual rumbles. Bring in some old guys for one time only deals and some OVW guys. Or guys making a return. The more they focus on the Two Rumbles and the Two Title Matches the better
Guest Anglesault Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 The fans might get burnt out watching two massive battle royales in one night.
Guest ftwdevils2469 Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 The fans might get burnt out watching two massive battle royales in one night. Although they are burned out what really matters to Vince is Buyrates and Ticket Sales. If they are burnt out at the end it doesn't really matter its just more money in his pocket.
Guest Y2BigJ Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 I agree w/ anglesault. I think if there was two one hour rumbles that the crowd would get burnt out. Plus it wil suck seeing Kane win the Raw rumble, and Taker winning the Smackdown.
Guest ftwdevils2469 Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 I agree w/ anglesault. I think if there was two one hour rumbles that the crowd would get burnt out. Plus it wil suck seeing Kane win the Raw rumble, and Taker winning the Smackdown. They would be so fucking stupid to Have Kane and Undertaker win.
Guest Choken One Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 By all likihood, The titles will be united by then...But the two ring idea sucks because you can't control two companie storylines at once...
Guest ftwdevils2469 Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 By all likihood, The titles will be united by then...But the two ring idea sucks because you can't control two companie storylines at once... There not Unifying the titles any time soon. They plan on giving them seperate PPVs next year. I never said two rings just two different Rumbles.
Guest Flyboy Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 What would the winner get? Probably a cookie, if we're talking about WWE logic.
Guest Pop Culture God Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 How about one rumble with the both RAW and SD! workers, and the last one from each show gets a shot at that show's title. That way two heels could unite and win. While it destroys the "every-man-for-himself" gimmick, it adds a new dimension by watching all the alliances and relationships form.
Guest Spaceman Spiff Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 An "I won the Royal Rumble, and all I got was a job to HHH" t-shirt.
Guest Pop Culture God Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 Oh and the winner gets a shot at Hurricane at WM for the Unified WWE, World, NWA, IWGP, GHC, and Triple-Crown titles. SMELL-THE-BUYRATE!
Guest MrRant Posted September 28, 2002 Report Posted September 28, 2002 Well since the rosters are so thin, they could get away with a 30 min rumble for each show since there is little star power on each show I think fans can believe some of the participants would be eliminated quickly.
Guest Ash Ketchum Posted September 29, 2002 Report Posted September 29, 2002 Oh and the winner gets a shot at Hurricane at WM for the Unified WWE, World, NWA, IWGP, GHC, and Triple-Crown titles. SMELL-THE-BUYRATE! We can only wish...
Guest DJ Jeff Posted September 29, 2002 Report Posted September 29, 2002 I like the idea of seeing two 30 minute Royal Rumble matches, one featuring the RAW brand, and the other featuring the Smackdown brand. They could have 15 superstars for RAW, and 15 for Smackdown. However, I'm hoping the split is over by the Royal Rumble, and the belt is once again unified.
Guest TheHulkster Posted September 29, 2002 Report Posted September 29, 2002 I think that they should just make it an award, sort of like the king of the ring. The could announce the winner as the Royal Rumble winner on shows after the Rumble and put over the history of the rumble, with some of the greatest names in US wrestling having won it. It might not sound like a good idea to some, but the Wrestlemania title shot stip has made the Rumble anti-climactic. You always know who is going to win the Royal Rumble, for the most part, and that takes some of the fun out of it.
Guest Choken One Posted September 29, 2002 Report Posted September 29, 2002 I sorta think that's the way to go... split or no split. Let's face it...It's old...You either win it...or Beat someone in a #1 contender match at the ensuing PPV which reneders the rumble worthless. This way they can have Rob Van Dam win but not have to give him the title shot (which for WWE mindset is the best way). The best move would be to HAVE a super Main event...with a gimmick (HIAC, Ladder or Iron Man).
Guest Trivia247 Posted September 29, 2002 Report Posted September 29, 2002 maybe by now and January there will be a Unification of the Titles. if not, then maybe the Royal rumble ends with the Final two men get the contendership, the last eliminated gets the Raw title, and the survivor gets the Smackdown one... oye what a cluster fuck potential.
Guest Chuck Woolery Posted September 29, 2002 Report Posted September 29, 2002 But, see, the Royal Rumble is the gimmick match for that reason. They don't toss it out just anytime. If you don't get the WWE January PPV, you're SOL, sport. They need to keep it like that, unless they want to have the Big Four PPVs now.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now