Guest BobBacklundRules Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 With the current brand extension, that leaves the traditional Royal Rumble causing a lot of confusion. In the past, the winner of the 30 Man Battle Royal always faced the WWE Heavyweight Champion at WWE Wrestlemania, but with two champions heavyweight champions there must be changes made. Currently WWE plans to have 2 Royal Rumble matches, one featuring 15 men from the "RAW Brand", the other featuring 15 men from the "Smackdown! Brand". With the winner of each fighting their brand's champion. As a reminder, OVW superstars will have the opportunity to work WWE Royal Rumble for a chance to win a shot at the WWE world title at WrestleMania.
Guest Downhome Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 I feel that they should do the same traditional Royal Rumble for the WWE World Championship, that one is a no brainer if you ask me... ...as for the Raw World Championship, I feel a tourny to be held up to, and at WrestleMania would suffice, for the #1 contendership.
Guest HartFan86 Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 2 Royal Rumbles is gay. You can't build a story out of it. 1 Rumble, winner gets to wrestle for the WWE title.
Guest Downhome Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 Whatever they do, they SHOULD do the normal Rumble for the WWE title, with Steph obviously overseeing it, and ONLY involving Smackdown stars... ...while Bishoff can think up something to do to determine the #1 contender for the RAW title. Perhaps a tourny as I mentioned above, or perhaps some type of new match. Anyhow, whatever they do... ...the key will be to make each title to seem equally important, but in a different way, thus two different types of matches to determine the #1 contender.
Guest Human Fly Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 15 men seems kind of small, roster split or not. Maybe that will make this one (the Raw one at least) hard to predict.
Guest Kotzenjunge Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 I've yet to hear this anywhere. The only part I've actually read before on one of the credible sites was the OVW wrestler being able to get into the Rumble. Please post some sources when you say this stuff.
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 This is good. Since there are only 15 guys, there will be a minimum of jobbers. That means we won't see any hosses getting the Diesel push by killing 15 jobbers.
Guest Downhome Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 This is good. Since there are only 15 guys, there will be a minimum of jobbers. That means we won't see any hosses getting the Diesel push by killing 15 jobbers. No, it means we WILL see a hoss, but instead of throwing out ten Crash Holly's, he'll be throwing out 5-10 of the best guys in the fed, if of course they do two small Rumbles, which would suck so bad.
Guest Human Fly Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 Assuming the 15 man report is true what do you think the breakdown would be? Damaja is the guy from OVW who will be in a Rumble. I'll put him in the SD Rumble just to just to. Raw: Chris Jericho, Christian, Booker T., Goldust, HBK, RVD, Kane, Lance Storm, William Regal, Hurricane, Batista, Jeff Hardy, Test, Raven, Steven Richards I originally had the Dudleys in there but 15 spots went fast. You know Batista is going to be in there. The Dudleys might be more likely to take Raven and Richards spots but then you start running out of heels. Other possible entrants: D-Lo, Bubba, Spike, D-Von, Rico, Jamal, Rosey, Tommy Dreamer, Ric Flair. Smackdown: Eddie Guererro, Chavo Guererro, Brock Lesnar, Big Show, Albert, Edge, Damaja, Bill DeMott, Billy Kidman, Jamie Noble, Matt Hardy, John Cena, Rikishi, Undertaker, Chuck Palumbo Stone Cold might go in here too, so you who knows. Other possible entrants: Nunzio, Tajiri, Shannon Moore, Mark Henry, B - 2 or whatever his name is then.
Guest Caliban Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 How hard would it be to have a normal 30 - man Rumble, with 15 Raw and 15 Smackdown guys. Winner gets a shot at their version of the World Title. Simple enough, plus lots of lovely inter-brand competition thrown in to see which brand gets the WM main event.
Guest GameCop Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 Two 15 man Rumbles? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! What's wrong with having the victor face the champion of his brand? You can't tell a story in two Rumbles! You can't even have a legitimate iron man! This is retarded. WWE has already screwed up the Survivor Series, and now they feel the need to screw with their best gimmick match ever, the Royal Rumble. In the coming years, WWE will probably eradicate the Rumble match, and change it to a regular (i.e. generic) PPV format. Screw WWE. I'm not ordering the Rumble if this is the case. The Rumble usually garners the highest buy-rate every year (with the exception of 'Mania). Don't be surprised if this year's Rumble, headlined by the Roid Twins, tanks. WWE will never change; it will always be the same, old bullshit.
Guest Caliban Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 HHH/Steiner, HBK/Jericho, Angle/Benoit and the Rumble sounds like a sweet lineup to me, actually.
Guest Polish_Rifle Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 I don't care how many people are in the Rumble, I will be happy as long as Brock doesn't win.
Guest MarvinisaLunatic Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 2 Rumbles at the Same time in 2 different rings.. Do it that way and the 2 15 Man rumbles idea works.
Guest blachuuh_monkey Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 "I don't care how many people are in the Rumble, I will be happy as long as Brock doesn't win." It looks like your going to be miserable buddy.
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 Actually, when we were throwing around ideas a couple of months ago, this was the concensus of what we wanted. I have no problem with it.
Guest godthedog Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 2 Rumbles at the Same time in 2 different rings.. Do it that way and the 2 15 Man rumbles idea works. you're kidding, right? not only is it half as long, it's twice as hard to follow what's going on cause you have to pay attention to 2 matches at the same time. how would you film 2 rumbles at the same time anyway? split screen?
Guest DJ Jeff Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 I like the idea of having 15 men from RAW and 15 men from Smackdown battle for a chance to get a shot at their respective heavyweight title. So, if Lesnar wins the Royal Rumble, he would get a shot at the WWE Title in the main event at Wrestlemania 19. If RVD won the Royal Rumble, it would be the same thing, except he'd get a shot at the World Title instead. That would be the best thing to do.
Guest Paranoid Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 Just when you think it can't get any worse. I say have the traditional 30 man event. Then the winner can pick which title he wants to go for. RAW or Smackdown. It could add to a storyline quit well.
Guest Brian Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 Winner gets the Mania main event spot too. That puts more on the line, especially for each brand as it forces GM's to hand-pick the participants.
Guest papacita Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 Just do one Rumble with the winner getting a shot at his brand's title. 2 Rumbles would just cheapen the concept of the event.
Guest deadbeater Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 The two matches will probably be different.
Guest Paranoid Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 The two matches will probably be different. ^This post should be on Leno's Headlines! lol
Guest The Metal Maniac Posted December 18, 2002 Report Posted December 18, 2002 I'm all for the single Rumble, 15 men per brand, winner gets a shot at their respective title. Bill it as the only time RAW and SD stars will be in the ring at the same time to make it seem like an even BIGGER deal, and then have the match be very much RAW vs. SD. Like someone mentioned, the WM main event is a BIG slot, and both sides want it for themselves, obviously. The losing brand can take like, the last 4 guys from their side and have a gauntlet or something at NWO. Hell, just take two and have a straight match - whatever. But the bottom line is, don't settle the other contender until NWO, so there's something to look forward to at that PPV.
Guest subliminal_animal Posted December 19, 2002 Report Posted December 19, 2002 The two matches will probably be different. ^This post should be on Leno's Headlines! lol I think he means "different" as it pertains to the type of match.
Guest thetrendsetter Posted December 19, 2002 Report Posted December 19, 2002 Why not do the SD Rumble at The royal rumble... Bischoff gets angry because he's been one uped by the most popular match in wrestling, and hauls out either a bunkhouse stampede or WW3 for No Way Out... make the 3 ring battle royal 2 rings, with 40 guys, and it's feasible...
Guest Hogan Made Wrestling Posted December 19, 2002 Report Posted December 19, 2002 problem: 1. WW3 sucks, it was just a WCW ripoff of Royal Rumble anyway 2. 40 guys? I challenge anyone to name 40 people on RAW, including Heat.
Guest Human Fly Posted December 19, 2002 Report Posted December 19, 2002 I don't think there are 40 people on the Raw roster including women. They would have to bring up 10 or so OVW workers. One Rumble would suck because everyone would know that Brock Lesnar is winning it. At least with two Rumbles one outcome will be a surprise.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now