Double Trouble Royal Rumble?

[The Czech Republic 0]

I just made a point over in Old School how we've advanced so far from the days of 1996 when Doug Gilbert, Kabuki, and Mil Mascaras were in the Royal Rumble to now having enough guys to field two separate Royal Rumbles.

 

Do you tihnk it would be a good idea to have Raw and Smackdown Rumbles simultaneously for 2003 or 2004? Designate one ring to be Raw, one be Smackdown. Every two minutes, a man enters for each side. When they reach the final ten men after all 60 participants have come out, wrestlers can float between rings. There would be one winner for the dual Rumble.

 

While this would be a bit of a clusterfuck to watch and commentate, the novelty does pique my interest.

[Guest TheGame2705]

They should do this year and only this year so they can end the split.

[ISportsFan 0]

First of all, I don't think they'd ever do it. It reminds people of the old WCW (with 2 or 3 rings at one event, ala War Games or WWIII), and that's enough to make sure nobody gets it. But I don't think I'd like it anyway.

 

Basically, it's just too cluttered. There's enough problem with watching one ring during a Royal Rumble when the ring gets semi-crowded, how about now trying to film two rings? Would they do the retardedly-stupid split screen like WCW did for their first World War III in 1995? Because unless you have a 60" TV, that would be ridiculous. And you'd miss half the action with rotating between rings.

 

You know who would commentate, too, don't you? That's right, JR and the King.

 

Bad idea all around. Not to say that the idea wouldn't wet many wrestlers' pants (a lot of guys would get PPV payoffs that normally don't), but it's just too bad for viewers.

 

Jason

[The Czech Republic 0]

They should do this year and only this year so they can end the split.

Yeah, somehow I feel like they HAVE to unify the titles at WMXX, which HAS to be the biggest best event in the history of this sport. With all the hype and the ticket prices, even Vince doesn't have the balls to not go all out.

 

Hey, with the Rumble: maybe stagger entrances so there's a guy coming in every minute at two-minute intervals, and keep the respective clocks running on screen.

[MillenniumMan831 0]

While there could be a Raw ring and a Smackdown ring, you'd have to make it legal to go back and forth among rings.

[Guest Duncan Eternia]

I like how they did it last year, with the winner getting the main event for himself and his brand. Makes it seem like there is a little more competition between RAW and SD.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

2 Rings, 60 Guys 2 Winners!

 

I doubt theres 60 people who wouldn't be involved in other matches. They'd have to throw in guys like Doink, The Conquistadors, Sgt. Slaughter, etc.

[{''({o..o})''} 0]

Well Patterson would have to start now booking a 60 man rumble now for it not to be the clusterfuck to end all clusterfucks. Also there still would only be 5-6 candidates tops to win the thing so it would be just a waste of time in my opinion, but what do I know I've f'ing launched my pet squirrel off my roof earlier with a catupult(Don't worry he had a parachute).

[Steviekick 0]

The multiple ring battle royals get too confusing to watch. Just up it to 40 instead of 30 entrants. That way it comes across as being more important and gets more people in it.

[Guest TheGame2705]

RAW

--------

1.Snow

2.Bubba

3.D-Von

4.Jericho

5.Nowinski

6.Christian

7.Cade

8.Goldberg

9.Goldust

10.Kane

11.Nash

12.Storm

13.Maven

14.Jindrak

15.Orton

16.Dupree

17.Flair

18.Rico

19.RVD

20.Mack

21.Rosey

22.Steiner

23.Michaels

24.Spike

25.Richards

26.Grenier

27.Test

28.Hurricane

29.Dreamer

30.Val Venis

 

Take out whoever faces Triple H and replace them with returning Batista

 

SD

----------

1.Train

2.Show

3.Ultimo

4.Gunn

5.Kidman

6.Bradshaw

7.Haas

8.Chavo

9.Benoit

10.Palumbo

11.Danny Basham

12.Doug Basham

13.Eddy

14.Edge

15.Faarooq

16.Funaki

17.Noble

18.Cena

19.Stamboli

20.Gowen

21.Hardy

22.Nunzio

23.Rey Jr.

24.Rhyno

25.Rikishi

26.O'Haire

27.Shannon

28.Benjamin

29.Spanky

30.Tajiri

 

Lesnar vs. Taker vs. Angle

[AndrewTS 0]

War Games was just too much. Sure, this would be only 2/3 as much clutter going on, but even so it would force them to keep more guys on the roster who would be just wasted and barely getting any TV time so that once a year they can be "filler" for the Rumble match.

 

Naw--the Rumble as it is perfect in my opinion. One ring, and it's like getting a bunch of mini-matches at once and is fun to watch. More than one ring would just cause you to miss things happening in each one.

[Steviekick 0]

If they did do a 60 man RR, the rest of the card would be very weak. Matches and the Rumble would be really short to accommodate for the multiple appearances.

[Guest Trivia247]

a nice concept but unfortunately you probably couldn't get it to work symotaniously what you could do is have the Raw matches then its Royal Rumble...then have a intermission then have the Smackdown matches and its Royal rumble.

[{''({o..o})''} 0]

There are only so many spots that can be used in a rumble let alone two. Guy gets thrown hangs on and its many varietys, Taka's crash and burn, or Tazz's 3-5 second apperence. By the middle of second match there would be nothing left to do.

[Guest TheGame2705]

There are only so many spots that can be used in a rumble let alone two. Guy gets thrown hangs on and its many varietys, Taka's crash and burn, or Tazz's 3-5 second apperence. By the middle of second match there would be nothing left to do.

Not necessarily. I liked 2003 Rumble alot, in fact my second favorite. Always something new. Hell it got me hooked on Mattitude.

[Styles 0]

Bad idea. Anyone who thinks this should be done has obviously never seen any of WCW's World War III matches. Just a complete clutter to watch, with no way to follow the action until the final 10. Do it like last year, the selling point is the RAW/Smackdown interactions which keeps things fresh with the winner getting the title shot in the main event of Mania.

[Guest TheGame2705]

Bad idea. Anyone who thinks this should be done has obviously never seen any of WCW's World War III matches. Just a complete clutter to watch, with no way to follow the action until the final 10. Do it like last year, the selling point is the RAW/Smackdown interactions which keeps things fresh with the winner getting the title shot in the main event of Mania.

I've seen all of them except 1996 and liked 95 and 97. 98 was horrible because everyone knew who would win and the PPV as a whole was horrible (with the rest of the last 3 mos. of that year).

 

One thing people aren't getting though is in WW3, everyone started at once. In Royal Rumble I think there's only been 15 people max at a time. I say it could work great with regular format and opposite minutes. Raw comes in, minute til Smackdown comes in, etc. You also can also have some cool spots with the two rings. A cool dynamic would be having Smackdown matches in the SD ring and RAW matches in the RAW ring. Possibly an entrance on each of the side by side rings for each brand.

[Guest Trivia247]

Its hard to hold your conversation during a single battle royal or a royal rumble match....can't do two at once, but maybe extendthe PPV timeso each brand had two hours with each main event being the RR match...probably the better way.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

...and maybe they can come in on zipcords...

 

...and maybe they can come up through the ground like Gangrel or Rey Rey...

 

...and maybe they can have it be a stacked HIAC...

 

 

god...

 

sorry...I love the Rumble the way it is...

[nl5xsk1 0]

The smart-ass in me wants to say "60 wrestlers, one ring but the ring is GIANT and twice the size as a normal ring!!!" but I'd be afraid that someone would take me seriously and tell me how stupid I am.

 

Leave the Rumble as it is. But have each brand do their own, on their own PPV. Winner gets a title shot still, but not an Wrestlemania (I've always hated that angle)