Guest bigdiswrestling Report post Posted July 6, 2004 Is it just me, or was this the worst idea ever. Not only is it a blatant copy of the Royal Rumble, but it was unbelievably boring. 3 Rings, 60-Men, and about 40 of those men were lower card workers and jobbers. Honestly, I've never been so bored than I was watching these PPVs. Even the more recent ones lacked anything special at all. It was just punching and kicking. Unbelievably bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Black Lushus 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 what's interesting with Royal Rumbles and Battle Royals is seeing a battle between two superstars who would normally never wrestle. It was usually maybe a quick two minute battle but it would kick ass and the crowd would mark out hard for it...unfortunantly management would never capitalize on those matches when it's obvious the crowd loves it and give us more...i'll have to go back and look at old tapes, but im sure i can find examples unless someone can beat me to it... the World Wars sucked, but I did like the one where it was down to Nash, Hall, Syxx and Big Show against Booker T, Rey Mysterio, Jeff Jarrett, Stephen Regal, Lex Luger and DDP (this was when the nWo was hot and DDP was potentially going to join them)...i think that's who it was anyway, the crowd was pretty hot for that last 5 minute spurt...i believe Big Show ended up winning this thing and lead up to him getting booted out of the nWo, please correct me if I'm wrong on this, my WCW history is hazier than my WWE history... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted July 6, 2004 Was that the one where Luger was on his own against 4-5 nWo wrestlers, and almost won before he was the final person eliminated? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Agent_Bond34 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 Was that the one where Luger was on his own against 4-5 nWo wrestlers, and almost won before he was the final person eliminated? Wasn't there a similar situation to this in the Uncensored 1997 main event? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest FrigidSoul Report post Posted July 7, 2004 the World Wars sucked, but I did like the one where it was down to Nash, Hall, Syxx and Big Show against Booker T, Rey Mysterio, Jeff Jarrett, Stephen Regal, Lex Luger and DDP (this was when the nWo was hot and DDP was potentially going to join them)...i think that's who it was anyway, the crowd was pretty hot for that last 5 minute spurt...i believe Big Show ended up winning this thing and lead up to him getting booted out of the nWo, please correct me if I'm wrong on this, my WCW history is hazier than my WWE history... You would be correct. Excerpt from Scott Keith's review on it(always good just for historical references) So we’ve got the nWo against Luger, Jarrett, Regal, Guerrero, Mysterio and DDP kind of floating in the middle. Eddy goes fast. Giant tosses Rey out one-handed. Hall Edges Jarrett and he’s gone. DDP charges Regal and he’s finished, then the nWo dumps Regal. So it’s Luger against Hall, Nash, Syxx and Giant. Giant misses a charge and gets racked. Hall tries the Edge and gets tossed. Syxx gets tossed. Nash gets racked, so Giant dumps both guys and wins the thing at Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boner Kawanger 0 Report post Posted July 7, 2004 And they copied that finish verbatum two years later. Just replace Kevin Nash with Scott Hall and The Giant with Kevin Nash. That still just irks me. It did when I saw the show live and it still does when I think about it. Fuckin' WCW... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
natey2k4 0 Report post Posted July 7, 2004 Only good thing about WCW is you knew that some of our jobberweight wrestlers were garunteed a spot on the PPV. And sometimes they had some lesser *over* wrestlers stay in awhile. 97 Wright and Mortis stayed in quite a while, Rey too as well. Still overall a shitty idea... but hey if i gets Psicosis, La Parka, Alex Wright, Hector Garza.. all those guys on PPV.. I'm suprisingly for it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cawthon777 0 Report post Posted July 7, 2004 I thought the concept was great in 1995 when the world title was up for grabs. You knew guys like Malenko, Benoit, etc weren't going to take it (hell, they had only been in the company 2 months at that point) but it did open up the playing field quite a bit for guys like Savage, Luger, Flair, etc to legitimately win the belt without having to go through Hogan. There was some great potential for WCW to use the match to elevate mid carders to the main event level by winning World War 3 and earning a world title shot but that never happened. Gee, I wonder why? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slickster 0 Report post Posted July 8, 2004 There was some great potential for WCW to use the match to elevate mid carders to the main event level by winning World War 3 and earning a world title shot but that never happened. Gee, I wonder why? I disagree about winning WW3 as being a possible opportunity to build a new star. I mean, if they did the 'winner gets Starrcade shot' a la the 98 edition, then they'd have just one month to make them a credible challenger in the eyes of the fans. Compare to the WWE, where the Rumble winner has 2+ months of buildup to put heat on the match. Also, the Rumble has 30 guys all in one ring; you could get attacked by 29 other guys through the course of this match. Plus, it's an hourlong match full of constant action. World War 3 was just 3 battle royals right next to each other with only 19 other guys in each ring. You don't even TOUCH 30 or so of the other guys in the match (they're eliminated in other rings). You don't need stamina to win this match (all went around 26:00). All you need to do is hold onto the ropes/stay low to the ground to win, like in any battle royal. Bottom line: winning a Rumble requires Herculean effort, while World War 3 can be won with luck. I think any casual fan could see that then and can see it now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cawthon777 0 Report post Posted July 8, 2004 There was some great potential for WCW to use the match to elevate mid carders to the main event level by winning World War 3 and earning a world title shot but that never happened. Gee, I wonder why? I disagree about winning WW3 as being a possible opportunity to build a new star. I mean, if they did the 'winner gets Starrcade shot' a la the 98 edition, then they'd have just one month to make them a credible challenger in the eyes of the fans. Compare to the WWE, where the Rumble winner has 2+ months of buildup to put heat on the match. I was referring to the stipulation in 96 and 97 where the winner would get a title shot at SuperBrawl. It didn't happen in 97 because the Giant got his shot at Souled Out instead. And it didn't happen in 98 because of the whold world title vacancy bit, but Hall did get the shot at Uncencored. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MillenniumMan831 0 Report post Posted July 8, 2004 I wish the participants were able to shift throughout the rings more as a way to run away or just shake things up. Instead for the most part, there were 3 20-Man battle royals and a 30 Man BR to finish it. If the rings would have been straight (like War Games) or at least have the aprons meet halfway, guys could have moved to and fro to aid an ally or run from an enemy easier and quicker. But no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted July 8, 2004 I wish the participants were able to shift throughout the rings more as a way to run away or just shake things up. Instead for the most part, there were 3 20-Man battle royals and a 30 Man BR to finish it. If the rings would have been straight (like War Games) or at least have the aprons meet halfway, guys could have moved to and fro to aid an ally or run from an enemy easier and quicker. But no. I always thought that was craptastic...all three rings not lined up with each other. It would've been cool to see someone get dumped out...but land in the other ring instead. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slickster 0 Report post Posted July 8, 2004 I wish the participants were able to shift throughout the rings more as a way to run away or just shake things up. Instead for the most part, there were 3 20-Man battle royals and a 30 Man BR to finish it. If the rings would have been straight (like War Games) or at least have the aprons meet halfway, guys could have moved to and fro to aid an ally or run from an enemy easier and quicker. But no. I always thought that was craptastic...all three rings not lined up with each other. It would've been cool to see someone get dumped out...but land in the other ring instead. Like the oldschool 2-ring battle royals....get tossed from Ring 1, go to Ring 2. It's a double-elimination match that I'm surprised nobody does anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slickster 0 Report post Posted July 8, 2004 It didn't happen in 97 because the Giant got his shot at Souled Out instead. And it didn't happen in 98 because of the whold world title vacancy bit, but Hall did get the shot at Uncencored. Why *did* Hall win WW3, anyway? He had been nothing but a tag team wrestler up to that point. Even after winning, he stayed in the tag team division with Nash until 5/98. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deancoles 0 Report post Posted July 8, 2004 I think Hall won because he was probably the only Upper midcard heel willing to job clean to Sting, personally I'd have had Luger or DDP win so that the Sting/Hogan result wasn't so obvious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
