Danville_Wrestling Posted January 24, 2007 Report Posted January 24, 2007 While 1991's Rumble isn't the greatest Rumble of all time I think it is definitely in the top 4. Bret Hart established himself in that match by going over 20 minutes, the Undertaker also established himself by getting several eliminations and just choking everything in sight, Greg Valentine turned face by attacking Bravo, Martel set the Rumble record (and in my opinion should have finished 2nd), etc. In fact, I think the entire 1991 pay-per-view is VERY underrated from a quality standpoint because the Miami crowd was hot throughout the show and awesome performances were turned in by the Rockers, Orient Express, Big Bossman, and the Barbarian. Also, who can forget that great sneak attack by Savage on the Warrior during the WWF title match when he blindsides Warrior in the aisle and Virgil turning on DiBiase? I definitely think the Rumble show was the best WWF pay-per-view of 1991.
Betty Houle Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 What is it with Savage and Royal Rumbles? He ALWAYS does horribly. In 1992 he made the Final 4 but got maybe 3 offensive moves in during his entire time in the ring. He was the last man eliminated in the 1993 Rumble so he hardly ALWAYS does horribly (Granted he was the 30th man in but still...)
Kahran Ramsus Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 Hogan fucked him over in 1989, you can hardly blame Savage for that one too.
eiker_ir Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 i loved Benoit, Jericho and Angle beings in the final four in 2004. I was like OMG WTF IS GOING OOOOON
Aero Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 Based on the endings alone, I'd probably rank the top ones as: 1. 2004 2. 2001 3. 1995 4. 1998 5. 1997 Sure, while we all knew that Big Show in 2004, Kane in 2001, and Rock in 1998 all had zero chance of winning, those were all just exciting endings.
MFer Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 I've only seen the RR from '01 to now, but one "oh shit" moment for me was when Snitsky knocked London off the apron. (in '05 I believe)
snuffbox Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 Bossman-Barbarian on the '91 show was insanely good considering the participants.
foleyfanforever88 Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 I've only seen the RR from '01 to now, but one "oh shit" moment for me was when Snitsky knocked London off the apron. (in '05 I believe) It was 05, I loved that spot even though its so contrived.
TheOriginalOrangeGoblin Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 What is it with Savage and Royal Rumbles? He ALWAYS does horribly. In 1992 he made the Final 4 but got maybe 3 offensive moves in during his entire time in the ring. He was the last man eliminated in the 1993 Rumble so he hardly ALWAYS does horribly (Granted he was the 30th man in but still...) Look at how he got eliminated though. And in 1989 it was Hogan fucking him over so I'll give him that. Still though, 1990 he didn't last long and got tossed early. 1991, he didn't even make it to the match. 1992, he eliminated Roberts then didn't get another offensive move all match. 1993 he came in 30th and was eliminated in the dumbest spot in Rumble history. 1994 he was non-descriptly tossed in the background as the camera focused on Doink.
pochorenella Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 I wouldn't highly rank the 95 Rumble but I would say that it's probably the best finish any Rumble has ever had. I wouldn't want them to ever do it again but at the time it was a really neat idea. Completely agree on this. It was a truly unique ending with a high level of suspense with Michaels outsmarting the Bulldog. And it was the first time that both the #1 and #2 entrants lasted as the final 2 (last year Triple H was in the last 3.)
DrVenkman PhD Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 Yeah, I don't see where the "bad ending" train of thought is coming from. The ending of that match has been shown multiple times in retro flashbacks on WWE TV and for good reason. It's not as if (to me knowledge) that the two foot rule retconned anything previously existing. Even knowing that HBK had to win and there was no chance that Bulldog would be fighting Diesel at Mania, I thought it was executed very well, complete will Bulldog's theme playing as the assumed victor.
Hawk 34 Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 Yeah, I don't see where the "bad ending" train of thought is coming from. The ending of that match has been shown multiple times in retro flashbacks on WWE TV and for good reason. It's not as if (to me knowledge) that the two foot rule retconned anything previously existing. Even knowing that HBK had to win and there was no chance that Bulldog would be fighting Diesel at Mania, I thought it was executed very well, complete will Bulldog's theme playing as the assumed victor. I think it's just a case of this spot being redone so many times in battle royals, it's made the sentiment for the finish more negative. There's only five types of eliminations possible according to WWE in the Rumble 1) The struggle by the ropes leading to one man falling over and one hangs on to win (ex. Rock/TBS) 2). The straight up mini match ending with a finisher and elimination or losing wrestler misses a charge and goes over (ex. HHH/Angle) 3). The double elimination (Ex. Hart/Luger) 4). Wrestler A sneaks up and eliminates wrestler B and C to win (Ex. Flair/Hogan/Sid) 5). The 1995 Finish I'd like to see a fresh finish but what else can be done, short of the final 3 having two men fall over while the winner has no involvement at all (which I'm sure has been done in a battle royal).
cabbageboy Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 Allow me to explain why that 1995 finish is moronic. First, what kind of dumbass was Bulldog for tossing HBK over the ropes and then simply walking away without making sure it was all over? Bulldog always was a moron in Rumbles really, for instance whenever he would press guys over his head and throw them IN the ring rather than over the top. It's insulting to my intelligence to think a guy wouldn't simply make sure a guy was fully eliminated. Second, it set up a feud I had zero desire to see as a main event. And I'm right about this since WM 11 did a shitty buyrate. Diesel (face champ) vs. Michaels (heel challenger) made no sense booking wise, since it had the small HBK playing the heel against a 7 ft. monster FACE? I ask you, why not just not give the belt to Nash at all, keep it on Backlund till the Rumble, Bret regains it there, and then Bulldog wins this Rumble. Then they can do Bret vs. Bulldog part 2 at WM. It'd have been a better match and my god could it have drawn less than what they ended up doing? (And yes, I know that Dec. 95 PPV with Bret/Bulldog did a crappy buyrate, but that was after Bulldog did a horrendous heel turn and had zero heat.)
Black Lushus Posted January 26, 2007 Report Posted January 26, 2007 HBK had the Sid factor going into WM11, so it was certainly believable that he could steal the title...and then they went out and had a pretty decent match...nothing spectacular, but it certainly wasn't bad.
DrVenkman PhD Posted January 26, 2007 Report Posted January 26, 2007 cabbage, you answered your own question about why Bulldog did what he did - he's retarded in Royal Rumbles. Perhaps his big battle royal win at Lord Albert Hall (which I swear was mentioned on about 50 Coliseum Videos afterwards) gave him the confidence to think his strong clothesline was more than enough to knock Michaels over the top and right to the floor.
Vern Gagne Posted January 26, 2007 Report Posted January 26, 2007 How is order and elimination determined?
The Amazing Rando Posted January 26, 2007 Report Posted January 26, 2007 i assume they storyline it out... like in 01 with the hardcore guys all sort of being grouped together and usually they have one to three bigger names come in between 5 and 15 and the other big names usually after 18. In Rumble 92 they gave Hogan/Taker "special privledges" in storyline because of the stripping of the belt. If the big storyline is HBK/Edge/Orton... they will probably have those guys come in within a span of about 6 entrants, unless they want to throw one in early (probably HBK at around 14) and have Edge and Orton both in either by entrant 21 or have one come in and then the other comes in right before the first is eliminated (probably around 25 or 26). Another big storyline is Taker looking to want the title, so you know he'll probably get a number between 21 and 25. They'll probably try and keep the Hardyz and Nitro around the same set of 7 (maybe have Matt or Jeff in before the 10th and have the other Hardy and Nitro come in back to back around 11-13. Since 1 and 2 haven't been talked about much, i'm expecting them to be Sandman and Sabu. 3rd will be Shelton, who will be like "oh shit i don't think so" followed by Crazy, MVP, Viscera, Jeff Hardy, Dreamer, Thorn, Kane ... there's your first ten. Matt and Nitro follow, then Flair, HBK, Kenny, Masters, Helms, Carlito, RVD, Orton... there's 20. Punk, Chavo, Holly, Edge, Taker, Benoit, Booker, Finlay, The Miz, Khali in at 30.
DrVenkman PhD Posted January 26, 2007 Report Posted January 26, 2007 Matt and Jeff are 3 for 3 in being only 1-3 numbers apart, so I expect no less in 2007.
Lil' Bitch Posted January 27, 2007 Report Posted January 27, 2007 1992 followed by 2004. Edit: 1990 is up there as well, along with 1991.
spman Posted January 27, 2007 Report Posted January 27, 2007 1990 and 1992 were always favorites of mine. 1995, 1989, 1993, and 1999 are the worst. 1989 sucks because no one really has the groove of the match worked out yet, and for the most part, the faces only fight the heels and vice versa. 1993 and 1999 just have way too many jobbers, and the just destroyed any credibility Savage may have had left by having him get thrown out by a kickout. 1995 is just terrible, it's way too short, has too many nonsense filler guys, and just flat out isn't interesting to watch.
Si82 Posted January 27, 2007 Report Posted January 27, 2007 After re-watching the rumble matches from 1989-2006 again I'd have to go with 1990 for my favourite. For all WWE are billing this year's match as the most star studded ever I would have to with the 1990 version. It had plenty of action and mini-feuds as well as the first confrontation between Hulk Hogan and the Ultimate Warrior.
Gert T Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 What are some of the obscure moments during the Rumble did you like? I know some have mention a few already. In 1992, I loved Jake getting paranoid each time the clock was running down in fear of when Randy Savage would come out.
DrVenkman PhD Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 Benoit lasting from the opening bell until the 30th entrant of the 2005 Rumble (making it the second year in a row he did so) seemingly went unnoticed but I loved it.
Lil' Bitch Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 IRS getting eliminated in 1992 when Piper pulled him over by holding onto his tie. 2006 when RVD returned and Carlito was hiding behind the ringpost like a fucking bitch!
Aero Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 1998, when Owen Hart returns to beat down Jeff Jarrett, Marc Mero stands around cheering Owen on nearly the entire time.
Black Lushus Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 memorable spots: -Flair dumping out Bulldog and then Kerry Von Erich within seconds of each other. -Bossman damn near hanging himself on the rope after missing on a knock out attempt on Flair. -Sid whipping Slaughter into the turnbuckle so hard that he popped up, over and out
Black Lushus Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit and Bob Holly breaking in Daniel Puder.
Betty Houle Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 My favorites: 1989, 1992, 2001. Least favorite: 1999. I'm not very fond of 1991 but I like the undercard a lot.
cabbageboy Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 Am I the only one who finds stuff like Ax vs. Smash utterly stupid? It's like "Hey, you're my tag partner...let's fight!" Why not just chill and pose to the crowd for 2 mins. until that poor #3 sap gets out there, and then destroy him? And everyone else that follows? Stuff like Cactus vs. Funk in 1998 I can grasp, since those guys have a bizarre love/hate relationship anyway. But two full time partners fighting is dumb.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now