Lt. Al Giardello 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 I think this year might be a suprise for the RR winner. I think Lashley might win it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarvinisaLunatic 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 Im still debating on whether to order it in HD or not. If I dont get HD I wont get it at all.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BHK 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 Are they charging more for HD? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Matt Young 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 Are they charging more for HD? $10 more, yes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enigma 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 The HD feed is $50. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scroby 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 Are they charging more for HD? $10 more, yes. The HD feed is $50. Enigma, there for those who can't do simple math. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enigma 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 WWE.Com has announced MVP vs. Ric Flair for the Rumble. It doesn't look like the U.S. Title is on the line. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrVenkman PhD 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 Yep, just calling it a "career threatening match". That's good, MVP can still job without another DQ/CO type finish and keep his title warm for Matt (who, unless they are keeping him out even longer, might even cost MVP the match). I'll admit it, I'll probably mark out a bit if Taker and Foley start throwing fists during the Rumble. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Black Lushus 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 that would be an awesome Rumble spot...if the crowd doesn't mark, they suck. Period. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
King Kamala 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 that would be an awesome Rumble spot...if the crowd doesn't mark, they suck. Period. It's at MSG, they'll mark. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Black Lushus 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 shows how much I pay attention...yeah MSG is usually a hot crowd. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 The combination of MSG and the Rumble makes this a PPV I'll order. Looks like a great card. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrVenkman PhD 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 I almost always love the Rumble match itself and the undercard is looking really strong this year. Add in a hot MSG crowd and we're in for a good PPV. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canadian Brandon 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 Yeah I'll be getting this. Third rumble in a row. I'm hoping we see a Lashley return during the rumble. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Matt Young 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 WWE.com says Batista, Undertaker, and Kane have all qualified, but doesn't say when or how. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheech Tremendous 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 WWE.com says Batista, Undertaker, and Kane have all qualified, but doesn't say when or how. Tournament in Rio? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2008 WWE.com says Batista, Undertaker, and Kane have all qualified, but doesn't say when or how. Tournament in Rio? WWE.com really needs to do that for at least one entrant. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dh86 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 WWE.com says Batista, Undertaker, and Kane have all qualified, but doesn't say when or how. WWE should just introduce a former World Champions rule where they are automatically entrants if they want to be. They can always use cop outs like "Because Vince said so" when needed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kawalimus 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 This is why they need to cut the Rumble PPV down on time make it two hours long. But they can keep the price the same cause it's the Royal Rumble. It would still be a major PPV just not as long. Remember the 1992 Rumble? That one was great cause it had all the top stars in it. THere were a ton of guys could win that one. Imagine if the RUmble this year had all the stars in it and not wrapped up in their own feuds. Save those feuds for other PPV. The rumble PPV should have all emphasis on the Rumble not on secondary matches. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawk 34 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 This is why they need to cut the Rumble PPV down on time make it two hours long. But they can keep the price the same cause it's the Royal Rumble. It would still be a major PPV just not as long. Remember the 1992 Rumble? That one was great cause it had all the top stars in it. There were a ton of guys could win that one. Imagine if the Rumble this year had all the stars in it and not wrapped up in their own feuds. Save those feuds for other PPV. The rumble PPV should have all emphasis on the Rumble not on secondary matches. Barbarian, Berserker, Duggan, Dibiase (whose singles career was fading) Haku, Hercules, Col. Mustafa, Michaels (he was a freshly turned singles star), Repo Man, Tito Santana (a glorified JTTS at that point), Sags, Slaughter (well after his heat died), Skinner, Snuka (way pass his time), Valentine (ditto), Volkoff, Warlord. That’s half of the line up, pepper in a few mid-card acts. The big attractions of the 1992 rumble were Hogan, Flair, Sid, Savage, Piper, Roberts and Undertaker. That's only 7 names. Hardly any different from what 2007 will offer. What made the Rumble so significant was Flair's performance and the fact the title was on the line. Getting a title shot won't duplicate the enormity of winning the title outright. Now, you can get the Rumble which will have good line up of stars although less realistic winners thanks to the title shot stipulation as well as a strong under card. You brought up 1992, that had a horrible under-card aside from a feel good pop for Piper's win. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scroby 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 WWE.com says Batista, Undertaker, and Kane have all qualified, but doesn't say when or how. Actually WWE.com just says they were added to the match. It doesn't say they had to qualify or anything. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawk 34 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 WWE.com says Batista, Undertaker, and Kane have all qualified, but doesn't say when or how. Actually WWE.com just says they were added to the match. It doesn't say they had to qualify or anything. All three won on SD. Maybe they'll simply use that as a reasoning and say those were qualifying matches. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scroby 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 WWE.com says Batista, Undertaker, and Kane have all qualified, but doesn't say when or how. Actually WWE.com just says they were added to the match. It doesn't say they had to qualify or anything. All three won on SD. Maybe they'll simply use that as a reasoning and say those were qualifying matches. WWE.com would list that, Finlay has been added to the Rumble as well at the Smackdown tapings but nothing has said about that. So I'm assuming the three of them didn't have to qualify at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kawalimus 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 That's a good reason WWE should have one these midcard acts win the rumble one year. And don't have it be a fluke nether like when Maven got rid of Undertaker. Have him just be the best man out there that day. But the problem with that is the winner of the Rumble has to be a headliner in the biggest show of the year. That's how WWE painted themselves into a corner with this event. And you can't just have the guy lose the title shot at NWO why? Cause then it diminishes the significance of the Rumble. But you have a midcarder win Royal Rumble one year, what that does is help you in the long term. That creates a certain doubt in viewers minds which increases the satisfaction watching a show. The Royal Rumble should play up the chaotic theme and have guys who "shouldn't" eliminate someone do so. Just for one night have the competition seem even, create a real atmosphere seemingly where anyone can win. You can't do this if you do things by the books. Which means having guys who aren't able to eliminate another because they're higher on the card. You gotta keep it where anything goes but for one night only! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawk 34 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 There is an advantage to having the Elimination Chamber act as the second chance match at NWO, it opens a small window of hope that they might actually have a "upset" winner but again, it's a small window. Ideally, they'd just have the Rumble winner challenge for the WWE title and the EC winner challenges ECW (or vice versa). Undertaker doesn't NEED to earn a shot. Edge should be jumping up and down to get UT at WM, chomping at the bit to end the streak. Instead, they won't do that because everyone must fear Undertaker. Problem is, they won't waste a winner going after what amounts to being the equivalent of TV title. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kawalimus 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 Another thing should be done one year is this. Have a slot where there is a mystery entrant into the Rumble. Then when he comes out it turns out being the current WWE champion whoever it may be. And this guy come in and wins the Rumble. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkius Maximus 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 ...Are you high? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gert T 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 They should just say Batista and Undertaker are automatic qualifiers due to previous wins. And yes, if that means Duggan gets in, so be it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scroby 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 They should just say Batista and Undertaker are automatic qualifiers due to previous wins. That's pretty much the excuse they used and for Kane it was because he's one of the most dominant wrestlers to be in the Rumble. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Matt Young 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2008 WWE.com says Batista, Undertaker, and Kane have all qualified, but doesn't say when or how. Actually WWE.com just says they were added to the match. It doesn't say they had to qualify or anything. See, that would be all fine and dandy, except the headline at the top of the page listing the entrants reads as follows: 2008 Royal Rumble Participants Not just anyone can enter Royal Rumble. Superstars must qualify for the coveted honor to battle for a World Title opportunity at WrestleMania. Here is a list of who has qualified for the 2008 Royal Rumble so far: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
