Oresama Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 The're going to do a 40-Man one again, Alberto Del Rio can't be the only winner of that. As long as it's handled well, I don't mind either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liontamer* Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 I don't think it matters... If the quality and booking is good, everything else falls into place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BestInTheWorld614 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 I only want a 40 man bc the Rumble is my favorite event and I always feel it goes so fast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E#37 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. 40 was overkill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeM Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 I think you get too many jobbers in 40 man rumbles...but the current roster is definitely stacked. Factor in surprises, and I think you probably have a better time to do a 40 man rumble this year than any other year in the past...that said, I think a 30 man match is probably still for the best...unless they're going all-out with surprise entrants. If they have like...5 really big surprise entrants...then I think a 40 man rumble would be better. If not, then stick with 30. And the women should have a 20 woman rumble. Like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardd Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 40. I love the Rumble because of the surprises. The more, the merrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannonfury Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 I like 40 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classiq. Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 40 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeM Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 With a split roster, and the increasing tradition of "surprise / novelty" entrants, 40 would work better. 15 from Raw, 15 from Smackdown which leaves 10 for others. Otherwise you're looking at maybe 12 each and 6 open for others. 12 isn't a lot of opportunity to get other mid / lower tier talent on the PPV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oresama Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 With a split roster, and the increasing tradition of "surprise / novelty" entrants, 40 would work better. 15 from Raw, 15 from Smackdown which leaves 10 for others. Otherwise you're looking at maybe 12 each and 6 open for others. 12 isn't a lot of opportunity to get other mid / lower tier talent on the PPV. About that, I prefer it when people have to qualify for the Royal Rumble. Tag team matches where the winning team both enter, tag team partners pitted against each other for a spot, battle royals where all the people that failed to qualify get one more chance. Same with Money in the Bank, it makes it feel more important when people have to fight for the opportunity to be in the match rather than people cutting a promo saying that they're entering. Obviously the likes of Goldberg, Lesnar and Undertaker aren't going to qualify in matches on Raw or SmackDown but I think the majority of the roster should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Counting Lights Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 40. Put in a lot of jobbers? Oh no how dare they give everyone on their roster a main event spot for one night of the year. You know that they're not going to win? How about just enjoy seeing them for once. I love seeing jobbers in the Rumble. I remember in the first 40 man Rumble, you had guys like Ryder and Chavo run in and get some really cool spots (Zack had the pop up Rough Ryder, Chavo with the suplex frenzy until he hit 3 amigo's), and it just keeps it so fun. Realistically, only 5-10 entrants are ever seen as possible winners anyway, so why not have some fun with lower carders who are totally gonna take advantage of some rare airtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightning116 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If 10 guys don't make the match, boo hoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardd Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If 10 guys don't make the match, boo hoo. More room for surprises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil' Kazu Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 Related to this thread: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Than Light Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If 10 guys don't make the match, boo hoo. More room for surprises.Really don't need more room for surprises. Too many surprises and the match pretty much turns into a spotfest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardd Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If 10 guys don't make the match, boo hoo. More room for surprises.Really don't need more room for surprises. Too many surprises and the match pretty much turns into a spotfest That's fine with me. I don't watch the Rumble for "great wrestling" or to see a "5-star classic". The most memorable moments of Rumbles are essentially the spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 Yeah, RRs and battle royals in general aren't usually expected to be wrestling classics lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEGION Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If 10 guys don't make the match, boo hoo. More room for surprises.Really don't need more room for surprises. Too many surprises and the match pretty much turns into a spotfestThe Royal Rumble is nothing but a spotfest already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creepia Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If 10 guys don't make the match, boo hoo. More room for surprises.Really don't need more room for surprises. Too many surprises and the match pretty much turns into a spotfestThe Royal Rumble is nothing but a spotfest already. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardd Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If 10 guys don't make the match, boo hoo. More room for surprises.Really don't need more room for surprises. Too many surprises and the match pretty much turns into a spotfestThe Royal Rumble is nothing but a spotfest already.Agreed. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muur Posted January 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 Spots are what matter in the Rumble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeM Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 With a split roster, and the increasing tradition of "surprise / novelty" entrants, 40 would work better. 15 from Raw, 15 from Smackdown which leaves 10 for others. Otherwise you're looking at maybe 12 each and 6 open for others. 12 isn't a lot of opportunity to get other mid / lower tier talent on the PPV. About that, I prefer it when people have to qualify for the Royal Rumble. Tag team matches where the winning team both enter, tag team partners pitted against each other for a spot, battle royals where all the people that failed to qualify get one more chance. Same with Money in the Bank, it makes it feel more important when people have to fight for the opportunity to be in the match rather than people cutting a promo saying that they're entering. Obviously the likes of Goldberg, Lesnar and Undertaker aren't going to qualify in matches on Raw or SmackDown but I think the majority of the roster should. Agree 100%. But I don't see the problem with even the likes of Undertaker having qualifiers. Makes them look dominant, and it gives lower guys a match on TV with top stars. Spots are what matter in the Rumble There's an element of that with all multi participant matches. Again however I'm going to hold up the 1992 Rumble match as the prime example of what a Rumble match should be. Not withstanding the fact it was for the title itself, or the stacked who's who list of participants - but the way the match was constructed, It tied together so many angles and stories; off the top of my head; Ric Flair's debut, and the seemingly impossible odds. Jake the Snake looking nervous every time the buzzer went off in case it was Randy Savage - then him hiding when it was. Davey Boy coming off a big Battle Royal win, and entering #1 Interactions with Flair and Piper The various tag team members meeting each other. Roddy Piper looking to win two titles in one night Shawn Michaels breaking out on his own. The Hogan / Sid feud beginning. I could go on all night about how that is the bar for the Rumble. Undertaker setting the seed for the fallout with Jake, and then being eliminated by Hogan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Counting Lights Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 30. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If 10 guys don't make the match, boo hoo. More room for surprises.Really don't need more room for surprises. Too many surprises and the match pretty much turns into a spotfestThe Royal Rumble is nothing but a spotfest already.Agreed. Agreed. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightning116 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 5 surprises ain't enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muur Posted January 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 5 surprises ain't enough? Probably but then it means there's only 25 'normal' entrants and then how many of those will be less than a minute? we'll get like, 20 'proper' entrants at more than a minute probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.