WWE Royal Rumble - January 29, 2012

meh PPV. Punk/Ziggler was good before the overbooking and Rumble was disappointing. Until Orton it was Jobber Rumble with some highlights.

Jericho/Sheamus nearly redeemed it.

sephy37

The 'bout that was turned into a dark match last year could be a main event this year for WrestleMania.

Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan for the WHC anyone?

And of course, I had an awesome time watching the PPV until I hear all the complaining on the internet.

And of course, I had an awesome time watching the PPV until I hear all the complaining on the internet.

Chicago_Nut

That is the best part. 

"WAH WAH *insert awful opinion on what should have happened here*  I'M DONE WITH WRESTLING!!!!!"

And of course, I had an awesome time watching the PPV until I hear all the complaining on the internet.

Chicago_Nut

Heh, and that would happen regardless of how good a PPV would be. Just think there was too many jobbers.

Favorite match was probably Kane vs Cena.

Every rumble has a bunch of jobbers. I didn't feel like there were too many this year.

I want to know, what was wrong with the Rumble? Why was it so bad?

Honestly, I'm pretty annoying by this considering, well, the CROWD loved it as they went NUTS for spots with Foley/Santino, Kharma, Kofi, Duggan, Booker, King, Road Dogg and among others. Hot crowd, great spots (including the GREATEST SPOT EVER), non stop action (unlike most Rumbles), great pacing between entries (it really never is 90 seconds, but they did a great job tonight), lots of stars, I mean...

WHAT THE F*** DO YOU WANT?!

I want to know, what was wrong with the Rumble? Why was it so bad?

Honestly, I'm pretty annoying by this considering, well, the CROWD loved it as they went NUTS for spots with Foley/Santino, Kharma, Kofi, Duggan, Booker, King, Road Dogg and among others. Hot crowd, great spots (including the GREATEST SPOT EVER), non stop action (unlike most Rumbles), great pacing between entries (it really never is 90 seconds, but they did a great job tonight), lots of stars, I mean...

WHAT THE F*** DO YOU WANT?!

Chicago_Nut

Haha, you're like the opposite of the typical "smart" fan - you make an excuse for why everything was good instead of why everything was bad.
The Rumble was fine, it wasn't great - the main problem was that there was like three people in the entire Rumble who ever had a chance of winning it so when any of those people weren't in the ring it was just filler. Cody and Miz had been building some credibility throughout the entire Rumble and then Big Show eliminates them easily. The Jericho/Sheamus segment was amazing, one of the better Rumble endings I've seen. 

Predictability = bad

Got it. I'll make sure to hate everything because of the outcome.

People complaining about "jobbers"? IT'S A ROYAL RUMBLE MATCH!!

Cena being in the Rumble would've made no sense since he has his WM match already.

I'm guessing they didn't put Kane in because they still want Kane to look like a monster and didn't want him being eliminated

Well didn't Big Show come out at #40 last year?

Big Show's average entry in the Rumble is pretty damn high.

EDIT: Nevermind, that was Kane. Show came out at 35.

Other than that, Big Show at #30 sucked the air out of me. I didn't care for a big name like Lesnar showing up, but...it's Big Show. Yay...Full_Metal1923

I'll admit that was super underwhelming. I was having a feeling that it would be a big return (at best Brock, at worst Rey Mysterio) and instead...blah. 

[QUOTE="Full_Metal1923"]Other than that, Big Show at #30 sucked the air out of me. I didn't care for a big name like Lesnar showing up, but...it's Big Show. Yay...JML897

I'll admit that was super underwhelming. I was having a feeling that it would be a big return (at best Brock, at worst Rey Mysterio) and instead...blah. 

Yeah, me and my brothers expected a big surprise also.

[QUOTE="JML897"]

[QUOTE="Full_Metal1923"]Other than that, Big Show at #30 sucked the air out of me. I didn't care for a big name like Lesnar showing up, but...it's Big Show. Yay...archvile_78

I'll admit that was super underwhelming. I was having a feeling that it would be a big return (at best Brock, at worst Rey Mysterio) and instead...blah. 

Yeah, me and my brothers expected a big surprise also.

Cena being in the Rumble would've made no sense since he has his WM match already.

I'm guessing they didn't put Kane in because they still want Kane to look like a monster and didn't want him being eliminated

JML897

I don't know, it just felt like there are couple moments when that instant "oh, there's the guy -insert name- has been fueding with coming to get retrbiution!" Full_Metal1923

Oh, and I forgot about Ricardo!

Like seriously, how awesome was that? 

I cannot fathom why anybody wouldn't think this Rumble was awesome. Drink a couple of beers and have fun when watching this stuff, I tells ya.

[QUOTE="Full_Metal1923"] I don't know, it just felt like there are couple moments when that instant "oh, there's the guy -insert name- has been fueding with coming to get retrbiution!" The_Dude14

Maybe it just speaks more on the roster tiring out for me. Everyone's fueded with everyone these days. No fresh faces, and few rivalries untapped that would matter. : ( 

Oh, and I forgot about Ricardo!

Like seriously, how awesome was that? 

I cannot fathom why anybody wouldn't think this Rumble was awesome. Drink a couple of beers and have fun when watching this stuff, I tells ya.

Chicago_Nut

I thought it was Alberto at first (i mean we probably all did) then i notice the car and then its ricardo. That segment during the Rumble made me laugh.

Also the socks showdown. :P

Ricardo/Foley/Santino was great comedy. Ricardo's probably my favorite person in WWE right nowJML897

Heh, loved how Ricardo was all "no, no" when Foley expected him to fight with him.

If you compare this year's to 2001, the difference is star power is night and day, so do not white wash, please.

Otherwise, I think the bigger problem with this year's Rumble is not so much the lack of star power, but rather, how not over the guys were. Take away the nostalgia/gimmick entries, and the crowd seem to be largely dead for most entries.

As for the Rumble itself, I miss the days when it was actually a match, and not a spot show. For what it was, it was fine. It definitely had it's moments. In particular, Sheamus-Jericho, while no Shawn-Taker, was good. 

I do laugh at the people who say this was the worst Rumble match. Not even. 1999 says hello.  

In conclusion, I love Ricardo.

Edit: Oh, and when will WWE learn not disappoint the crowd with #30? Either announce the guy in advance (like they did with Rikishi in 2001), have it be a surprise, or a top star (in this case, RKO or Jericho and his jacket).

As for the Rumble itself, I miss the days when it was actually a match, and not a spot show. For what it was, it was fine. It definitely had it's moments. In particular, Sheamus-Jericho, while no Shawn-Taker, was good. 

Blue_Shield

The 2000 Rumble is exactly that and it was absolutely, godawfully atrocious and boring. If you're talking something like 1992, then absolutely. But the Rumble was never really a legit "match" to begin with.

I think the 2001 Rumble is one HELL of a spot show, and it's considered one of the best Rumbles. And I love it. 

That Rumble was bad. Punk/Ziggler was good but overbooked ending killed it.
Rumble killed any excitement I had in me for Wrestlemania.

I was watching it with friends who are casual watchers. And when it came down to Jericho and Sheamus. One said.

"It can't be over yet. Something else has to happen."

Because it was disappointing in every way. The Big Show as number 30 killed all of us and most of them loved the Big Show.
10% of the Rumble was ****ing announcers? Why not have Brodus, Kane, Cena, Regal in the Rumble?

Where the **** was Christian?

This was one of the worst rumbles I have ever watched. 1999 was a trainwreck but this wasn't far behind.

Like when dudes are hugging each other in corners and trying to eliminate each other in the most boring way possible?

The 2000 Rumble is exactly that and it was absolutely, godawfully atrocious and boring. If you're talking something like 1992, then absolutely. But the Rumble was never really a legit "match" to begin with.

I think the 2001 Rumble is one HELL of a spot show, and it's considered one of the best Rumbles. And I love it.Chicago_Nut

And do not get me wrong. Old Rumble, if done wrong, definitely could be boring. However, with that being said, I still prefer that over the spot show. The match made more sense. Dudes would try to *gasp* eliminate other dudes. Now, it's a spot show. 

Again, just my preference.

And I'll admit, 2001 Rumble was awesome. Not sure if I would just call it a spot show, but I digress.

Why not have BrodusKotenks

Where was the funk when we needed it, baby? 

This was one of the worst rumbles I have ever watched. 1999 was a trainwreck but this wasn't far behind.Kotenks

Wow.

And yes, Drew vs Brodus was stupid. Both should have been in the Rumble.

Rumble can't be any less star-studded (or worse, as I recall) than 93. Macho Man was, like, the only star in that Rumble. I think 93 was the first Rumble where the undercard was more impressive than the Rumble.The_Dude14

Also, say what you will about Yokozuna (and I would say plenty), but at least the man was pushed like a monster.

Edit: Also, 1993 did not have the advantage of nostalgia/gimmick entries, and using guys from the undercard.

1993 Rumble would have improved by default if you what would have had the likes of the Razor Ramon, Shawn Michaels, Marty Jannetty, and Bam Bam Bigelow in there. 

Edit 2: Also, isn't it saying something when we are comparing this Rumble to 93? Ya know, the years when WWE's business was in the s*** can.

Re-watching 1993 Rumble, and while it is not most exciting Rumble ever, it still has more meat to it.

Also, this Rumble has Heenan.

Heenan (on Taker): "By the time he gets to the ring, it will be time for WrestleMania."

Who doesn't love the Brain? 

Edit: lol, DiBiase no sells Taker's chokeslam.

I, too, think that having Cena in the match for a long time would have definitely helped.

Would it have made sense? No. But hey...Kharma was in the Rumble. She can't even wrestle for a world title in the first place.

I did not watch the show. Just the Rumble.

Again, depends on what you are looking for.

As a spot show, I thought it was fine.

Edit: However, to me, take away the nostalgia/gimmick entries, and this match exposed how not over many of the current guys were.

i for one loved the rumble match....very unpredictable sheamus winning it, i mean jericho got the high number like everyone thought he would be everything was in place for an easy win for him...there were so many close calls between sheamus and jericho getting eliminated and the sheamus finally pulled it off, it was a great ending

this only thing that upset me was jericho losing of course, but only because i'm a big jericho mark...and the fact that jerichos end of the world thing was kind of anticlimatic i suppose...but hopefully Raw tonight changes that

but overall jericho didn't need the rumble win, he's kind of done it all and he didn't need this for his career...jericho is as over as he's ever gonna get....sheamus on the other hand i think needed this, his first title reign was extremely way too soon and he just wasn't ready...now i finally think he's ready for a main event spot

oh...and i totally called Kharma being in the rumble...before the rumble match started i was talking to my friends and i said "hey, wasn't kharma knocked up like well over 9 months ago? surely that baby has popped out by now? it'd be awesome if she came back in the rumble tonight" and surely enough she did...damn glad she's back

me and my friends biggest pop of the night though was probably road dogg coming out...despite being old and semi fat, he still looks pretty good in the ring 

me and my friends biggest pop of the night though was probably road dogg coming out...despite being old and semi fat, he still looks pretty good in the ringCDUB316

[QUOTE="CDUB316"]me and my friends biggest pop of the night though was probably road dogg coming out...despite being old and semi fat, he still looks pretty good in the ringBlue_Shield

Well it isn't like he was some techincal powerhouse high flyer. So what little he had, he probably still got. 

You people are so grumpy.

And you are trying too hard.

Was he ever a technical mastermind that would make Bret Hart jealous? Hell no.

But it's clear the Road Dogg we got was a out of shape old man Road Dogg.

To be fair, the "You Still Got It" chant is often abused. Even with Streamboat at 25, but considering his age, and the fact he was the only old dude in the match that did not embarrass himself, it was understandable.

And remember, I did say it was nice to see him again. It's not like I said something like "lol, what's the old man doing here?", or something. 

I honestly didn't see any difference between old man Roaddogg's ability and 1998 Roaddogg's ability. Granted, he came into the Royal Rumble for just a short spurt. It's really easy to mask a wrestler's limitations that way.

Then how bad was it?cryceaye5

It was fine. I never really expect much from the undercard on a Rumble because historically the undercards are often pretty weak (they know they can sell the PPV just because of the Rumble)...but Punk/Ziggler was mostly great and I enjoyed the Kane/Cena stuff. The rest of the card was pretty forgettable.

The Rumble itself I thought was a pretty average Royal Rumble -- to me an average Royal Rumble is great because I love the Royal Rumble.

I mean, will the Rumble be the PPV of the year? I hope not, that means we're in store for a pretty bad year. But it'll be far from the worst PPV of the year too. 

Also, how about the Orton Rumble? That was another Rumble where the angle sucked the life out of the match.

Though, with that being said, it was about time we had a team/faction in the Royal Rumble actually take advantage of the fact they are a faction/team in the Royal Rumble.

Edit: Though, I would still rank 1999 lower than 2009. 

I thought the 2009 angle was fantastic and all the build up was fantastic. Predictable? That should never play into someone's enjoyment of a match. I Understand if it does, but... dudes, come on. Be like me. Be positive and love life.

In 2000, The Rock was the only credible dude in that Rumble.

In 2002, HOLY S***, so obvious HHH was winning.

2003? Oh DEAR GOD, it was obvious.

2004? Oh yeah.

2005? You better believed that Cena or Batista were winning it.

2006? Jesus, man. Can make a case for HHH but... come on. EDDIE.

2007? It was either Michaels or Taker and you knew it.

2008? Finally, something unexpected.

This "unpredictability" of the Rumble winner is overblown, and most of those Rumbles are great despite having a predictable winner.

The unpredictability of the #30 spot is also overblown.

X-Pac was #30 in 2000. EX PACK!

Man, I forgot about how fake the ending to Rumble 93 was.

Shame Vince thought Savage was "done".

Savage vs. Bret could have been epic.

Instead, we got turd that was WrestleMania 9.

Oh well.

Onto 1994!