|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Jan 14, 2018 10:32:21 GMT -5
A friend of mine was over for that PPV and his wife came in during the Rumble itself, about midway through. She asked what had happened and we were like "Oh, Daniel Bryan was tossed by Bray Wyatt like a jobber." She was in utter and complete disbelief, a reaction like "How could they ever do something that stupid?"
But yeah one problem with the entire Reigns push ironically is that they don't actually push him hard enough. It's this weird passive aggressive deal where they want to push him, but he's not over, so they back track on it, but then push him again, fans revolt, rinse, lather, repeat. I've never quite seen something like this. The past couple of years they actually have Reigns struggle and lose quite often but fans don't really care since the endgame is still so blatantly obvious.
I still don't know where they go with the guy after WM. It's like that PPV is the character's entire endgame, beating Lesnar. The video game is finished. The final boss would be beaten. Yet historically that is when a guy's run is supposed to actually start, not end. Someone had the same problem with Bayley in that recent thread, that she had achieved everything she can in her story arc and it's time to do something else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2018 10:52:42 GMT -5
I honestly think WWE could be spotless from today forward for infinity but I would still resent them because of this match and look forward to their further decline.
It was f***ing hilarious though.
|
|
H-Virus
Hank Scorpio
A Real Contagious Experience
Posts: 5,991
|
Post by H-Virus on Jan 14, 2018 11:12:07 GMT -5
It's really depressing to see what the Rumble match has been like the last several years.
2014 was won by a part-timer who'd only come back to the company a month earlier, which sent the entire company into damage control because they had stupidly convinced themselves that the most over guy in the company wasn't really all that over. And it also ended up being CM Punk's last match in the company.
2015 was a dumpster fire on just about every level, from Bryan's early elimination, to the Local Men, to Roman and the Rock getting booed out of the building. This is the match that killed Roman's chances of becoming this generation's John Cena no matter how hard he gets pushed or how many accolades he collects along the way.
2016 is only memorable for being AJ Styles' debut. The only person who mattered was Reigns, and if they thought that having him voluntarily walk away from a match where his title was on the line so he could go have a snack backstage and then come back fifteen minutes later looking completely healed from his previous assault, well... they thought wrong. And how f***ing stupid were Vince and the League of Nations for not throwing his dead body back into the ring to eliminate him?
2017 was focused on three people: Lesnar, Goldberg and Undertaker. And since none of them showed up until the very end of the match, it made the first two thirds of it feel pointless. And just to make it even stupider, Lesnar and Goldberg didn't even last five minutes before getting eliminated, and Undertaker barely made it past eight.
And let's not forget that three of those years were won by the members of Evolution, and yet somehow the one that they didn't win was still the worst of the lot.
The Rumble has been my favorite match since I first started watching wrestling, but I'm not holding my breath for anything spectacular to happen this year, either. Reigns/Lesnar is already set in stone, so unless someone from Smackdown wins (and the only viable option there is Nakamura, who's also had his push botched to hell), I'm preparing for one of two things: vitriol or apathy.
|
|
Big Poppa Pumpkin
Dennis Stamp
I'll be in the back polishing............ my belt.
Posts: 4,987 
|
Post by Big Poppa Pumpkin on Jan 14, 2018 11:24:04 GMT -5
I felt sorry for everyone in the match because after Bryan got dumped out it was beyond salvage. Personally I would have had Bryan and Reigns as the last two, have them both go over at the same time, then their argument over who hit the floor first turns into a full-blown brawl to set up the match they ended up having at Fastlane anyway. Winner goes to Wrestlemania! I'm pretty sure that would have generated more interest in Fastlane than "Hey, I got tossed out like a jobber at #15 but I'm mad at you for winning for some reason and wanna prove myself the better man" or whatever the story was going into the match.
Then you could do a thing where Bryan comes close to winning but ultimately loses to the strong Reigns, setting up an eventual title feud between the two after Reigns wins at Wrestlemania. Maybe have someone do a run in and screw Bryan out of the match at Fastlane to set up a big Wrestlemania match for him. I just feel like if Bryan were made to look more important the crowd wouldn't have shit on Roman so much. The whole thing was a real mess, like if it were back in the territory days that would have probably 'killed the town' because it was such a middle finger to the audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by CeilingFan on Jan 14, 2018 11:28:44 GMT -5
Thank you O so much for this you are welcome  |
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 14, 2018 11:41:25 GMT -5
That match is a glorious pinnacle in the WWE's surrealist Reigns experiment. I do not tend to enjoy schadenfreude, but there's something different about seeing this big Conquering Megaface Hero story playing out, but the crowd thinks he's a super villain. It's just... baffling.
On other nights, they cut the crowd's mic, or the audience has sunk into despair and not gotten so angry. But at that Rumble, they were mad enough to create this ridiculous spectacle.
The only other night that comes close, to me, is last year's post-Wrestlemania Raw. That had the bizarre extra layer where Reigns is a face who's getting treated as a heel, but he's acting like the heel reaction is a big victory for him as a face. That's some Ionesco shit, right there.
|
|
msc
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,566
|
Post by msc on Jan 14, 2018 11:43:35 GMT -5
I... liked the 2016 and 2017 Rumbles, tbh. 2016 probably seems better due to 2014 and 15, but they both have rewatch value. It has been a while since an outright classic Rumble though - 2008? 2004? C'mon booker man (any of you), give us a good one, that's all we ask. There wasn't that many (iirc) moans about Austin winning in 2001 after all, because that rumble is awesome.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheMediocreWarrior on Jan 14, 2018 11:48:10 GMT -5
I didn't have a huge problem with Reigns winning since I never for a second thought they'd let Bryan win. The problem was that they booked Roman with obviously no understanding of why people had liked him in the first place (this has continued to this day) and the rest of the Rumble was a mess from start to finish. I don't think the crowds would have turned on Roman if they had kept him as the silent badass who destroyed people, instead of trying to force him into the John Cena mold that he didn't fit. Roman Reigns should be the successor to Goldberg, not the jokey babyface promo John Cena. This is part of WWE's larger problem, where they think every star needs to be able to do everything from wrestling high quality matches to promos. Sometimes being the silent guy who proves himself in the ring is cool. Or someone could have a manager to do the talking for them. That's what they have for Brock Lesnar, but apparently no one else can have that! WWE really should bring back the manager in a big way. Now that Paige's in ring career is over, I'd like to see her lead a stable as a manager. Maybe build up Absolution and have a couple of guys in there too. |
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 14, 2018 12:05:01 GMT -5
It's always funny listening to announcers when they have to ignore crowd reactions and stick to their scripts so awkwardly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Jan 14, 2018 12:17:49 GMT -5
I... liked the 2016 and 2017 Rumbles, tbh. 2016 probably seems better due to 2014 and 15, but they both have rewatch value. It has been a while since an outright classic Rumble though - 2008? 2004? C'mon booker man (any of you), give us a good one, that's all we ask. There wasn't that many (iirc) moans about Austin winning in 2001 after all, because that rumble is awesome. I’ll say I like 2014 along with the other two you mentioned. If the No 30 thing didn’t happen and they made a good enough reason why Bryan wouldn’t be in the Rumble (and no, a line in a promo wasn’t good enough considering stuff like that was said before in the past and people entered anyway), then it’d be a fun Rumble to most. 2016 had some really nice character moments and Styles debuting puts it above most Rumbles and 2017 was fine for the most part. But yeah, there’s hasn’t been a really great Rumble but they don’t have to be great. Just be that start to the Road to WrestleMania. Set up feuds to conclude at WM, push forward stuff that the fans who watch every week will know are arching the stuff they’ve seen and make it action packed and fun. Very few Rumbles are ones I wouldn’t consider successful at that. Even 1999 somewhat set up Rock/Austin for that year’s WrestleMania. |
|
|
|
Post by psychokiller on Jan 14, 2018 13:15:34 GMT -5
The pettiness is off the charts with Vince. I know there’s probably less than a 10% chance of Vince selling the company & someone that’s not a McMahon taking over but one can only hope. They’re all ruining the product & it’s a shame. |
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 14, 2018 13:22:44 GMT -5
They ended up making everyone look bad. They petulantly screwed over Bryan. They made Kane and Big Show look like shit. They turned the crowd against Reigns, and even made the Rock look stupid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jan 14, 2018 13:24:48 GMT -5
So outside of Reigns mentioning the crowd reaction in the Royal Rumble documentary, has anyone else ever commented on all this?
|
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Jan 14, 2018 13:29:43 GMT -5
2 things:
I haven't watched this since, but I seem to remember that there was a slight pause when Roman's music hit of the whole of Philly remembering the CM Punk podcast at the exact same time and realising "Oh god damn it, he's winning isn't he?"
I wonder how many of the higher ups back stage heard that reaction and just quietly thought "oh..."
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 28,329
|
Post by chazraps on Jan 14, 2018 13:46:53 GMT -5
I... liked the 2016 and 2017 Rumbles, tbh. 2016 probably seems better due to 2014 and 15, but they both have rewatch value. It has been a while since an outright classic Rumble though - 2008? 2004? C'mon booker man (any of you), give us a good one, that's all we ask. There wasn't that many (iirc) moans about Austin winning in 2001 after all, because that rumble is awesome. I honestly adore the 2012 Rumble because it's possibly the only time this side of the millennium that you had absolutely no idea who was going to win it. At least five different entrants had convincing stories that could see them going all the way, the surprises were real surprises, and the final ten minutes really made winning the Rumble feel like a grueling prize. It got hated on at the time for Jericho not winning, and now when compared to other Rumbles people complain about the "lack of star power," but that's missing what made this such a uniquely exciting Rumble, with the atmosphere I think they strive for when they push the "unpredictability" element. It's worth a revisit, I believe history will be kind to it. |
|
msc
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,566
|
Post by msc on Jan 14, 2018 14:11:36 GMT -5
I... liked the 2016 and 2017 Rumbles, tbh. 2016 probably seems better due to 2014 and 15, but they both have rewatch value. It has been a while since an outright classic Rumble though - 2008? 2004? C'mon booker man (any of you), give us a good one, that's all we ask. There wasn't that many (iirc) moans about Austin winning in 2001 after all, because that rumble is awesome. I honestly adore the 2012 Rumble because it's possibly the only time this side of the millennium that you had absolutely no idea who was going to win it. At least five different entrants had convincing stories that could see them going all the way, the surprises were real surprises, and the final ten minutes really made winning the Rumble feel like a grueling prize. It got hated on at the time for Jericho not winning, and now when compared to other Rumbles people complain about the "lack of star power," but that's missing what made this such a uniquely exciting Rumble, with the atmosphere I think they strive for when they push the "unpredictability" element. It's worth a revisit, I believe history will be kind to it. Oh I bet CewshReviews (a wrestling reviewer/podcaster) Sheamus would win and won, so I am still fond of the 2012 rumble!  |
|
|
|
Post by JTG Fan on Jan 14, 2018 14:15:31 GMT -5
This is the moment Reigns became unsalvageable. Well, except for the fact that he currently makes WWE a bunch of money off merch and is getting babyface reactions, sure. |
|
|
|
Post by Susan "Poison" Candy on Jan 14, 2018 14:20:29 GMT -5
I can't quite put my finger on it but I believe that the Rumble matches have gone a bit downhill since 2006.
2006 - Mysterio wins cause he "Did it for Eddie"....Ugh that storyline
2007 - Undertaker wins last eliminating Shawn Michaels, when you think about it as a whole that Rumble match in my mind was kind of forgettable.
2008 - John Cena returns after being on the shelf for only a few months and wins at number 30. Ugh super Cena. Didn't win at Mania.
2009 - Randy Orton, okay Rumble match but the end game was he lost at WrestleMania in one of the worst WrestleMania events.
2010 - Edge returns from injury and wins the Rumble but losses at Mania which he should have won for all storyline purposes.
2011 - Del Rio wins Rumble match and losses opening title match. Yay?
2012 - Sheamus wins which I believe should have gone to Jericho and this was the beginning of the fans revolution towards everything creative did. Sheamus beats Bryan in 18 seconds at Mania which turned the whole WWE world upside down.
2013 - John Cena wins again and wins Mania match against The Rock which to be honest nobody cared about.
2014 - Batista wins when it was Bryan's year. Nobody cared but we got what we wanted at Mania.
2015 - Need I say more.....
2016 - Triple H wins only to put over the guy who just the following year was booed out of the building and nobody cared about his win in the Rumble match in 2015 and nobody cared that he won back the title at another meh Mania.
2017 - Randy Orton who goes on to beat Bray Wyatt for the title at Mania only to have the dumbest feuds and lose the title to Jinder Mahal of all people.
I hope that this year's Rumble match and winner won't fall into the same pattern that it has been going for the last decade.
|
|
Perfect Timing
Dennis Stamp
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 4,869
|
Post by Perfect Timing on Jan 14, 2018 15:53:35 GMT -5
If I was to put a finger on it I'd say it's Pat Patterson. I mean wasn't he a huge reason why Rumbles have been awesome for many years? I don't think he's booked one in about 10 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarkerpolseng on Jan 14, 2018 16:07:14 GMT -5
I watched with some friends who don't really watch, (except we get together for the RR and WM) and when Show and Kane were non chalantly tossing out our favs, my buddy said "With the ease they tossed them out, the camera angles they used to film it, the quickness of them being tossed out, and the announcing, it is like the WWE is just rubbing it in our faces."
|
|
