Should the Womens Rumble be a one off?

[Perfect Timing]

I don't think they need to have to every year. It's overkill to have two in a single night plus it drains the crowd when the real Rumble comes on they've already counted down earlier in the night. I'm giving it a chance but let's be honest, female battle royals suck.

[EoE: Workin On My Night Cheese]

I'd say a tentative yes, mostly because the roster pool and yearly turnover for the women isn't large enough to warrant it without it being like 95% the same people every year. Like, I wouldn't complain if they did do them every year, because I love Royal Rumbles, but that's the numbers of the matter.

[Johnny]

Jan 22, 2018 5:21:54 GMT -5 Perfect Timing said:

let's be honest, female battle royals suck.

I think you'll find ALL battle royals suck.

No, it shouldn't be a one-off. They should use it regularly as a platform to actually put some thought and effort into the build of a women's match at Wrestlemania.

[Mozenrath]

I think we ought to see how it turns out first, but I would prefer they keep it, or at the least, do a Queen of the Ring tournament next go round. The women really don't have any sort of accolade beyond winning their brand's title, so if you're not holding that or actively feuding for it, you're in purgatory. That's not really helping anyone.

[Kyn]

I'll wait to see it before I judge. I want WWE to keep building up the Women's division to be on a par with the scale & opportunities the men's division has (wishful thinking, I know), so I hope it'll go well.

[Deleted]

I say yes, because I’d rather the WWE come up with something new and unique to the women instead of the lazy booking of the Rumble winner getting a title shot. The Rumble is my favorite match but even for the men it’s just lazily booked 99% of the time these days.

["Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay]

Jan 22, 2018 5:21:54 GMT -5 Perfect Timing said:

I'm giving it a chance but let's be honest, female battle royals suck.

That doesn't sound like giving it a chance to me, and saying something as sweeping as that about women's battle royals doesn't warm me to the opinion either.

The first one is not looking likely to be great, no, but that doesn't mean they should stop doing it. It's not like the first Royal Rumble was much cop, and there are precious few 'great' men's battle royals either.

[Spiderf 4]

Jan 22, 2018 5:32:47 GMT -5 Johnny said:

Jan 22, 2018 5:21:54 GMT -5 Perfect Timing said:

let's be honest, female battle royals suck.

I think you'll find ALL battle royals suck.

No, it shouldn't be a one-off. They should use it regularly as a platform to actually put some thought and effort into the build of a women's match at Wrestlemania.

Agree on both counts. Regular battle royals can get too same-y, which makes the Royal Rumble so much better.

If anything, the Women's Rumble can be once every other year, mainly because NXT does a good job at loading and reloading female talent.

[Eunös ✈]

Jan 22, 2018 5:32:47 GMT -5 Johnny said:

Jan 22, 2018 5:21:54 GMT -5 Perfect Timing said:

let's be honest, female battle royals suck.

I think you'll find ALL battle royals suck.

Personally I love Battle Royals, but to each their own

[Final Countdown Jones]

If the match tells a good story and laid arranged with care to mean something, then make it yearly. They have the talent to make something special here, they just have to get the booking on board with it, which is a harder task than it should be, but that's really no failing of the wrestlers involved. Womens' battle royals do have a history of sucking, but they also have a history of being three minute affairs and much more broadly populated by matches during the less than stellar days of the division. With who they have now, it can be a lot better than that, the office just needs to care. And I hope they do, because giving us a reason to care and moving past having everything be a HISTORIC FIRST is the vital piece of growth WWE needs in its approach to the womens' divisions.

[CeilingFan]

next year, the Women's Rumble should take place at Fastlane.

[fw91]

Depends on the fldw of the show. If it doesn’t burn out the crowd or hinder the men’s rumble (40 second intervals, rushing etc) then bring it back. But I think in terms of logistics this is going to fail. The card is massive already for a rumble show.

[sunnytaker]

I think they should keep it going though maybe cut it down to 25 due to the smaller women's roster compared to the men. the only problem I see is with two rumbles on the same card are they really going to have time for additional matches (and give them time to develop not just a bunch of 5 minute matches) without it becoming a 4+ hour PPV?

[cabbageboy]

Is this women's Rumble actually going to be the full 2 minute intervals or whatever it usually is? Or is it 1 minute intervals?

[The Heartbreak TWERK]

Jan 22, 2018 5:21:54 GMT -5 Perfect Timing said:

I'm giving it a chance but let's be honest, female battle royals suck.

Well, this thread's going to be special.

[Vice honcho room temperature]

I don't want it with the men's Rumble. Two Rumbles in one night seems like too much at least after the initial one. Maybe before Summerslam to give Summerslam something to fight for

["Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik]

It has to take place every year. Whether you like it or not, WWE has made a decision to at least superficially treat women and men equally in terms of opportunities. They both receive a MITB match, can do HITC matches, and now have a Rumble match. Part of the reason this came is that it makes little sense if you are pushing them as equals to say wrestler X can be in a Royal Rumble and wrestler Y can't solely because X has a penis and Y doesn't (especially since they aren't having women compete against men like in the past with Chyna and Beth Phoenix). So to do it one year and then take it back is almost impossible from a PR perspective because you announced very publically that they both should get this and now they don't. It's worse than not even giving it to them in the first place. I fully expect another women's MITB and another Rumble.

[TGM]

There should be a woman's Royal Rumble match every year, same as the men's.

I hope one year we get the Woman's title headlining Wrestlemania.

[KofiMania]

Jan 22, 2018 10:24:43 GMT -5 sunnytaker said:

I think they should keep it going though maybe cut it down to 25 due to the smaller women's roster compared to the men. the only problem I see is with two rumbles on the same card are they really going to have time for additional matches (and give them time to develop not just a bunch of 5 minute matches) without it becoming a 4+ hour PPV?

All of the "Big 5" PPVs are 4 hours now, I believe.

[salz4life]

Jan 22, 2018 5:43:52 GMT -5 Mozenrath said:

I think we ought to see how it turns out first, but I would prefer they keep it, or at the least, do a Queen of the Ring tournament next go round. The women really don't have any sort of accolade beyond winning their brand's title, so if you're not holding that or actively feuding for it, you're in purgatory. That's not really helping anyone.

I think the Queen of the Ring for the ladies would be outstanding. You could have qualifying matches on Raw/Smackdown (NXT?) and then have a Network Special with the Final 8 (or 16 depending on what they want to do). If they really wanted to do something "different", they could do a G1 type thing spread out over a month or so. This, though, would require the creative committee to actually come up with something creative. I think it would be interesting, but I'm also interested in the women's division. I'm not sure if that is a popular enough stance.