Not ending the PPV with the Rumble

[Jumpin' Jesse Walsh]

Looking back throughout history, has it ever been a good idea to end a Rumble PPV without the Rumble match being the last match on the show? It makes the match to go on after it feel like an afterthought to me. The only time it felt sorta okay was 1997 in order to send the crowd home happy with HBK going over in his hometown, but even then? Still kinda awkward.

[Instant Classic]

2006 is the one that strikes me, all that just so Undertaker could collapse the ring. 2013 when Rock won the title was fine with me.

[CMWaters]

1996 worked to have pissed of Diesel confront Undertaker before the title match against Bret Hart, followed by the run in he did.

[chazraps]

1998 was the right call to end with the title match as there's absolutely no way tonally you could go from "a man is burned alive inside a casket" to "here comes 30 dudes!"

[EoE: Well There's Your Problem]

Jan 18, 2021 0:17:40 GMT -5 chazraps said:

1998 was the right call to end with the title match as there's absolutely no way tonally you could go from "a man is burned alive inside a casket" to "here comes 30 dudes!"

They have done it eventually... No Mercy 2005 when Randy Orton lit a casket on fire with The Undertaker in it, and they followed it up with... Nunzio v Juventud Guerrera.

[chazraps]

Jan 18, 2021 0:24:15 GMT -5 EoE: Well There's Your Problem said:

Jan 18, 2021 0:17:40 GMT -5 chazraps said:

1998 was the right call to end with the title match as there's absolutely no way tonally you could go from "a man is burned alive inside a casket" to "here comes 30 dudes!"

They have done it eventually... No Mercy 2005 when Randy Orton lit a casket on fire with The Undertaker in it, and they followed it up with... Nunzio v Juventud Guerrera.

Well yeah, but that's just two dudes.

As the old saying goes: 30 dudes is a party, 2 dudes is Shiva.

[Wardlow on Wardlow 54]

I've always believed a PPV named after a certain match type should be headlined by that match type. With that said, let's look at what years the Rumble didn't close the show:

1988: it was a TV special, but I still have to question giving Paul Roma and Jim Powers a main event match.
1996: story-wise, it made sense, with the Diesel/Undertaker program. The match wasn't terrible, either.
1997: right call. If they put the Rumble on last, the crowd would have been dead, after shooting their load for HBK.
1998: as stated above, it would have been difficult to go from Kane burning his brother in a casket to Mick Foley and Terry Funk smashing each other with chairs.
2006: ...Undertaker didn't HAVE to collapse the ring. We could have built that match in any number of ways without destroying the ring or putting Mark Henry in a PPV main event.
2013: it was The Rock winning the belt for the first time in over ten years. Of course that was closing the show.

The more interesting question, though, is which Rumble PPVs would have been better with a different main event?

I feel like 1989-1991 may have worked better if the Rumble hadn't gone on last, because the match was seen as just being for bragging rights, but no WrestleMania implications. But none of those shows had a match that would have been main event worthy (91 had a World Title match, but that match affected the Rumble's booking and had to go before it)

1995 probably should have had a different match close the show, hell, why not close with the Tag Title and have a shock ending to the PPV with the Bam Bam/LT confrontation?

1999 should have closed with Mankind/Rock. Not only would it have kept the crowd from being subdued during the Rumble, it also would have helped send the crowd home happy. Imagine if Rock costs Austin the Rumble, then wins the title, BUT as he's celebrating, glass shatters and Austin tears down the aisle and kills Rock with a beating and Stunner?

2000 should have closed with Cactus/Triple H. It was a better match and would have been better than a botched/screwy finish to the Rumble.

2009, I'm on the fence. On one hand, Orton was the hot heel going in, so ending on him winning the Rumble was fine. But would ending with Matt turning on Jeff to help Edge win the title have been a better ending?

2014 and 2015 probably would have been better if the Rumble didn't close them lol although for 2015, the World Title match definitely would have been the better closer.

2017, why DIDN'T AJ/Cena close the show?? It was the match of the night and would have quelled the sting of that subpar Rumble ending.

2019, I maybe would have ended with the women's Rumble instead of the men's, but a Rumble closed the show, so whatever.

[SirLucas]

Jan 18, 2021 0:52:04 GMT -5 Wardlow on Wardlow 54 said:

I've always believed a PPV named after a certain match type should be headlined by that match type. With that said, let's look at what years the Rumble didn't close the show:

1988: it was a TV special, but I still have to question giving Paul Roma and Jim Powers a main event match.

This was a throwaway match used as a cool down so Vince and Jesse could plug the upcoming Hogan/Andre rematch. Having filler matches go on last was a common booking practice used on Saturday Night's Main Event. It provided a backdrop where the announcers could spend extra time rehashing a top storyline from earlier in the night.

[Deleted]

Jan 18, 2021 17:34:45 GMT -5 SirLucas said:

Jan 18, 2021 0:52:04 GMT -5 Wardlow on Wardlow 54 said:

I've always believed a PPV named after a certain match type should be headlined by that match type. With that said, let's look at what years the Rumble didn't close the show:

1988: it was a TV special, but I still have to question giving Paul Roma and Jim Powers a main event match.

This was a throwaway match used as a cool down so Vince and Jesse could plug the upcoming Hogan/Andre rematch. Having filler matches go on last was a common booking practice used on Saturday Night's Main Event. It provided a backdrop where the announcers could spend extra time rehashing a top storyline from earlier in the night.

Hell, they were using that practice on RAW for years since the 3 hour shift.

[rrg251]

My thought on the 2006 PPV is that the World Heavyweight Championship should have been on the line in the Rumble. Instead it was on the line two weeks earlier in a battle royal with Kurt Angle inexplicably jumping brands from Raw to Smackdown to win it. Have it on the line in the Rumble, which can be won by Raw Superstar Angle without the awkward brand switch, and you can still have the Undertaker challenge/ring collapse close the show.

[Vice honcho room temperature]

Jan 18, 2021 17:34:45 GMT -5 SirLucas said:

Jan 18, 2021 0:52:04 GMT -5 Wardlow on Wardlow 54 said:

I've always believed a PPV named after a certain match type should be headlined by that match type. With that said, let's look at what years the Rumble didn't close the show:

1988: it was a TV special, but I still have to question giving Paul Roma and Jim Powers a main event match.

This was a throwaway match used as a cool down so Vince and Jesse could plug the upcoming Hogan/Andre rematch. Having filler matches go on last was a common booking practice used on Saturday Night's Main Event. It provided a backdrop where the announcers could spend extra time rehashing a top storyline from earlier in the night.

Its also a very WWF House Show style booking too. I mean look at where Hogan vs. the Iron Shiek was on the card. Or most of Hogan's house show matches. Somewhere in the middle before the intermission in order to get Hogan out early.