After TLC my girl and I were talking about how there was no way they could fukk up the Rumble since Roman was champ and there were rumors of Cena facing Taker at WM.
"Fans might like the winner for the first time in 5 years."
After TLC my girl and I were talking about how there was no way they could fukk up the Rumble since Roman was champ and there were rumors of Cena facing Taker at WM.
"Fans might like the winner for the first time in 5 years."
I didn't have an expectation, I just figured that with Reigns as champ, Cena possibly facing Taker, and Sheamus fresh off a stale MITB/title run that the worst case scenarios were exorcised.
I liked ADR winning, but the last time someone the fans were truly behind won was Edge, and that was 31 days into this decade! For a scripted sport where you control who wins and loses, that is unacceptable.
They should just adhere to this guideline:
Whoever they want to win the Rumble, just put the belt on them w/o the Jan-March build that will be rejected anyway. Let anyone the crowd is behind win it, and have their pick vs the crowd's pick at WM.
Obviously don't advertise it as such, but just find a way to make it happen, and sometimes let the crowd backed superstar walk in as champ and face their Rumble-winning chosen one.
And if they're feeling real crazy one year, they could have a crowd backed champ AND challenger.
It looked like that was what was happening this year. Their guy got the belt, bypassed the Rumble, and was gonna face someone over. Realistically, I think their only surefire options are Ambrose, Taker, Lesnar. If creative got good at their job, then it could be Owens, Ryback, Rusev, Wyatt, Bálor, or Joe.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.