RIDDUM_N_STYLE Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 According to the wrestling news sites today there will 40 enterants into this years Ruble match. Why are messing with the format after so many years? I think its wrong as it will spoil what has happened in Rumble matches of old. Stick to the same format its not broken why try fix it. Â no it wont spoil it at all. i seem to recall the original rumble in 1988 was only 20 then they bumped it up to 30 from 89 onwards so i cant see an extra 10 being any problem now than it was 22 years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members neil's bitch Posted January 18, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted January 18, 2011 I was just reading about the 40 guys, its a bit duff changing the format, but its instantly sparked my interest i nthe rumble again this year.....as i allready didnt have a clue who was going to win, now an extra 10 guys are in there! Â I still would of love it if one year there was 31 people, just as you think somebody wins it hits 31 and out comes some super face/heel and wins the rumble. Â oh well, either way im interested! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSJLogan Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 I like the thought of 40. The whole point of the PPV is for the rumble and i reckon they're only doing it so that they dont have to put on so many matches. It'll mess up stats though with people probably lasting longer in this rumble (have they said if the rumble match itself will be longer or are they squeezing 40 men in the same time that they do 30?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Be interested to see if the change the gap between entrants, maybe to every 90 seconds as opposed to 2 minutes? Otherwise we're in for a long match! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliver Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 I see the rise in Royal Rumble entrants as a good thing. I always enjoy the Royal Rumble, so having it last approximately 33.3% longer can only be a good thing. Â Unless they cut the gaps in time between entrants. But that still gives more wrestlers the chance to be in the Rumble. They have a large enough roster, why not bump up the numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSF Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 WWE.co is saying the gap will be 90 seconds, but it changes pretty much every year. At 90 second intervals the Rumble will last just over an hour, which is about the same as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigBoot Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Depends how many people are in at the end though. I've noticed over the last decade that final portion seemed to get longer than it was in the 90s which resulted in some great stuff, like Rated rKo vs. Undertaker and Michaels that turned into Undertaker vs. Michaels which made the 2007 and Rumble.  According to the wrestling news sites today there will 40 enterants into this years Ruble match. Why are messing with the format after so many years? I think its wrong as it will spoil what has happened in Rumble matches of old. Stick to the same format its not broken why try fix it.  no it wont spoil it at all. i seem to recall the original rumble in 1988 was only 20 then they bumped it up to 30 from 89 onwards so i cant see an extra 10 being any problem now than it was 22 years ago  It does seem like a strange time to do it though since I don't think of the current roster as having more stars than other eras. I remember thinking it was not a bad idea to freshen things up when it seemed like everyone was suggesting they should bump it up to forty in 2002 but that was after WCW and ECW had folded and it seemed like they had an absolutely massive roster, same thing in 2003-04. On the other hand the fact there were so many undercard guys didn't get in there made it seem like the actual thirty were more elite, for the first time since 1991 (I felt the same way in 1989-91 when the roster was massive and there would always be a few undercard guys you liked who weren't in it).  I'm not opposed to the idea though and it has sparked my interest in this years event so well done to them.  I like the thought of 40. The whole point of the PPV is for the rumble and i reckon they're only doing it so that they dont have to put on so many matches. It'll mess up stats though with people probably lasting longer in this rumble (have they said if the rumble match itself will be longer or are they squeezing 40 men in the same time that they do 30?)  Good point. I think we'll get a couple of really long performances this year. Maybe someone lasting from 1 until 31 and then getting dumped out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 I predict Alberto Del Rio will do the distance this year. he won't win it, but he'l be in for at least 50 minutes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted January 18, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted January 18, 2011 Maybe this is the year someone finally eliminates 29 other superstars. Only to still lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.