Royal Rumble Thoughts (Spoilers)

First topic message reminder :

One of the best title matches ever.

One of the worst Rumble matches ever.

Honestly that was horrificly booked.

Adam D wrote:I just watched the rumble and the triple threat was one of the best title matches I've seen in wwe.

A couple of points though:

1. Why does corporate Kane wear suit trousers to the ring? Fair enough if it's impromptu but not when he is due to appear in a match!

2. Lesnar is an animal. But his suplexes/ snap mates etc are just weird. He doesn't get any height on them and they look like they are genuinely hurting the wrestlers. It looks like he isn't performing the moves correctly.

In regards to Corporate Kane, Dolphin I think summed it up best on the podcast when he said Kane looks like the guy at a office party who's had one too many shandy's and decided to stand on the main table with his shirt off and tell the boss what he thinks.

Positives:
1. Bray Wyatt - star of the Rumble
2. Heavyweight Match - when you leave the stars to plan their own matches, look what can happen
3. Lesnar - proving time and time again he is the benchmark for all others to strive to be
4. If there were any doubts about Seth Rollins being a main eventer, there aren't anymore

Negatives - and this is just one long point:
1. They need to really work of the Rumble. They seem to think they can just throw it together and as it's the Rumble it looks after itself. Wrong.
By the time they got to Reigns winning, the match was already dead. Right from the start they got it wrong - every time the crowd got behind someone, they went over the top rope to be replaced by someone no one is interested in. Bubba and Boggieman get the crowd into it - only for them to be followed by Sin Cara. Crowd Killer. Bryan goes early. Crowd Killer - not only as they crowd are behind him but as it telegraphed the winner. Big Show and Kane in the last 4. Crowd Killer.
The build up over the weeks before the Rumble made you think that they'd put no thought into it. We were proved right.
The worst thing is they knew what would happen to Reigns and the only thing they could come up with was to add the Rock into the equation - which only served to make Reigns look worse!

liverbnz wrote:Dolph

Just out of interest, if you are a booker, what traits do you want to see in you heels to get the crowds to hate on them?

(I asked this in my previous post above but must have deleted somehow! )

I was meaning to come back and justify my disagreement, awfull rude of me not to.

I find heel booking a bit difficult because I hate the fact that heel seems to equal cheat. Lesnar is a heel though; he refuses to turn up to some PPVs, won't wrestle "for free" (ie on Raw) and makes fun of the fact he won't give the fans a glimpse of him in the ring on just any old show, belittles all competitors and the audience and has been shown to be a mercenary for the Authority.

There's various things you can do. Stepping away from fights is always a decent one (mainly on Raw or outside of matches), insult the crowd, insult opponents, insult legends (and I do find it funny that the Ascension have been deemed disrespectful for a pretty normal heel tactic), and there are some heels who can cheat, whine and all of the above. Christian was too much for me, that heel run that people loved against Orton was painful to watch from my perspective, just nothing to care for in there.

Bo Dallas had potential to be a great heel. Telling the crowd how inspirational he is all the while he cheats to win. I mean, thats booking 101. You dont have a heel like that win clean all the time. Sure he had the odd lucky win, but they were still clean.

That's a great definition of a heel. Its a shame that WWE can't stick to this. For example Cena is their biggest face. But when asked if he'd put his title shot up against a chance to bring back the 3 who'd been sacked because of him, he ummmed and ahhhed. I know this was a plot device to get the "WWE Universe" voting on their app, but they've had some terrible face decisions around Cena, making him look like a heel.

The more I hear the Rusev/Bryan/Reigns scenario the more it makes sense and seems like the best way to get Reigns over.

Fun bit of Trivia - this was the first Rumble since 2004 were a previous winner wasnt in the match.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

liverbnz wrote:Dolph

Just out of interest, if you are a booker, what traits do you want to see in you heels to get the crowds to hate on them?

(I asked this in my previous post above but must have deleted somehow! )

I was meaning to come back and justify my disagreement, awfull rude of me not to.

I find heel booking a bit difficult because I hate the fact that heel seems to equal cheat. Lesnar is a heel though; he refuses to turn up to some PPVs, won't wrestle "for free" (ie on Raw) and makes fun of the fact he won't give the fans a glimpse of him in the ring on just any old show, belittles all competitors and the audience and has been shown to be a mercenary for the Authority.

There's various things you can do. Stepping away from fights is always a decent one (mainly on Raw or outside of matches), insult the crowd, insult opponents, insult legends (and I do find it funny that the Ascension have been deemed disrespectful for a pretty normal heel tactic), and there are some heels who can cheat, whine and all of the above. Christian was too much for me, that heel run that people loved against Orton was painful to watch from my perspective, just nothing to care for in there.

I would say 90% of the crowd know nothing of Lesnar's contract and his limited dates so your first paragraph doesn't really have any baring on whether the crowd boo Lesnar or not. The WWE just dont mention him when he's not there, they never talk about his contract. The association with the Authority I can see an arguement for although it's a very loose relationship at the best of times - the Authority oddly tried to get the belt off him after he won it if I remember rightly.

As for the 2nd paragraph Lesnar at times shows some of those traits but I wouldn't have him as someone who cheats, backs down (certainly not becasue he's a coward) or insults anyone. He's just an askicking badass with unbelievable strength that loves to fight, which IMO opinion makes him likeable and therefore gets him cheered.

But he's presented as a heel. He has backed away from fights and also run in after when the guys back is turned. He has picked exclusively on faces (before Rollins, admittedly) and attacked them ruthlessly. From Henry through the table, Big Show at the Rumble last year and not really having a match, his desire to kill the Undertaker.

Not sure 90% don't know about his contract. Those that dont see it as even more of a heel move; they dont realise hes not contracted to be there, hes just a man who doesnt bother to show up for months on end with the belt. Like it or not, thats a heel move. Same with refusing to let the fans see him fight "for free". He's above them.

Just read that Blue Meanie and Tommy Dreamer were planned to be surprise entrences in the rumble to help promote a new ECW DVD but officials decided last minute to only use one ECW original

Who he picks on again has no bearing on whether he has heel or face traits, as I said original I didn't think WWE were presenting him deliberately as face - they just seem to do a lot of things that would make the crowd cheer him.

I'll give you the fight for free thing though, definitely a heel trait. But if they wanted him to be booed they need him doing sneak attacks ( I don't remember any since Undertaker - perhaps one vs Cena), walk away from fights when it's getting too hot to handle even during matches and cheat to win. He wins clean all the time.

To sum up I think he's a minor tweak or 2 from being fully fledged face.

VDT wrote:Just read that Blue Meanie and Tommy Dreamer were planned to be surprise entrences in the rumble to help promote a new ECW DVD but officials decided last minute to only use one ECW original

Blue Meanie still angry that WWE gave him military time

Can I just point out how absolutely insane not only the whole match was, but the ending to the triple threat. Rollins hits a 450 splash perfectly, followed by lesnar dead lifting him into a suplex, to suplexing cena out the ring, to suplexing rollins who lands on his feet, hits lesnar with two shots to the head with the breifcase, finishing with Lesnar catching rollins in mid-curb stomp to hit the f5 for the win. Incredible.

liverbnz wrote:Who he picks on again has no bearing on whether he has heel or face traits, as I said original I didn't think WWE were presenting him deliberately as face - they just seem to do a lot of things that would make the crowd cheer him.

I'll give you the fight for free thing though, definitely a heel trait. But if they wanted him to be booed they need him doing sneak attacks ( I don't remember any since Undertaker - perhaps one vs Cena), walk away from fights when it's getting too hot to handle even during matches and cheat to win. He wins clean all the time.

To sum up I think he's a minor tweak or 2 from being fully fledged face.

I think that last point is what many are saying on here about turning some one heel. Heel's don't need to be cheating cowards and faces don't need to be all out supermen.

The best present a character where only a few changes mean they can easily turn one way or another.