From the Podium presents "You'll Thank Me Later" - Shaking Up the Rumble

[Leonard]

PRESENTS:
“You’ll Thank Me Later”

Shaking Up the Rumble

The owner of the WWE has always had a soft spot in his heart for “shaking things up.” In 2009, he did so mainly with the pretenses that each Pay-Per-View event should have some sort of gimmick (which, while detrimental to us “smart” fans, have proven to be, by and large, successful). The “big four,” however, have yet to be touched…but do they need to be? Some would argue that the Royal Rumble event, specifically the match itself, has become a shell of its former self, and needs to be either retired (and replaced by a different match) or given a proverbial makeover. Anybody remember the Battlebowl? For those of you who do not, WCW used the concept of having randomly drawn teams compete in tag team matches, and featuring the winners in a double-ring battle royal to crown a winner.

What I would propose is a concept similar to this, with just a few preliminary exceptions:

-Open up the qualifying matches to anyone who hasn’t held a world championship (meaning the WWE and World Heavyweight varieties) since the last WrestleMania. This way it is assured that someone (at least marginally) fresh is thrust into the main event once again. It might not make immediate business since to give a new guy one of the biggest wins of the year, but they’ve got to make the plunge sometime.

-Don’t really make it random. This was WCW’s major downfall with this idea. Let the bookers create some interesting “strange bedfellows” matchups, but don’t do things “interbranded.” Imagine the potential for friends competing against each other, and enemies forced to team together to get into the Rumble.

-Instead of having the actual event all on one night, why not stretch it out for a month or so? The WWE featured Rumble qualifiers at various house shows, to make things more meaningful. Why not use the month of lead-in for the Rumble to hold some of these tag team qualifier matches?

Once an indeterminate amount of teams qualify (the exact number shouldn’t be set in stone—in this way one could add/subtract teams from year to year, depending on the state of the roster), the “random” draw that night will start with one team beginning the match. At two minute intervals, another team enters. This will continue until all teams have entered (leading to, at least, a good half-hour match by itself).

I’ve always noticed that the “final four” of the Royal Rumble has been treated with a certain amount of fanfare during the event. Let’s give these individuals a little more prestige. From the point of the final four, the Rumble Finals will occur, which will, for all intents and purposes, be a glorified four-way elimination match. The first fall will be a standard match-up. The second fall (which is now triple threat, mind you) will be a no-disqualification, falls count anywhere match. The final fall, in keeping the spirit of the Royal Rumble intact, will be an over-the-top rope challenge.

What happens to the winner? While maybe the idea that the winner gets rewarded is a bit pretentious and outdated, I think it’s fair that the winner of an intense match-up (such as a Royal Rumble or Money in the Bank match) is given an incentive for being successful. Why not? People throughout history have gotten bigger rewards for less impressive feats. Let’s keep the WrestleMania main event slot open for the winner of this puppy. When I suggest the “main event,” however, I mean that the winner of this thing should be on the last match of the card come WrestleMania. That hasn’t necessarily been guaranteed in recent years, but I think it should be.

If I can be frank for a moment (“…can I still be Garth?”), I’ve always enjoyed the Royal Rumble match. It’s a fact that a lot of people feel the same way. Yet I would also agree that things may need to be freshened up just a bit while keeping the same feel that comes with the Rumble. After all, the Royal Rumble PPV is one of the highest-grossing events for the WWE every year, so one has to be careful in how much altering takes place here. In the manner presented above, one can please those traditionalists who enjoy the Pat Patterson-derived match, while pleasing the younger, more avant-garde crowd with some updated changes. It might not be the most “entertaining” proposal you’ll find, but it’s certainly a logical one.

As for you all entering this writing competition, you should probably just delete your posts and give up now; I assure you…

You’ll thank me later.

Until the next downbeat…

[The Smartbreak Kid]

I popped for the BattleBowl reference. Oh, that WCW... always breaking new ground. This was a solid read from beginning to end. While the match concept could be a lot for the live audience to follow (just like the one I came up with), I think with some tweaking, it could be done. I mainly dig the fact that you answered the question. Any column that can work in a Wayne's World 2 reference is a good column in my book. Nice.

[Roger Murtaugh]

Another straight forward column of what you do best. Crazy how much love Battlebowl has been getting around here lately.

Good luck

[The Maz]

I am not sure how you did this in the word limit but it was as if every time I found a whole in your theory, you addressed it in the next sentence. On top of that, you still managed to throw in a Wayne's World reference and that made me mark out more than Battle Bowl. Again, not sure if I like it as a replacement for the Rumble but it would sure make an interesting PPV.

You are going to be a very tough man to beat in this tourney.


MAZZA CSI RATING: 8.5

A little side note. It may just be me but the bold orange that creeps into this (and the last one) do my head in a bit. Not even sure why.

[Swanton]

Leonard, some interesting ideas here. I think the different finishes for the final four wouldn't work because it's too complicated. You don't want to interrupt the atmosphere my announcing the rules for the next few stages really.

I think the orange text thing is good, but I wouldn't put it in bold. I'm not sure why, I just think it would look better like that.

Aside from that, this was a good, solid column.

[Box Car Rocco]

Dude... Was the whole "You'll Thank Me Later" stuff just a build up for the first round of CSI. It fitted in way perfect!

I think the fourway should be an over the top rope elimination, then a normal triple threat before the FCA match. My main reason is that after eliminating people, then pinning two more guys, eliminating them over the top would seem a bit weird.

Best of luck Leonard, this was pretty good.

[Leonard]

SBK - I wish the Wayne's World 2 reference was something I had planned...unfortunately, I watched that abomination so much as a kid that I just can't erase it from my head...LOL You're right that the concept may be a little hard to follow, but I saw it as the best compromise. Thanks for reading.

Roger - Thanks! As bad as BattleBowl was, that's how good it could have been with some smart people working the books.

Maz - That's what I try to do with my writing...if I were reading this, what questions would I have? Granted, not everything was answered, but I think I got close. I appreciate the compliments, but let's not get too ahead of ourselves...I'm not even in yet. Maybe just non-bolded orange would be OK, but I though it looked "jank" (as the cool kids say nowadays), so I went bold.

Swanton - I dig your thoughts about interrupting the flow...I guess if you wanted to give the final four some special treatment (at least in the way I suggested), it'd have to be done. Interesting thought. Thanks for reading.

BCR - No, I wish I had planned it. Just turned out that it worked really well!

Valid point, my friend. But if the over-the-top rope elimination were to happen first in the final four, why not just do a final three? Interesting thought again.

Thanks to all who stopped by!

Leonard

[Uncle Joe]

I’ve always noticed that the “final four” of the Royal Rumble has been treated with a certain amount of fanfare during the event. Let’s give these individuals a little more prestige. From the point of the final four, the Rumble Finals will occur, which will, for all intents and purposes, be a glorified four-way elimination match. The first fall will be a standard match-up. The second fall (which is now triple threat, mind you) will be a no-disqualification, falls count anywhere match. The final fall, in keeping the spirit of the Royal Rumble intact, will be an over-the-top rope challenge.

That there sold it for me.

[Dr. CMV1]

Geezus H. there's a whole page of these I didn't see until now...

Nice column, Leo. I like the idea - it's not too terribly over the top since it's been done before. It's taking something (Battlebowl) and making it better.

But I question whether we're all just taking something that's great (the Rumble) and making it worse...

[The Godfather]

The fatal fourway is one of my favourite match types due to the whole elimination thing, and this was a really nice addition to the end of the match. It could lead to some great stories (as another column put it) - imagine Benoit/Mysterio getting to the final four after over an hour and then managing to win the fatal fourway - it would be epic.
Nice work

[Super Chrisss]

This was possibly the most complicated, yet logical solution, I have yet to read. Does that make sense? Doesn't matter. What does matter is you were able to somehow narrow down your vast ideas into under 1000 words and still wrap everything up.

Impressive work, sir. I would just ditch the Rumble qualifiers atogether, though.