|
Post by Trent Matsunoshin on Jan 24, 2007 2:51:30 GMT 1
Believe it or not, Jeff Hardy might not be that far off, surprises aren't always a bad thing.
But actually, I want to see HBK vs .Cena.
|
|
|
Post by Keith Williams on Jan 24, 2007 5:16:06 GMT 1
Well right now WWe could go one of three ways with this rumble. First they can have Shawn Michaels become the first ever to be a 3 time Royal Rumble winner and go on to face Cena in what will be a very good main event at Mania.
Second they could go for a repeat from 1994 when they had both Bret Hart and Lex Luger win. except this time have it be Randy Orton and Edge that ends up in that predicament. Then build up with will Rated RKO work together to take out Cena? or sabotage each other to ensure that the other won't be walking out with the belt.
Finally they could just skip having a Raw wrestler win the rumble and have the Undertaker walk out with it. He has never won one and is due. Plus if they are going ahead with a Taker vs Batista match at Mania, that is one way to go about it.
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jan 24, 2007 18:49:37 GMT 1
Well right now WWe could go one of three ways with this rumble. First they can have Shawn Michaels become the first ever to be a 3 time Royal Rumble winner and go on to face Cena in what will be a very good main event at Mania. Steve Austin was the first to win three: '97, '98, and '01. Second they could go for a repeat from 1994 when they had both Bret Hart and Lex Luger win. except this time have it be Randy Orton and Edge that ends up in that predicament. Stare had mentioned something similar in another thread. That is a possibility, but it makes for a shitty main event at Mania. I've flip-flopped on this enough and I am tired of thinking about it. RAW ended with Michales standing tall, an indication that he's not the one. I doubt they would have two face v. face matches for the titles at Mania 23. (HBK v. Cena; Taker v. Batista) And all our world champs are faces. WWE doesn't like Edge because his physique is not that of a "champion" even though 2006 was his year. I'm going with Orton due to the fact that he was "upgraded" from SD! after being demoted last year, indication that WWE is willing to trust him. Final Pick: Randy Orton
|
|
|
Post by Aladdin on Jan 24, 2007 19:43:29 GMT 1
Ideally for me, Edge would win the title. HBK would then beat Cena for the title and it would be HBK Vs. Edge. Sure we've seen this before, but after seeing the two of them on Raw, I really want to see it happen at Mania. A long singles feud between the two would be incredible.
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jan 24, 2007 19:47:47 GMT 1
With Edge not being "WWE's ideal" champion coupled with the fact that like Hunter, one of HBK's body parts is going to blow out any minute, it just won't happen. Michaels is old as dirt and wrestling a full time schedule with the likes of Edge would be the death of him. It's painfully obvious why the DX hype went to SummerSlam and beyound: WWE wanted Hunter and Shawn in the ring for the draw, but needed to pad things up and protect their health by working them as a tag team. It only worked for so long. It's just a matter of time before Michaels is in a wheelchair.
|
|
|
Post by Stare on Jan 24, 2007 19:52:23 GMT 1
^the reason I can't see Orton winning is because he is being downplayed next to Edge. Edge is displayed as the leader of Rated-RKO with the way they use him. I would pick Edge over Orton to win it, simply for that reason. You don't put the guy who's going to win the Rumble in the shadows, cause his winning it would have no significance.
The more I think about it, Shawn Michaels is becoming a clear choice. He's a fan-favorite, so him winning it would be accepted. He's been left standing tall, which would usually be a clear sign he wouldnt win, but being that they are having to change some things around with HHH's departure, they might be forced to build up the will-be-winner just a bit.
Also, I read a recent interview with Shawn on ign.com, and he was talking about trying to get The Rock last year cause he wants to face someone new at each WrestleMania while he is still wrestling. Last I checked, John Cena is really the only big name around that Shawn really hasn't faced, or at least not feuded with (I dont remember a one on one match). Turn Shawn heel, and you don't have 2 face vs. face Main Events.
It's a very hard pick, but I'm sticking with Michaels for the moment.
Also, as far as Mania goes, I could see a Kennedy vs. Batista vs. Taker facing off for the belt. I'm thinking Kennedy might win the title at the Rumble due to Undertaker interfering and costing Batista the match accidentally. Batista takes Taker out of the Rumble as revenge. They have a match at No Way Out to figure out the #1 Contender, and it's a draw or something, leading to a Triple Threat with every man at each other's throats. It would also be a good way to end Undertaker's undefeated streak . . . with him never getting pinned.
I dont know, WWE is very scattered at the moment
|
|
|
Post by Mrs Fizz Allmendinger on Jan 24, 2007 23:05:01 GMT 1
The Royal Rumble card looks interesting. I am defently watching this PPV and paying a whopping £14.95 for it. It's expensive but it is worth it.
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jan 24, 2007 23:05:15 GMT 1
fourteen dollars is expensive? ;D No doubt Michaels v. Cena would sell. Big time. And if Hunter was penciled in to face Cena again, HBK would be the logical choice to replace him. I just don't see HBK winning the title and being able to work the rigorous schedule the champion must work. With that being said, it would confuse the hell out of me if they had the winner of the Rumble job to the champion at Mania. It's like they build us up only to let us down. Why? Recent Rumble history shows us the winner generally takes the title at Mania and runs with it for a number of months. HBK just doesn't have enough left because he's been working a full time schedule and his body is breaking down. EDIT: But this is what makes this Rumble stand out since 1999; there is no clear choice of who the winner will be. But with three face champions, it makes more sense for a heel to take it. Orton.
|
|
|
Post by The Executioner on Jan 24, 2007 23:20:10 GMT 1
we pay 49.95 in canada so 14 is cheap.
|
|
|
Post by Aladdin on Jan 24, 2007 23:30:56 GMT 1
That's 14 pounds, not dollars. So around 26 dollars or so. We still get a better deal than you lost though. I
However I get the best price. Free.
|
|
|
Post by Mrs Fizz Allmendinger on Jan 24, 2007 23:45:10 GMT 1
It's £15.00 in reality terms of money in UK guys. You get it free Aladdin?
|
|
|
Post by Keith Williams on Jan 25, 2007 5:13:27 GMT 1
Well right now WWe could go one of three ways with this rumble. First they can have Shawn Michaels become the first ever to be a 3 time Royal Rumble winner and go on to face Cena in what will be a very good main event at Mania. Steve Austin was the first to win three: '97, '98, and '01. Dang, Can't believe I missed that. I even had the winners pulled up when I wrote this today. Ok Mr. Smart guy, if you are so good with Rumble winners, without looking what was the highest numbered entry to win a rumble, who was it, and what year did they win it? and no fair peeking either. Plus you keep going on about how Shawn is ready to break any moment. And that the WWE would be foolish to hinge their wrestlemania plans on him. Well the same can be said about anyone on any of the rosters. Look at Triple H, didn't really see that quad tear coming did ya? At any given moment a wrestlers career could come to a end. Its a scary thought but its true. WWE can't get into the "well this or this could happen to this wrestler so we shouldn't give him a main event title shot at insert ppv here". In most cases you have a plan B and C in case Plan A falls thru. Plus with Shawn's promo on RAW and his new found new attitude, I could see him winning Sunday and going on to face Cena for the belt at Mania. It would be a fresh match and if anyone could carry Cena to a decent match it would be the showstopper. As for the Triple Threat for title on the smackdown side. I don't think the wwe will go that route again this year. They did that last year with Mysterio, Orton and Angle. I believe that they will have a one on one match for the belt. I wouldn't be surprised if they decide to turn Taker heel to face Batista. That would make for sense for him to lose if he was a heel then a face. Here is a good scenario that might work if the wwe decides to go this way. Have Edge win the rumble. He gets the choice of who he wants to face at Mania. He decides to head over to Smackdown, thinking he will face Batista. At No Way out, we have Taker vs Batistia. Edge interferes trying to get Batistia the win but turns out that he costs him the belt. Then can have Taker vs Edge for the title at Mania, where Edge defeats him after interference from Batista. Taker gets his first WM lost, Edge is a world champion again. All is right.
|
|
|
Post by stocko on Jan 25, 2007 13:38:16 GMT 1
i get it free too, i will deffo be ordering this but only for the rumble itself, ya gotta love the rumble
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jan 25, 2007 17:42:28 GMT 1
That's 14 pounds, not dollars. So around 26 dollars or so. We still get a better deal than you lost though. I However I get the best price. Free. Well at least we have paved roadways here, chump! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Stare on Jan 25, 2007 17:51:45 GMT 1
Also Keith, Edge vs. Undertaker would be awesome with both of them putting up their undefeated streaks against each other's at Mania.
That was actually a good idea, if only WWE had idea men like you
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jan 25, 2007 17:57:26 GMT 1
It's so confusing but that is what makes it fun. Though I am sticking with Orton as my final pick, I do see Stare's point of HBK winning the Rumble, and then start to "heel it up" like he did in the weeks before facing Hogan in 2005. We'll see.
|
|
|
Post by Aladdin on Jan 25, 2007 20:32:47 GMT 1
Also Keith, Edge vs. Undertaker would be awesome with both of them putting up their undefeated streaks against each other's at Mania. That was actually a good idea, if only WWE had idea men like you That's a match a lot of people have mentioned before. But it should happen when Taker is ready to retire so that Edge's streak actually compares to realistically.
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jan 25, 2007 23:47:18 GMT 1
As a singles competitor, Edge is only 3-0 at Mania. He'll have to build a better streak on the Big Stage than that if the match stipulation you speak of can be believable.
|
|
|
Post by Keith Williams on Jan 26, 2007 4:41:21 GMT 1
Perhaps, but the build up to the feud is already there. Granted Edge is only 5-0 in wrestlemania's compared to Undertakers 14-0, but still there can be a storyline. Both men since they first stepped foot into a wwe ring, have never tasted defeat on the grandest stage of them all, Wrestlemania. Which one will be the first to taste defeat? Can Edge makes Takers record 14-1? or can Taker finally peg a lost on the Rated R Superstar?
|
|
|
Post by The Great JT on Jan 26, 2007 5:04:04 GMT 1
I saw it happen on my Smackdown vs Raw game, and I gotta admit I want to see it happen. I want The Great Khali to win.
|
|
|
Post by Keith Williams on Jan 26, 2007 5:10:13 GMT 1
The wwe isn't that stupid. There is no way that they would give Khali a world title shot at the biggest ppv of the year. IF he was to get one, it be at one of the lesser ppvs. Either everyone is going to gang up on him and throw him out or someone like the Undertaker is going to come in and throw him out just so the announcers can bust a collective nut about how the Undertaker just threw Khali out of the ring.
If I was booking it, I would have Jake "the Snake" Roberts appear, throw Lucifer into the ring and Khali sees it and high tails it out of the ring ala Andre the Giant back in either '88 or '89 whenever Jake brought out Damien
|
|
|
Post by The Great JT on Jan 26, 2007 5:16:54 GMT 1
Ha. Jake "The Snake" rules. I still have a 6" action figure of him somewhere.
But seriously, I think it's time we had another good "foriegn" champion. I think the last GOOD one was Bret Hart, and he retired some time ago.
|
|
|
Post by Keith Williams on Jan 26, 2007 5:21:11 GMT 1
um..Edge does come from Canada. That is unless you don't consider Edge to be a good champion.
|
|
|
Post by The Great JT on Jan 26, 2007 5:23:15 GMT 1
um..Edge does come from Canada. That is unless you don't consider Edge to be a good champion. Not in the least. Bret is still the #1 Canadian wrestler. Ever. Period.
|
|
|
Post by Keith Williams on Jan 26, 2007 5:38:47 GMT 1
That may be your opinion, but there are alot more Canadian wrestlers that have come down the pipes over the years. Each one of them can be argued as being the best Canadian wrestler of all time. Some of them are:
-"Rowdy" Roddy Piper -Chris Benoit -Chris Jericho -Rick Matel (aka "the Model) -Trish Stratus -"Mad Dog" Vachon -Pat Patterson -Killer Kowalski -Owen Hart -Stan "the Man" Stasiak
just to name a few Canadians thru the years..
|
|