Douglas Nunnally: Welcome, wrestling fans, to the first edition of The Wrestling Roundtable in over ten months! I personally apologize for the long absence and promise we will be back here either weekly or bi-monthly for all you fans and truly better than ever. For those new fans, TWR is a roundtable discussion between columnists of recent issues in wrestling today. On the panel today, we have myself as the moderator, Matt Green (author of Get The 'E' Out), Mike Johns (author of The Trademark Rants), Joe Pritchett (author of Joe Pritchett's Real Talk), and Tim Wronka (author of From The Eye Of The Dragon). Pretty impressive, huh? Well, anyway, today for our return edition, we will be talking about the 19th annual Royal Rumble PPV that happened about two weeks ago, but still has the IWC abuzz. What did you guys think?
Mike Johns: Personally, I found it disappointing and pathetic and really, this all due to one match: Edge versus Cena. After the reaction Edge was getting as champ, as well as the turn-around John Cena made after nearly committing babyface-suicide about a month earlier, it makes no sense to me whatsoever that Edge would lose the title so soon.
Matt Green: I think the Rumble had a lot more issues than the fact the Edge-Cena match was poorly booked. The decimation of JBL by a comedy character made little sense now that JBL is an established top line heel; the cruiserweight open, while brimming with potential, was a horrible mismatch of styles where no one meshed with each other and ended up capitulating into a TNA PPV opener with contrived blown spots; and finally, the Rumble being in the middle of the show really said to me that it didn't mean that much to the company so whoever won it was winning it because they had to be safe for No Way Out, which they now are since the Rey-Orton storyline will keep fans tuned in because of the controversy and that it's so flash in the pan fans won't get bored of it. Add to those points the needlessness of the women’s match, Cena's entrance, the title change, and the Undertaker return you have the worst WWF/E PPV in my opinion since Wrestlemania IX.
Joe Pritchett: I was certainly upset that the Royal Rumble match was in the middle of the PPV. With that being said, I was excited to see Rey Mysterio get the win though that did cause plenty of controversy. As far as the Cena/Edge match goes, I found the entire angle to be an act of desperation by the WWE. I don't think they had any plans of taking the title off of Cena when they did, but they needed to do something in hopes of turning his character around with the fans, but I'm not sure it worked. I was more than upset to see the likes of JBL fall to the Boogeyman as well. This was mentioned before but it seems absurd to me that he was basically destroyed when a year ago he was one of the longest reigning WWE champions.
Tim Wronka: To be honest, I didn't think that the PPV was that bad, especially considering how bad we've seen some PPV's. Like most of the others here, I agree that the Rumble match should have been the main event. Rey winning was an awesome surprise that I won't soon forget, and the overall match was better than the two main events. As for those matches, they were ok. I think the Edge-Cena feud has been very entertaining (minus live sex) and a definite change of pace. The SmackDown! main event was passable, but it was really saved by the Taker appearance at the end to end the night on a good night, even though Rey winning would have been better. The women's match was decent, JBL-Boogeyman didn’t last long enough to be bad, and the Cruiserweight open, while a bit spotty, was an exciting match. So overall the PPV, was ok, but could have been worse.
Mike Johns: First off, I just want to address the whole JBL thing. As far as I'm concerned, I don't see him as a top tier anything. The man literally ran SmackDown! into the ground during his title reign, devaluing every single contender he faced including Eddie Guerrero and Undertaker. As for why anyone would be upset with him losing to the Boogeyman, I don't get it. JBL puts over a guy who's worse than he is, and yeah, that sucks, but not nearly as much as JBL killing SmackDown! was a year ago. As for Cena-Edge, it seems more obvious now than ever that Edge winning the belt was simply a political play to salvage Cena's heat so he could wrestle Triple H at WM.
Douglas Nunnally: Mike, don't you think that Boogeyman squashing someone who was on top for so long devalues that title reign or makes him a legit contender for the title now?
Mike Johns: No. JBL devalued that reign on his own. The Boogeyman just confirms it. As for being a contender, I don't think any fan, smart to the business or otherwise, would take Boogeyman seriously as a contender.
Joe Pritchett: I'll admit that I am not a huge fan of JBL or his run as WWE Champion, and yes, he may have "devalued" the title in the eyes of some; but none the less, I find that him being "squashed" by the Boogeyman cannot be, in any way, a good thing in regards to the integrity of the WWE Championship and what it means to be a champion.
Matt Green: Like Joe, I'm not a huge JBL fan; but the fact is, when WWE have continually knocked themselves out to get the guy over to be an upper tier guy and he has as much heat as any heel on the roster, it's ridiculous that they just cut the carpet out from underneath his feet and squash him with a comedy character that will have been buried by this time next year and JBL will still be up near the top of the card. JBL is never going to be the best worker and he was never going to do big business as champ but he held it so long the fans were going to pop huge when Cena beat him. Therefore, he did his job as champ. With his Rumble defeat, it ruins anything WWE wish do with him in the future
Mike Johns: If the WWE does anything with JBL in the future, it's in the mid-card. Seriously, he hasn't even been a serious contender since his feud with Batista ended. If anything, this squash devalued JBL, who had little value to begin with. I don't want to sound insulting, but the only objection I'm seeing is here is that you're marks for the belt, which is understandable, and you want to see it protected; but if that's the case, then why defend JBL when he did more to destroy a world belt while holding it than possibly any performer since David Arquette?
Matt Green: You've totally missed the point and if you think the belt lineage shouldn't be protected, it's just the fact you can't get over your biased feelings that JBL isn't Chris Benoit or Shawn Michaels. JBL being kept a strong character helps the WWE in the long run to make money; the business that WWE is in requires them to make money and the way they make money is having strong heels to challenge their face champions and strong faces to chase their heel champions. If they squash the guys that they push to the top tier, WWE destroy credibility in the worker and start to nullify any drawing power that worker has. Now, I don't think JBL should be main eventing or should have ever main evented, but he was world champion and in that case, WWE should keep him strong to help build for the future rather than squashing him with a comedy character. When it comes time to build a new babyface, JBL won't get the job done because he has no credibility as heel because he was squashed by someone who WWE don't consider a top tier guy.
Douglas Nunnally: Good points by everyone. Moving on, it seems that we all agreed earlier that not having the Rumble as the main event was a huge blunder, however, what do you guys think about how the match was booked as well as the outcome with Rey Mysterio winning, not just the pure surprise of it?
Tim Wronka: The match was booked in an okay fashion. I think in years past there were more entertaining spots like last year there was the Raw versus. SmackDown! confrontation and the year before had Mick Foley's surprising return. This year did have some surprises, like Triple H drawing number one and Tatanka coming out and staying a while, but nothing as big as it could have been, especially when a lot of people were hoping the Rock would show up. As to Rey winning, it seemed a bit like, "What?" It was definitely awesome to see, but seemed to come out of nowhere. I would have preferred a few more close call situations for Rey because he seemed to disappear at some points and then won it fairly quickly. Other than that, the Rumble was pretty entertaining, but a bit generic.
Joe Pritchett: I agree with Tim that there wasn't anything huge that went on minus the ending. I was hoping a big name would be making a surprise return which didn't happen. As far as Rey winning the Rumble, it definitely took me by surprise. I think Rey almost "disappearing" in the match, as Tim put it, helped add to the surprise though. There's also the factor of believability to think about. Some have argued that Rey shouldn't have won and doesn't deserve a push toward the title. I am quick to say that: A. underdog stories have always been an exciting part of sports and B. we're talking about WWE. I think his win was definitely a good thing.
Mike Johns: First off about Joe's point about no major star returning, the thing is that it was supposed to be RVD. The problem is that WWE has done so much to kill RVD's following over the last couple years that he had zero impact on the Rumble when he made his return. As for Rey, if Rey actually does make it to a WM title match, then it was all for the best. The problem is that he isn't going to. This ultimately hurts Rey, the WWE, and SmackDown!, who is in desperate need of a strong secondary babyface to follow up Kurt Angle's "Bret Hart" style of fighting champion. I would like to believe that Rey is going to be a contender to a title (any title) in the long run, but as Joe said, this is WWE where there is a long and storied history of "big men" holding belts, while "little guys" fill the under card. Just because Savage was a success and HBK is touted as a legend doesn't mean that every smaller guy who held the belt in WWE was given much to work with. Just remember Chris Jericho.
Tim Wronka: In terms of what you said about RVD, I think he had a pretty good showing. What Joe's point was is that there were no surprise entries to the Rumble. We already knew that RVD would be coming back, and to be honest, I think he got one of the biggest pops of the night; and his so called "dead following," as you called it, didn't seem to be apparent at all. The crowd definitely booed heavily when he got eliminated as well.
Matt Green: As far as the Rumble goes as a spectacle, I think it was really dull except once it got down to the final four and the crowd reacted for something other than the music hitting the arena. Rey winning was cool, but it didn't feel special simply because the beginning simply didn't have action and confrontation that made anyone in the audience believe the winner of the Rumble was going to have given everything he had. The RVD return was handled as well as it could be and it was WWE being courteous that got him to the final four because he was basically the only component of the finish that was easily expendable. As for Mike’s comment about WWE creating someone behind Kurt Angle's "Bret Hart" figure, if Kurt Angle was half the worker, promo, or wrestling mind Bret Hart was WWE wouldn't need a back up because Bret Hart carried the company on his back from March 1994 to November 1994 with zero help from any other face in the company.
Mike Johns: Kurt doesn't need the back up, SmackDown! does. If SmackDown! only relies on Angle, the show will feel hollow, much like the WWE circa 1994 was. You have to have more than just a main event to fill up a show; so without a secondary face to help fill up spots, the show, outside of the main event, will be filler and who wants to watch a show made up of 90% filler?
Matt Green: Well quite obviously, 4.5 of USA's network syndication want to watch filler because that's the rating Raw got this week and 3.0 of UPN's syndication tuned into SmackDown! for shows that were almost entirely a non-competitive wrestling entity.
Douglas Nunnally: Again, some good points, most of which I agree with as well as probably our viewers, but another topic we haven't really touched down upon would be the match that took the Rumble's place in the main event: Mark Henry versus Kurt Angle. It seems everyone has an opinion on this match, mostly a negative one, but what are your takes on it?
Tim Wronka: First of all, Angle's random face turn makes no sense. Sure, he was getting face pops against Cena, but that's because Cena was getting stale and Angle was winning respect over with the mark fan base. However, I don’t think Angle works too well as a strong face. People cheer his heel character because they find it funny, but Angle as a face just seems too generic. It's almost like we have to cheer him because WWE is telling us he is face even though a few weeks earlier he was insulting the troops and black people. As for Henry, it just seems that WWE wants to get some use out of his huge contract he signed almost 10 years ago, so they throw him in the main event. The overall match was very lame, to be honest, and the ending came out of nowhere. I'll admit I liked Taker's appearance at the end, since it definitely helped take some of the bad taste out of my mouth the match left; but under any other circumstance, that match should not have closed a PPV, especially being a major one like the Royal Rumble.
Joe Pritchett: I think that Angle's face turn was a bit abrupt and sudden, and I agree with Tim and most others that he works better as a heel. But as far as the match itself goes, I think it served its purpose. It was what it was and I don't think it was any better or worse than it could have been given the circumstances. I didn't like the idea of having Henry in the main event in the first place, but nonetheless there he was, so I think both Angle and Henry put on the best match they could. The Taker entrance at the end really helped to take the focus off of what shouldn't have headlined one of the biggest Pay Per Views of the year though.
Mike Johns: I just want to know: who all here has ever done any booking for a wrestling promotion? I know this sounds like a random question, but this will help me make my point.
Joe Pritchett: I haven't, but may be getting involved with a local promotion this summer.
Tim Wronka: I haven’t either.
Douglas Nunnally: I have.
Mike Johns: Okay, Doug. Then you know that part of your job is to give the people what they want. People want to cheer Angle. Whether it makes sense or not or whether Angle is a good face or not are now moot points.
Matt Green: Basically, the only point of the match I saw was to try and make Angle look strong and they failed miserably and it was only positioned at the end to give Taker a platform to return for the 15 millionth time, so they failed on one count and left the fans with a bad taste in their mouths on the second.
Tim Wronka: Mike, you say that the fans want to cheer Angle. I agree with that, I just get concerned that he may be booked where fans will turn against him.
Mike Johns: That's a given.
Tim Wronka: He needs to still keep his heel edge when being a face and not just be goody-two-shoes. Also, the fans do want to cheer him, but is he really a draw? Do you think that his match with Henry was a reason people order the PPV? I would have to say no to that.
Mike Johns: Henry is just there. I'm personally indifferent to it. Whether he deserves it or not, I just don't care. The contract is up soon and hopefully he's gone. I wouldn’t have done it personally, but hey, you're paying the guy, so I don't blame them for using him. I just wouldn’t have used him this way, that's all.
Douglas Nunnally: Well, we've pretty much examined this PPV to a T and pretty much all agree the PPV was a let-down as WWE dropped the ball again. Before we finish, anyone have any closing thoughts?
Joe Pritchett: I think I've said all I need to say.
Mike Johns: Nah, I'm cool.
Tim Wronka: Same here.
Matt Green: I'm good for once.
Douglas Nunnally: All right then I think I speak for all of you when I thank the readers for joining us here. Thanks to you four as well for an excellent roundtable discussion and we will be back next week with a discussion on steroids in wrestling.
To send feedback to any of these writers, simply click on their name.
Copyright © 2005; TheWrestlingVoice.com & Douglas Nunnally.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement