Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Blake Griffin Slam Dunks: NBA Jam Style

Elimination Chamber: Is WWE inadvertently ruining the Royal Rumble concept?

Photo via WWE.com.

Pro wrestling fans are a fickle bunch. We're a group of folks that like to think we've got it all figured out and no matter how often promoters try to get one over on us, we're always one step ahead of the game.

But we're all just marks at heart, always hoping for the next great thrill when we forget things like who is "going over" and who is being "buried" or is in the middle of a big "push." Unfortunately, because of the culture created by Vince McMahon and his entertainment empire, WWE, those moments are fewer and far between each and every year that goes by.

The latest attack on our wrestling fandom is of our beloved Royal Rumble. Indeed, if there's one event outside of WrestleMania that we can all agree on is worth the time and financial investment, it's the Rumble pay-per-view and, more specifically, the match itself.

The concept is simple. 30 men (40 in 2011) enter the match at intervals of somewhere around a minute and a half to two minutes, participants are eliminated by being thrown over the top rope, and the last man standing is awarded a title shot of his choosing (against either the world heavyweight champion or WWE champion) at that year's WrestleMania event.

It's structured well, it's simple, and it's highly effective in getting fans prepared for the biggest event of the year. So what's the problem?

The Elimination Chamber, that's what.

Star-divide

The Elimination Chamber was introduced as a match concept all the way back in 2002 at that year's Survivor Series. The first ever winner was none other than the great Shawn Michaels, who won the world heavyweight championship. It was used sporadically as a special attraction match after that, in a similar vein to the Hell in a Cell match.

But you know WWE; if it's successful as a match, it should be successful as a stand alone pay-per-view.

So it was made official starting in 2010 that the February pay-per-view show, after Royal Rumble and before WrestleMania, would be officially entitled Elimination Chamber and would feature two Chamber matches contested for the main titles from both the Raw and Smackdown brands.

In 2010, Chris Jericho defeated six other men to win the world heavyweight championship while John Cena did the same to win the WWE championship, though he lost it immediately after to Batista in an impromptu match. Nonetheless, he went on the WrestleMania 25, along with Jericho, to have a match for the WWE and world heavyweight championships.

That year, Edge won the Royal Rumble and didn't appear on the Elimination Chamber pay-per-view.

In 2011, the Smackdown Elimination Chamber match was for the world heavyweight championship while the Raw Chamber match held the stipulation that the winner would go on to have a match against the WWE champion at WrestleMania. Edge retained his title in the former, John Cena was victorious in the latter.

That year, Alberto Del Rio won the Royal Rumble and announced his intentions to go after the world heavyweight championship. He had a match against Kofi Kingston at the Elimination Chamber pay-per-view.

Which brings us to this year. The winner of the Rumble match was Sheamus, of course, and he has yet to announce what title he'll be going after. For now it doesn't matter because there are two Elimination Chamber matches set for the pay-per-view on Feb. 19 featuring 12 superstars contesting for both the WWE and world heavyweight championships.

Which ultimately raises the question regarding whether or not WWE is stripping the Royal Rumble of its meaning by having a pay-per-view the following month that features two chances for the champions to lose the titles the Rumble winner is supposed to be going after.

Realistically, what's the point of the Rumble match? To earn a title shot, for one, and to have it occur at WrestleMania, for two, right?

Well, let's look at how ass backwards this is. Sheamus wins the Rumble and he'll get to face one of the two champions, no matter who they are, on April 1 in Miami. That's all well and good, right?

But 10 other superstars are getting a title shot before him at Elimination Chamber and they did absolutely nothing to earn it. Let's look at the two Chamber matches:

Raw:

CM Punk (defending WWE championship) vs. Chris Jericho vs. The Miz vs. R-Truth vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston

Smackdown:

Daniel Bryan (defending world heavyweight championship) vs. Big Show vs. Great Khali vs. Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett vs. Cody Rhodes

Every single superstar vying for either title was in the Rumble match and lost. Every one. So what, again, is the big appeal in doing everything one can to ensure one wins such a grueling match?

You could say that it's the promise of not just a title shot but of a title shot at WrestleMania, the "Granddaddy of Them All," and that's certainly understandable. But that doesn't really hold up because if you win the Elimination Chamber match, you would go into 'Mania as the champion and would defend your title against the Rumble winner anyway.

Huh. At this point, winning the Royal Rumble doesn't really mean much of anything, does it?

This year that fact is especially magnified considering the main event of WrestleMania 28 was set in stone last year when The Rock and John Cena agreed to a match. That's without taking into account Triple H vs. Undertaker, which is going to be the number two match on the card.

So the highest the Rumble winner can get at this point is to be the third match down at the biggest show of the year. That's not a main event title shot, that's just a title shot.

Again I ask you, what's the point in going to the trouble of winning the Royal Rumble when you can just find yourself in a title shot at the very next show and you have zero chance of main eventing at WrestleMania?

I'm not saying WWE should completely do away with the Elimination Chamber concept. Quite the contrary, it's actually a very well put together deal. There are just better ways to utilize it.

For instance, why not ditch one of the Chamber matches altogether? If Sheamus is going to challenge Daniel Bryan for the world heavyweight championship, why not dump that Chamber match and have the Raw Chamber match stipulation be that the winner gets a title shot at WrestleMania for the other title against its champion?

That would set up Sheamus vs. Bryan and Punk vs. the winner of the other Chamber match while protecting the Rumble's mystique and giving the Chamber a good reason to actually take place other than the fact that it's a good gimmick match.

Storylines could be masterfully crafted on this premise. Every superstar wants to win the Royal Rumble but the reality is only one of them can, so the ones that don't should be absolutely falling over themselves to get into the Elimination Chamber match to get their chance at the other belt, whichever it may be. They could mix the brands, do all sorts of cool, new and interesting things with it.

Now, though, we've got a watered down concept with no real meaning and WWE once again failing to see further than six inches in front of its face.

Am I crazy here or do any of you Cagesiders feel the same?

Comment 9 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I hear ya, Geno

Ideally you could flip the two PPV’s around, so the Elimination Chamber was in late Jan and the Rumble was in Feb. that way the RR would lead directly into WM. If the Rumble being the first PPV of the year has some time significance, then they can move EC after WM and have a generic PPV in its place. Hell, call it Road to WM or RoadTrip or something of the sorts. You build up feuds, nail down match stipulations, finalize number one contendership or particpants in MitB, etc. At this point we are all just waiting for WM anyways. Let’s just admit to it and do something about it.

Or, worst comes to worst, all EC matchups are number one contendership matches. If the Rumble winner chooses your brands championship, it either becomes triple threat or you get bounced till after WM.

I'm big, I'm white, I'm Irish, and G*d damnit people like me!

by C. J. Bradford on Feb 2, 2012 10:23 PM EST reply actions  

You’re not totally wrong but you’re not totally right. You’re underselling the importance of challenging for a major championship on the biggest stage of them all; it’s basically like if the Patriots had a bye for the playoffs and could have gone right to the Super Bowl. But it’s watered down by there being two championships, thus meaning two title matches, thus meaning that somebody’s going to be “going to WrestleMania” without having “earned” the right the way the Rumble winner did.

But you’re right, the best solution would be for the EC PPV to have one EC match, featuring wrestlers from both brands; the winner gets the other challenger spot, with the Rumble winner getting first pick. So you’d have a match between, say, Orton, Jericho, Big Show, Miz, Ziggler… is there another babyface out there that would work? I guess it doesn’t matter. But that’s a lot more exciting. You could have qualifier matches, guys really trying to earn the spot… hmm, maybe the reason HHH doesn’t want the Undertaker at WM is because he’s got his eyes on bigger things… until ’Taker costs him the match at EC, much like Shawn Michaels did to ’Taker all those years ago… that would be pretty cool.

by Ken Raining on Feb 2, 2012 10:57 PM EST reply actions  

You bring up a good point, but...

The Elimination Chamber isn’t supposed to be just 6 guys in a match going for the title. Its 6 guys all having to fight off up to 5 possible wrestlers at once within the most sadistic, brutal structure the WWE has/had. The Royal Rumble gets a straight 1 on 1 match for the championship at Wrestlemania without having to go through hell in the Elimination Chamber to get a chance.

So I don’t think the EC PPV inherently ruins the Royal Rumble. However, if the WWE doesn’t stress how dangerous and horrible it is for a wrestler to go through the Elimination Chamber, it seriously undermines the whole thing. Additionally, if Sheamus ends up in a triple threat match for the title, that won’t help matters any either. Its already a given that he won’t be the main event at Wrestlemania, so that is one Royal Rumble victory point gone.

by hfl2013 on Feb 2, 2012 10:57 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

this.

In the body of other posts, I am often admittedly high and tend to not want to edit a lot.
by willlinn on Dec 2, 2011 12:01 PM PST

if Wren gets Arenado from Colorado, I’ll give him a BJ.
by Scott Coleman on Dec 19, 2011 9:45 PM PST

by Klemson Krash on Feb 3, 2012 7:29 AM EST up reply actions  

What you guys are saying makes sense but this is one of those times where I am willing to throw logic out the window since the EC matches usually produce very high quality action and athleticism, and ultimately, that’s one are some of the main things I want to see in wrestling. And the Royal Rumble match is usually hyped well enough to make it always seem really important even though the EC logically should diminish its importance. The Royal Rumble match is the one match year where you could potentially have all of the top stars in the ring at the same time beating the hell out of each other. This clash of top stars and surprise returns has produced many dramatic moments and dramatic eliminations. I think that is a major part of the Rumble’s appeal as well, not just the Mania title shot.

And I hate the HIAC PPV because I feel that HIAC matches are more dependent on great backstory for true greatness (which I feel is much less important to the greatness of EC matches), and having a standalone PPV for that gimmick has largely ruined the big-time feel of those HIAC matches.

But ultimately when it comes down to Match of the Year candidates in recent years I find that at least one of the EC matches is usually in the mix (for my standards, anyway), and I wish every PPV could potentially have Match of the Year candidates on it. EC always has potential to deliver two such gems. The rest of the PPV is largely garbage outside of those two matches, but that really isn’t a big deal in my eyes.

I think it is easy to rip on the Rumble right now due to this year’s lackluster match that had very little star power and was mostly a comedy fest. But the Rumble and EC together make up for my two favorite PPVs of the year. I hope WWE doesn’t change that format leading up to Mania anytime soon. I think it’s a pretty entertaining combo.

by Kanenite on Feb 2, 2012 11:10 PM EST reply actions  

I think the booking in 2011 was a good idea. You can only have one winner in the Royal Rumble who will go after his show’s title, so how do we get a legitimate number one contender for the other? The Chamber is a convenient way for them to find that. It’s kind of like “ok, you didn’t win the Rumble, but here’s another and possibly harsher way to get to ’Mania.” It doesn’t take away from the importance of the Rumble, and still makes the person going after the other title look like he deserves it. I’d be ok with there just being one Chamber match though. Three guys from Raw, and three from Smackdown.

https://twitter.com/#!/Sixteen_Shells, http://sixteenshells.blogspot.com/

by FarmerInTheCity on Feb 3, 2012 2:56 AM EST reply actions  

My bigger problem is I don’t believe Sheamus is going to get the shot, that kills the Rumble to me. Wrestlemania is every marks dream, it’s in our hearts even though I hate the WWE.

by MVP Raiders on Feb 3, 2012 7:02 AM EST via Android app reply actions  

I like the idea a lot. However, I believe the Royal Rumble has been watered down more and more over the years. It was a big f’n deal when there was one title. You win the Rumble and then got a shot at the company’s biggest title in the match that will be the main event.

Then a 2nd title just as big was the first was added (at least it’s billed as such). So now the Rumble is half as important because you don’t NEED to win the Rumble to get a shot. THEN add the fact that title shots aren’t even the main event in Mania any more (as Geno mentioned) dilutes it further. (A lesson learned after HHH and Orton couldn’t top HBK vs. Taker.) Then last year, the winner of the Rumble was a friggin’ Curtain Jerker!! (And I’m sure Punk v. Jericho will be the higher match on the card this year.)

All of that together and with their EC billing, the Rumble has gone to extremely important to a match that if it isn’t entertaining (like this year) it means nothing. And it’s a damn shame.

by KDidz on Feb 3, 2012 8:40 PM EST reply actions  

yo sheamus

congrats sheamus i am Ur biggest fan of India pls i am saying one thing please take wwe champion ship as in world heavy weight there are tough opponents so please accept my request and if you will take wwe champion ship there are cm punk, Alberto Dario, Irish Jericho and dolf zigler so you can win it so try to work hard

ur fan
‘sagar’

by sagarkuvar1 on Feb 6, 2012 9:26 AM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

"Behind you there may be one, or there may be many, waiting to stick a knife in your back. But you don't have to worry about me ... I'll shoot you right between the eyes." -- Kevin Nash

The General

Solidsnake_small Geno Mrosko

Editors

Small Keith Harris

Bane2_small Jesse Holland

File1684_small Sergio Hernandez