General Chit-Chat Thread - No Spoilers

[Hoss]

*any

 

[Chris]

Nah EC, they were all pretty boring to me, at best a couple are better than the '99 Rumble which is the WOAT

 

[Hoss]

That's what I figured. 60 men is just stupid.

 

[Chris]

I think the '98 one may have been the best if that's the one Nash won, if not whatever year Nash won was the one I liked the best but it still wasn't really that good

 

[Hoss]

No chance you're gonna be able to tell proper stories or have those big highlight moments like the Rumble does

 

[Chris]

CLB coming out here and saying he deserves ONE MORE MATCH

 

[Chris]

They're super boring until like 15 men are left and then I still feel like they don't do a good job getting some decent spots in, like it's just basic battle royal shit the whole way through

 

[Hoss]

Yikes

 

[Smart Marx]

Most World War 3's told complete stories. They just start slow until they get to the final act. I just appreciate the fact they didn't ripoff Royal Rumble full cloth.

 

[Hoss]

Somehow I've never watched any of them. But that's because I always assumed they sucked.

 

[Smart Marx]

I mean, it is a basic battle royal.

 

[Hoss]

I just figured if there was a good 60 man battle royal I woulda heard about it.

 

[Smart Marx]

The 1998 was good like Chris mentioned. I also enjoyed the 1997 one due to the fuckery.

 

[Chris]

They weren't really bad per se, just pretty boring and not really worth talking about it, like if they really sucked you'd have probably heard about them more lol

 

[Smart Marx]

The 1995 one was hilarious due to Hogan being Hogan.