Is the Rumble still relevant?

[GeeTeaIye]

The main purpose of that match is to determine who gets into the WM main event, but that is always overshadowed by the Taker match, or by a John Cena match.
It degraded even further last year when the rumble winner wrestled in the first match of the night for 17 seconds.
So my question is, Does the RR have a purpose or is it just another Battle Royal match?

 

[Stopspot]

Yes it is. Even though the rumble winners match might be over shadowed by more high profile matches or wrestlers it is and easy and almost surefire way to create a main eventer. So it does serve a purpose.

 

[Cloud]

Due to certain matches the RR's status has dropped slightly but bear in mind the Cena, Streak, Rock, Brock matches won't last forever and the RR will still be there.

So yes it's important and as Stop says it creates future main eventers.

 

[GeeTeaIye]

Yes it is. Even though the rumble winners match might be over shadowed by more high profile matches or wrestlers it is and easy and almost surefire way to create a main eventer. So it does serve a purpose.

but that would imply that actual low carders or lower mid carders should win, not only former Whc/Wwe champions

 

[Stopspot]

but that would imply that actual low carders or lower mid carders should win, not only former Whc/Wwe champions

Most guys who win the rumble solidify their main event status by winning the rumble. Sheamus last year is a prime example. He was delegated to mid card status after his two WWE championship reigns flopped and by winning the rumble he proved that he was back on top in the company and has hardly slowed down since then (other than being completely boring and lazy but his momentum doesn't seem to stop). This is of course an ideal scenario.

 

[CM Punk]

The last few years have sucked.

 

[GeeTeaIye]

Most guys who win the rumble solidify their main event status by winning the rumble. Sheamus last year is a prime example. He was delegated to mid card status after his two WWE championship reigns flopped and by winning the rumble he proved that he was back on top in the company and has hardly slowed down since then (other than being completely boring and lazy but his momentum doesn't seem to stop). This is of course an ideal scenario.

:damn:
guess you're right.

 

[Lockard 23]

Sheamus could have never won the Rumble (could have gone to Jericho) and still been pushed into the WHC scene and things wouldn't have been any different. I would agree that the Rumble seems like just another match these days, and I've even had legitimate fears in the past that they might get rid of the match at some point. Look at the hype for it this year - three more shows to go before the PPV and not a lot of emphasis has been put on the Rumble match yet. I know Rock/Punk is huge enough to overshadow it, but still. That's why I hope John Cena wins the match this year, because we know he and Rock are gonna be in the same ring again and at least if he wins the Rumble, that means the match that headlines Wrestlemania is connected to the Rumble match, something that hasn't been done since 2009, and before that, all the way back to 2005.

 

[DarksideTrin]

It's still my favourite match

 

[Crayo]

Yes, but they're accidentally doing the most they can to destroy its legacy.

 

[Leo C]

Yes, it is. It can create/solidify main eventers for sure, and even if the match is not the ME it's still a high-profile WM match.

 

[Jonathan]

It is to us, but nothing apart from Mania and SummerSlam mean anything to them.

 

[Snowman1]

Relevant? Depends. If they actually use it for something useful, then yes. Sheamus and Alberto winning really cemented them as main-eventers.
But when Cena and Orton won it, it was pretty irrelevant because they would have gotten big 'Mania matches regardless.

It helps that the #2 guy (other than Santino) also always gets the title shot, making the win feel more special.
Although it would help if the guys who are in there for like an hour would go on to have great years as well, like Miz and Cody last year.