This piece of news, if indeed true (and I have no reason to doubt it), certainly makes things a lot more interesting as well as unpredictable, which is what the Royal Rumble should always be anyway. Lord knows we don’t need a Rumble like last year when we all pretty much had called Triple H entering at number 30 and winning like…3 months prior or previous one’s such as those that Batista and Roman won.
From the very start of these conversations regarding the Royal Rumble and its potential winners, I expressed my take that we should probably be looking for a RAW guy and to this day, I still stand by it. As I explained, I think it makes the most sense given that Smackdown have the Elimination Chamber as their exclusive PPV the following month in which a number one contender for the WWE Championship can be determined. That being said, even Undertaker, though normally one of the favorites to win, I feel is “eliminated” as an option.
Many, including myself, assumed that Taker vs. Cena would happen this year for all sorts of reasons so this sudden change did come as a surprise; personally, I feel this is more of the specific match being postponed for Mania 34 in New Orleans but that’s another story for another time. So, apparently Vince had a change of mind and in a way, I get it. I mean, the Undertaker himself is an attraction as is and his matches are always considered marquee matches (more so when the streak was alive but still) that don’t necessarily need any title to be involved, therefore this could be a case of Vince thinking…multiple money matches. Besides, word is WWE are determined to top off Wrestling Kingdom so in that aspect, I really can’t blame the guy.
As things stand, it’s pretty much a matter of trying to put the pieces together:
a) Is it fair to assume that the KO/Jericho storyline will culminate at Mania? Most likely, yes.
b) Is it fair to assume that Rollins will have the match with Triple H? Even though they’ve pretty much fucked this storyline to the point that it’s almost forgotten, the answer is probably yes.
c) Is it fair to assume that Brock vs. Goldberg part 3 is happening at Mania? Pretty much a lock…
d) Is it fair to assume that Roman will be defending the Universal Championship at Mania? Damn right it is…
e) Is it fair to assume that Randy Orton and Bray will do their thing at Mania? Though things are moving a bit fast the last couple of weeks, I think it makes sense for this story;ine to reach its end at Mania so yes.
If the above, say, equation, is correct and those are indeed the plans for Mania (some of them anyway), the questions raised are: who does Roman defend against, who faces the Undertaker and what about Cena and Styles.
First of all, I think we all pretty much agree that Roman is winning the Universal title at the Rumble. Call it fixation, call it obsession like I do, call it whatever you want but the fact of the matter is, they are putting that ugly ass belt on Roman because, God forbid, he has to get his win back. He lost the US title on RAW last week (being made to look strong once again in the process because…Roman) so, yeah, fuck off Kevin Owens. Quite frankly, I really don’t mind. I’d rather he gets his moment at the Rumble rather than Mania AGAIN and perhaps WWE are thinking the same thing in an attempt to avoid another chorus of boos.
So, if Roman will be crowned the new Universal Title, can Cena be crowned the new WWE Champion? In other words, would WWE go ahead and have both major titles change hands on the same night? I guess they could but will they? This is kind of a dead end to me. On one hand, it makes sense for Cena to tie Ric Flair’s record at Mania making it memorable moment, on the other hand the Alamodome with 60.000+ in attendance isn’t such a bad place either. But if Cena fails to win at the Rumble, how do you drag this storyline all the way to Mania? Unless…they pull the trigger at the Chamber in that rumored two out of three falls match? It doesn’t necessarily feel right, then again they did squash Brock at Survivor Series not so long ago, didn’t they? For shock value purposes, I’ll say AJ retains at the Rumble and Cena eventually wins at the Chamber.
As for the Undertaker, I too heard the report that came from Alvarez in the Observer about Vince having a “cool” idea and also noticed that several have jumped to the conclusion it being the Demon, Fin Balor. Would it be a spectacle? You bet your ass it would; those entrances alone are a fucking spectacle. However I wouldn’t rush into trying to interpret this idea just yet because we are talking about…Vince. Not us fans. Vince. And his cool ideas don’t necessarily fit with what us fans consider a cool idea. In Vince’s world, Strowman vs. Undertaker is a cool idea and you damn know it was his idea for that backstage take to Braun while Undertaker was delivering his promo last week; it’s something that we’ve seen time and again in the past (Giant Gonzalez ring any bells?) so I’d advise you all to hold your horses. Come to think of it, how exactly do you have Balor feud with Taker anyway? Sure, via the Royal Rumble would be one way IF Balor shows up. According to all reports and assuming they are legit and not an attempt to throw us all off for the element of surprise, Balor isn’t expected to be back until March. So how do you build a feud with Undertaker and more or less in one month? Quite frankly, if I’m Balor and I’m returning in March, I immediately go after MY Universal Title that I never lost.
All in all, the one thing that's certain is that the Royal Rumble has gotten all that much more interesting, which of course is a good thing. Based on the above and if we are to eliminate all the part timers, who's left to win? The way I see it, Sami Zayn is kind of left hanging, as is Strowman. Wanna add a Samoe Joe, which should be considered a lock as far as a surprise entrant? Go ahead...
