Tylor
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 23, 2008 18:17:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,437
|
Post by Tylor on Feb 1, 2010 0:02:30 GMT -5
... or did that rumble just fly on by? No other rumble that i saw went by that quick, except on vid. games
|
|
|
Post by HugoOne on Feb 1, 2010 0:04:01 GMT -5
1995 was shorter, but this was a short Rumble, all things considered. Still a very good one.
|
|
|
Post by jothanmo on Feb 1, 2010 0:09:28 GMT -5
It wasn't just you, I thought the same thing.
I had no care for any other match on the card, then the Rumble basically just swooped by...
|
|
|
Post by yankeesforever on Feb 1, 2010 0:22:44 GMT -5
It did fly . But alot of the Rumbles now seem to go fast like that .
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Feb 1, 2010 0:23:56 GMT -5
It was definitely quick, I actually timed it, and I stopped my stopwatch at 54 minutes, and that was at least five minutes after it ended, but I was too excited to remember I had it running.
|
|
jwsowner
Main Eventer
"The King Of String"
Joined on: Nov 21, 2009 14:41:05 GMT -5
Posts: 2,283
|
Post by jwsowner on Feb 1, 2010 0:31:25 GMT -5
Yeah, there was definitely something off about this year's Royal Rumble match. I think it was that we didn't have that moment in the match where there was a huge cluster of superstars.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. PerpetuaLynch Motion on Feb 1, 2010 0:34:05 GMT -5
Yeah, there was definitely something off about this year's Royal Rumble match. I think it was that we didn't have that moment in the match where there was a huge cluster of superstars. I'm thinking this is where the kid demographic comes into play. A LOT of kids have trouble paying attention to a lot of things going on at once. I theorize they eliminated a lot of the cluster in the ring for this exact reason.
|
|
|
Post by BØRNS on Feb 1, 2010 2:19:11 GMT -5
Yeah, there was definitely something off about this year's Royal Rumble match. I think it was that we didn't have that moment in the match where there was a huge cluster of superstars. I'm thinking this is where the kid demographic comes into play. A LOT of kids have trouble paying attention to a lot of things going on at once. I theorize they eliminated a lot of the cluster in the ring for this exact reason. I agree it went way too fast. And, if that's the reason it went by so quickly, then that's B.S. Won't kids be more excited by the fact that 10+ wrestlers are in the ring at once? I missed that feeling of complete chaos in this RR. Oh well, it was pretty good, still, and had many memorable moments.
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Feb 1, 2010 2:22:50 GMT -5
Damn 54 minutes or most likely around 50 minutes is a lot shorter than then some rumbles like when Rey won it was like 62 minutes!
Kinda sucks for the fans but at least Edge won!
|
|
HappyChappyInc.
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Sept 23, 2008 2:12:29 GMT -5
Posts: 227
|
Post by HappyChappyInc. on Feb 1, 2010 7:09:09 GMT -5
Now that I think about it, yes it was a short Rumble. But also a very good one.
|
|
|
Post by orton1994 on Feb 1, 2010 7:49:38 GMT -5
yeah you can thanks CM PUNK for that
|
|
|
Post by muccguy88 on Feb 1, 2010 11:40:20 GMT -5
definitely flew by. didnt it used to be like an hour by the time #30 even reached the ring? this year had a lot of poor performances. so many guys went out really quick and they were guys that usually do good. kane only had one elimination i think. and wat was with r-truth taking out both mark henry and big show at the same time? back wen they rumbles were great it would take like 5 guys to take out big show. i think the people booking the rumble no longer know how to make it work with a lot of guys in the ring at once and they need to focus on just a few guys. punk was kind of impressive but i expected him to last a lot longer.
|
|
Tasker
Main Eventer
EST4LIFE
Joined on: Aug 16, 2009 17:33:05 GMT -5
Posts: 3,192
|
Post by Tasker on Feb 1, 2010 11:42:58 GMT -5
Myself,i couldnt believe how quick it went. They all entered so fast.
|
|