Sound Off: Will The Andre Memorial Battle Royal Be Better Than The Royal Rumble?
Since then, many have entered their name into the hat of participants, and superstars, namely Dolph Ziggler and Big Show, have received a long-awaited mini push and have staked their claim as possible favorites to win the battle royal. However, when the dust is settled, what does this really do for the winner?
The possibilities are vast. At the Royal Rumble, Shield member Roman Reigns broke the previous record of 11 eliminations, topping his total to 12. There is no doubt that he was the highlight of the match. However, just like Kane, it just may be a statistic with no payoff. This was proven partially by Reigns being the focal point in most of the match, only for the excitement to be deflated by a Batista victory.
This concept rings true in many recent Royal Rumble matches. With the exception of Alberto Del Rio (who consequently lost his WM WHC match) and arguably Sheamus, the Royal Rumble winner has not been someone who is penned as the future of the company in quite some time. Interstingly, Batista's Royal Rumble win in 2005 was the last time it was won to push a rising star. Other than Reigns, Ryback was the closest, only to be runner-up to John Cena who did not need to win the match in order to be in the title hunt again.
The ATGM Battle Royal creates an opportunity to do what has not been done at the Royal Rumble for nearly 10 years - allow the winner to be someone who is a rising star, with a future as a solid main-event superstar. And, yes, we will still have our surprise entrants, which is always an exciting part of the Royal Rumble match.
So, with these elements in mind, will the ATGM Battle Royal be better than the Royal Rumble? Sound off below.
Short URL: http://winc.cc/vr1ctH