>>14394881The Royal Rumble has been severely harmed by lax officiating. In the 2000s we started seeing more and more abuse of the rule that you won't get eliminated for going out under the ropes. I understand it's not an elimination, but there shouldn't be tons of fighting on the floor during a Rumble. It's just not that sort of match, or shouldn't be. This ramped up considerably in the 2010s and we got the horrendous and incredibly childish Kofi Kingston moments, where we all had to pretend that an elimination doesn't count so long as you're standing on a chair or someone's shoulders or whatnot. It kills any immersion one could have in the match, and it turns the whole thing into one big joke.
WWE decided to run TWO Rumbles at the same event, which is so unbelievably stupid that I still can't understand who approved it or why. Doing so kills the gimmick by overexposure. Not to mention these matches are really difficult to book anyway, and now there needs to be enough differences between the two so as not to disappoint the audience. Women's wrestling is shit, but if we have to suffer through it, at least put the women's Rumble on a different event, preferably months after the men's, so that there can be genuine excitement for both.
And yes, the Rumble needs STARS to work. I'm not even a fan of the 'winner main events WrestleMania' stipulation, because that severely limits who can win it and everyone watching knows it. If the match is full to the brim with stars, then fine. But oftentimes there will only be 3-6 guys in the whole thing that are viable contenders for that main event spot, which makes everyone else irrelevant and kills a lot of the excitement.
The winner SHOULD get a huge boost in prestige which can lead to a world title shots and a main event at Mania under the right circumstances, but it should by no means be a guarantee. I think champions should participate, unless there is a good storyline reason to hold a world title match on the card instead.
