Main Event vs. Championship Match



Chris Jericho vs. Edge

 My friend Travis is the inspiration behind this post. It's something we've talked about before, and I've given some thought.  But he recently brought it up again, and of course now I've got to throw in my
1-2-3 cents on the subject.

Each year we're promised the winner of the Royal Rumble will be featured in the main event of Wrestlemania and get a title match to boot.

So now comes the debate.  Is the main event the last match on the card, or is it simply one of the main matches on the card?

I've always felt the main event is the last match on the card.  The only exception here was back in the 80's during Saturday Night's Main Event.  You usually got the world title match or main event early on in the show. I think that was in part because the show didn't come on until 10:30 p.m. CST/11:30 EST.  Lots of kiddies were probably asleep by the time Koko B. Ware was jobbing to Sgt. Slaughter at 11:55 CST.  Just sayin'...

Anyway, back to my point.  Let's look at the history of Royal Rumble winners and their Wrestlemania matches.

Wrestlemania 26:  Edge won the 2010 Royal Rumble.  He chose to face Chris Jericho at Wrestlemania.  The match was not the last match on the card.  It was BEFORE the John Cena-Batista match and the monstrosity 8 diva tag team match.  So while it was high on the card, it wasn't the last match and in my opinion, NOT the main event.  And I apologize for putting main event  in italics.  I've started and now I can't seem to stop.

Randy Orton vs. HHH

Wrestlemania 25:  Randy Orton won the 2009 Royal Rumble and was in the last match of the night as he faced Triple H for the WWE championship.

This was the main event of the card and probably one of the dullest in Wrestlemania history.  The crowd was so amped up after seeing the Undertaker and Shawn Michaels, it was hard for these two to even hold a candle to that.  So we'll give the E that one. 

Wrestlemania 24:  Super Cena defied the odds and returned to the 2008 Royal Rumble (early) as a surprise entrant.  He was number 30 that year and won the event.  He went on to Wrestlemaina 24 in Orlando to face champion Randy Orton and fellow challenger Triple H in a triple threat match.  I don't remember all the back story as to how H got involved, but I think there's something written somewhere that these three must all contend for the title in the same match a couple of times a year. 

Anyway, to my original point.  This was not the last match on the card either.  I think the only reason for that was because Orton went over and was the heel.  Vince likes to send the fans home happy at Mania, and we got the Undertaker expanded his streak and winning the world title from Edge (which was a good main event.

Wrestlemania 23: The Undertaker won the Royal Rumble in 2007, last tossing out Shawn Michaels.  A little ironic given where we are today.  He went on to face (and defeat) Batista for the belt.  I wasn't at this Mania, but according to the online lineup, this match was the 4th on the card.  Not sure how accurate that is, but the main event that year was John Cena vs. HBK.  I agree, that one should have been the main event and was glad to see that it was.

Rey wins the gold at Wrestlemania 22

Wrestlemania 22: The ultimate underdog, Rey Mysterio picked up the huge win at the 2006 Royal Rumble.  But dream of being the main event at Wrestlemania didn't really come true.  Rey went on to beat Kurt Angle and Randy Orton in a triple threat match that was third from the end.  That epic Playboy Pillow fight between Torrie Wilson and Candace Michelle was used as the buffer between the two title matches.

Wrestlemania 21:  Big Dave Batista won the 2005 Royal Rumble.  Or did he.  If I remember right he and Cena kinda botched up the ending there and both ended up going out at the same time.  Storyline wise, they went with Batista as the winner. He chose to wrestle his his former Evolution buddy Triple H for the title.  That was the last match on the card and what I'd consider the main event.  


Wrestlemania 20: He who shall not be named, ah who am I kidding?  Chris Benoit won the 2004 Royal Rumble.  He went on to beat Triple H and Shawn Michaels for the title in a triple threat match.  Again, this was the main event and belonged in that spot.


Wrestlemania 19:  Same story.  Brock Lesnar won the Rumble that year and was in the main event against Kurt Angle. And that was the first Wrestlemania where we had both the WWE championship and the World title up for grabs.


So here's the point of all of this.  The E needs to just say the winner of the Royal Rumble gets a championship match at Wrestlemania.  That would end the debate over what's the main event.  But I've said it before, I think with the title match stipulation, it limits the realm of people who will actually win the Royal Rumble.

Just some food for thought on your Wednesday.  Discuss, comment, and check out My 1-2-3 Cents on YouTube as well.  Thanks!

Brock Ain't Coming to Wrestlemania

In case you missed it, this is from FanHouse.

I know my grammar isn't proper in the headline.  Don't care.  I have been reading about the possibilities  of a Brock Lesnar vs. Undertaker match at Wrestlemania 27 for  a couple of months now.  I've avoided the topic, but there's been more buzz in recent days on some of the sites I read, so I thought I'd weigh in now.

Maybe I'm in the minority but I don't want to see this happen.  I'm happy for Brock and all the success he has had in the UFC, but I really think he kinda screwed over the WWE and its fans a few years ago.

Maybe screwed over is too harsh.  But I didn't care much for the way he left the WWE back in 2004.  Although being on the receiving end of a Stone Cold Stunner was pretty good.

Here's my problem with Brock.  I don't like the way he left.  The company spent a couple of years building him up to be a major player.  He was fast tracked to the top.  And why not?  He fit the mold that Vince likes to fill.  He's a big man who could work and get a decent reaction from the crowd.

And remember this is all my opinion, so if you disagree, please comment.  But Brock just seemed to get too big for his britches.  Maybe that's because of the mega push he received.  He's basically a kid getting the world handed to him.  He did work hard I suppose, but it seemed like it was all too fast.  Much like the Goldberg phenomenon back in the WCW days.  (Ironic the two met in their last WWE match)

Now the buzz is that Brock will appear at Mania and end the Undertaker's streak because they had some sort of "confrontation" back in October at a UFC event.  From all the reports I've read, Dana White is not budging on the issue of letting Lesnar wrestle.  And why would Brock risk it?

Would the WWE really have him as the man to end the streak?  Surely not.  At least I would hope not.  If and when the streak ends, it needs to be done by a full time WWE superstar.  That honor should be reserved for someone special.

So if Brock doesn't end the streak, what would be the point of one of UFC's finest getting beat on such a grand stage?  And if it happened, they'd be all kinds of media coverage.  Probably not what the company is looking for, I'm suspecting.

If it's not Brock coming to Wrestlemania, what WWE outsider should it be?  There's also been talk of Kevin Nash, (ummm, no thanks) and even Shawn Michaels, which makes little sense.  Also, does the WWE need an outsider coming in to Wrestlemania?  It usually creates a little extra buzz, but probably not worth alienating your fan base, right?