I’m perfectly fine with the women’s Royal rumble and men’s Royal rumble matches taking the main event slots, even if they don’t end up being the biggest matches on the card. During the late 90s and early 2000s, about half the time the biggest match was not the main event. Tiffany Stratton vs Charlotte Flair could have been built up better. But, I wish they’d stick to their guns and at least try to push these ones as the biggest matches on the cards.
1997 - Bret vs Austin was much bigger match than Undertaker vs Sid
2000 - The Four corners was an unpopular choice, and the Triangle Ladder Match stole the show.
2002 - Rock vs Hogan was way bigger than Triple H vs Jericho.
2003 - a weird one because Rock vs Austin was bigger than Angle vs Brock, but Angle vs Brock stole the show in the last minute with Brock’s… shooting star headbutt to the the mat.
Three big reasons I think led to the different emphasis:
1. WWE trying to use the titles as a way to build new top stars rather than showcase the actual top stars.
2. Stacked cards, there are so many big wrestlers right now that it’s much more likely others are going to steal spotlight, and WWE writing adapted to this.
3. And this might be the biggest reason: Extra long Wrestlemania season. Wrestlemania should have happened this weekend, or one of the last two weekends. But it’s happening in late April. There’s still 3 weeks left, and so the buzz from the Rumble is wearing off quickly.
I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.
