Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeritron
Lets be fair here. Just because some of us think Cena sucks doesn't mean him winning the rumble was shitting on the rumble. In fact, it was far more shocking and fresh (exciting) than previous years where the winner was labeled from a mile away and followed a clear path to the win. At best, it was between two guys (one from each brand).
Even though Cena sucks, at least it was a swerve. Taker winning again would have been pointless.
|
Somebody just turning up out of the blue and winning it though, dispassionate of it being Cena, doesn't do it justice for me. There have been a few in recent years that weren't terribly obvious. Taker's definitely wasn't, He Who Must Not Be Named was one of several possibilities but definitely not a foregone conclusion, and Batista wasn't really the only choice that year either. It would have been less obnoxious to me if he had come out in the 10-15 range instead of dead last. When he showed up last his win was a foregone conclusion. Showing up earlier wouldn't have been much less of a giveaway, mind, but it would have helped.
Incidentally, it isnt just Cena's win that constitutes defication here, it's also pissing away the title shot a month later at a lower-tier PPV that was the BIG insult.