Should the 40-man Royal Rumble return?

[Str8Shooter]

Creative can handle it.

Famous last words

[Headlesspete]

The star power isn't great though. Even if it's not as bad as some people might make out, it definitely ain't good compared with other periods in WWE's history. And the more people you add to the match, the more you dilute that star power, no matter what.

Completely disagree. I've just shown WWE have the start power to pull this off. Atleast 25 of the 40 names i listed are legit wrestlers that NEED to be in there, and none of them should be used as "random wrestler #7 to be eliminated in quick order by Brock or Goldburg", and so we need wrestlers that have substantial name value that can take that hit.

And if nothing else, I'd much rather watch an extra 20 minutes of Royal Rumble with 10 more guys, than a random tag title match. The Rumble is by far the most anticipated and exiting match of the year, i find it hard to believe anyone would be against seeing more of it.

[The Legend]

The Rumbles is an hour of repetitiveness mixed with a handful of cool moments. I wouldn't come close to calling it the most exciting match of the year.

[Hanley!]

Completely disagree. I've just shown WWE have the start power to pull this off. Atleast 25 of the 40 names i listed are legit wrestlers that NEED to be in there, and none of them should be used as "random wrestler #7 to be eliminated in quick order by Brock or Goldburg", and so we need wrestlers that have substantial name value that can take that hit.

And if nothing else, I'd much rather watch an extra 20 minutes of Royal Rumble with 10 more guys, than a random tag title match. The Rumble is by far the most anticipated and exiting match of the year, i find it hard to believe anyone would be against seeing more of it.

There's no way 25 of those names need to be in there. And even if they did, that's still less than 30 names. Why throw in that extra 10? You're just adding wrestlers that nobody believes can win. You're adding filler. Would you add an extra 20 minutes of filler to your favourite movie, just to drag the experience out for longer? I know I wouldn't. And this is the same concept.

I'd rather watch the tag match for that 20 minutes. You could book a really good tag match to take up that amount of time on the show, and there are two sets of tag championships now. Why not make use of them?

You say that the Rumble is the most exciting match of the year and you have a hard time believing why anyone would be against seeing more of it. Well, you've answered your own question there: Because that extra 20 minutes makes the match less exciting.

You know the phrase "less is more"? It applies here. You yourself made a thread recently asking if the 3rd hour of Raw could bring down the whole company. Sometimes you can have too much of a good thing.