Interesting Rumble stat

Hey Scott,

Just wanted to throw an interesting Rumble stat at you for blog discussion. I'm a huge Rumble fan, and was thoroughly entertained (for one reason or another) by this year's show. And on a side note, I love Daniel Bryan and would have loved to see him be a surprise entrant and win it, but let's be honest, you had to have your head up your rear end to not see Batista winning that thing. Everyone hooting and hollering about it in the aftermath and expecting it were setting themselves up for disappointment.

Anyway, throughout many of the years in the Rumble, the winner would often hold at least one, if not both sometimes of the Rumble "honors" as I like to call them – one being the longest-lasting guy in the ring and the other having the most eliminations. However, this year's Rumble marked the 8th straight year now that the winner held neither. Do you think that's their new strategy for booking a Rumble? The thought process being you can push 3 different guys in the match by having 1 win, 1 last the longest and 1 have the most eliminations? And don't you think that kind of lessens the impact made by the winner? I mean, I would like the winner at times to go the distance like Benoit or Mysterio, or toss out a bunch of guys like Stone Cold or the Hulkster. Eight years is quite the streak. Your thoughts? Thanks!

So they're 50/50 booking the Rumbles now even is what you're saying?  I'm not particularly surprised.  Pushing everyone = Pushing no one.