Royal Rumble 1996 Got It All Wrong

As many, and by many I mean hardly any, of you know I have been netflixing royal rumbles of late. I am watching them in order and am now up to 1996. This rumble went against the basic trend of having the rumble be the last event of the night. This royal rumble put a title match between Brett Hart and the Undertaker after the main event. This was a horrible decision for two reasons. For one this was an absolutely awesome royal rumble and would clearly be the main event regaurdless of what you put up next to it. Thus what was a very exciting well preformed title match seemed anti-climactic after the royal rumble. And you finish the viewing experience feeling unsatisfied and barely able to remember that sweet-ass royal rumble you saw 40 minutes ago.

Now I realize that very few people watch a lot of royal rumbles, especially ones that occured over 10 years ago. Thus making this a "don't you hate it when your lazy butler washes your sock-gaurders and they're still covered in schmutz" type of argument. However I am sure that there are at least 2 or 3 other people in the world that feel the exact same way I do. So if you meet one of them please direct them here.

Anyway the bottom line is this, "Listen up WWF promotional team from 11 years ago! When you are going to schedule a Royal Rumble you need to make the Rumble itself the main event, no matter how great you think the title match you have schedueled is going to be!"

I've said my piece.