Did WWF Pick The Right Winners?: King Of The Ring

[Y 2 Jake]

Looking back at past King Of The Rings, do you think WWE chose the right superstar to win that year? It could potentially mean a lot for your career. It certainly did for Steve Austin.

If you take the semi-final match's from 1993-2002 and work them into who you think should have won each of those match's, and give your opinion on who you think should have won.

1993

* Semi-Final Match: Bret Hart over Curt Hennig.
* Final Match: Bret Hart over Bam Bam Bigelow.

Bigelow got a buy when Tatanka & Lex Luger went to a draw.

Personally I think they crowned the wrong wrestler that year. Bret Hart was already a main event wrestler at the time. He had headlined W.M. several months earlier, and he didn't need the win.. And Hogan was leaving to film a movie.

I would have had Henning go over Hart. I dont know who I think should have won as both Mr. P & Bigelow were deserving. But then again other than him initial run and feud with L.T., Bigelow was treated badly. So I would have picked him.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

1994:

* Semi-Final Match: Razor Ramon over Irwin R. Schyster.
* Semi-Final Match: Owen Hart over 1-2-3 Kid.
* Final Match: Owen Hart over Razor Ramon.

I do think they chose the right person that year. Owen deserved it and with Hart winning the previous year it looked good on paper. WWF never really capitalized on it though.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

1995:

* Semi-Final Match: Savio Vega over The Roadie.
* Final Match: Mabel over Savio Vega.

Mabel get's a buy because HBK & Kama went to a draw.

Anybody other than Mabel should have won. HBK should have got it that year. He was yet to get the world title so he wasn't at the peak of his career. But out of the semi-final competitors I would have chosen The Roadie. He's the only one out of himself, Vega & Mabel that really gained a lot of popularity. He still would have been a shit choice though.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

1996:

* Semi-Final Match: Jake Roberts over Vader.
* Semi-Final Match: Steve Austin over Marc Mero.
* Final Match: Steve Austin over Jake Roberts.

Without a doubt the right choice. I would have liked to see a Vader/Austin final but the outcome was still the right one.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

1997:

* Semi-Final Match: Hunter Hearst-Helmsley over Ahmed Johnson.
* Semi-Final Match: Mankind over Jerry Lawler.
* Final Match: Hunter Hearst-Helmsley over Mankind.

It was certainly the right final. But I dont think it would have mattered who was the victor. Although for personal reason's I'd prefer Mankind. I think King Mankind would have been entertaining.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

1998:

* Semi-Final Match: Rocky Maivia over Dan Severn.
* Semi-Final Match: Ken Shamrock over Jeff Jarrett.
* Final Match: Ken Shamrock over Rocky Maivia.

Again the right final. But the wrong choice as victor. Ken Shamrock never did much in wrestling. And look at The Rock now. If he had been KOTR I guarentee WWE would still be using it today. Well if there still was a KOTR.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

1999:

* Semi-Final Match: Billy Gunn over Kane.
* Semi-Final Match: X-Pac over Road Dogg.
* Final Match: Billy Gunn over X-Pac.

WTF? No wrong choice. It should have been Kane/X-Pac in the final. That's what everyone thought it would be anyway. Billy Gunn suck's. He feuded with The Rock and couldn't get over. Kane should have won this one. Although he still isn't a good choice.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

2000:

* Semi-Final Match: Rikishi Phatu over Val Venis.
* Semi-Final Match: Kurt Angle over Crash Holly.
* Final Match: Kurt Angle over Rikishi Phatu.

Yeah the right choice. For some reason Benoit, Guerrero & Y2J were eliminated in the quarter-finals. But Kurt was hot at the time and he's certainly a better choice than Rikishi, Crash & Venis.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

2001:

* Semi-Final Match: Kurt Angle over Christian.
* Semi-Final Match: Edge over Rhyno.
* Final Match: Edge over Kurt Angle.

I think Angle should have won it again. He didn't need the victory. But Edge got it and he then didn't become a main eventer for another 5 years. If Edge had gone up to main event status quickly after then yes, but he didn't. So wrong choice IMO.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

2002:

* Semi-Final Match: Rob Van Dam over Chris Jericho
* Semi-Final Match: Brock Lesnar over Test
* Final Match: Brock Lesnar over Rob Van Dam

Wrong choice. I know WWE didn't know that Lesnar would leave less than two years later. But he did. Meanwhile RVD (despite him leaving soon) has been with the company for 6 years. Also at the time Lesnar was still green and not terribly over. RVD was still riding his Invasion poularity and would have made a great KOTR.

 

[Prax]

1996:

* Semi-Final Match: Jake Roberts over Vader.
* Semi-Final Match: Steve Austin over Marc Mero.
* Final Match: Steve Austin over Jake Roberts.

Without a doubt the right choice. I would have liked to see a Vader/Austin final but the outcome was still the right one.

Actually Jake Roberts being in that final played a major role in Austin's future success. The whole Austin 3:16 thing thing stemmed from Jake Roberts doing the whole Bible Thumper gimmick that led Austin to make fun of him and greate the catchphrase.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Actually Jake Roberts being in that final played a major role in Austin's future success. The whole Austin 3:16 thing thing stemmed from Jake Roberts doing the whole Bible Thumper gimmick that led Austin to make fun of him and greate the catchphrase.

Agreed. But I would have prefered a Vader/Austin match. And Austin had the talent to cut an awesom promo even without that Austin 3:16 speach. He probably wouldn't have sold so many T-Shirts but that's not really the point.

 

[Prax]

Jake, interesting points. I would like to know how the fuck Val Venis and Crash Holly got that far that one year, lol.

Well it's easy to look back on it now and say it was the wrong choice, hindsight is 20/20. Back in the day no one knew Austin would be so big after winning KOTR, same for most of the guys who went on to become something, or didn't do anything at all.

KOTR and choosing it winner is a total gamble.

 

[A.J.]

Well i have to admit this is should be an interesting thread Jake. I do want to say that the 1999 KOTR had to be the worst due to the outcome and finals. Truth be told that none of the people invloved in the simis and finals should have won that KOTR that year. Tought part who was you going to let win it that year as most of the main people was already at the main event level only person would have been Jarrett butstill.

When Mabel won i still dont get it I meani thought that was HBK year, but i guess they felt Mabel was going to be huge and be a man the company could count on. The whole Shamrock winning was a joke as Rock deserved that win as later in the year he became champ it woudl have been the perfect as he was the last man eleminated in the rumble that year, a KOTR win would solidfy his main event push and a WWE title win a Survivro Seris would make a for a great year. but no WWE lets the joke Shamrock win idoits.

But i agree with Prax as its hard to perdict who is going to be a star and whos going to be dud. I mean its a gamble the WWE takes in crowning a KOTR. But I belive thats why WWE doesnt do it anymore as they had some failures and I just dont think they feel they need it to establish future stars as they feel they can do it on their own.

And you know WWE knows they made a mistake in the person winning as look at the last KOTR in 2002 when they show footage of previous winners only of Bret,Owen, Austin, HHH, Angle, and Edge

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Jake, interesting points. I would like to know how the fuck Val Venis and Crash Holly got that far that one year, lol.

Well it's easy to look back on it now and say it was the wrong choice, hindsight is 20/20. Back in the day no one knew Austin would be so big after winning KOTR, same for most of the guys who went on to become something, or didn't do anything at all.

KOTR and choosing it winner is a total gamble.

Well Venis was feuding with Mankind 6 months earlier. And he was about to go on a good run with RTC. He was actually over at that point. And Crash had the super over Hardcore 24/7 title thing going on.

I do realise that it's hard to judge at the time. But I'm on about looking back.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I also think that Booker was the wrong choice to win it last year. With the way there currently pushing Lashley, he should have won it. Dont get me wrong, Lashley suck's donkey dick. But Booker didn't really need to win it. But it would have done more for Lashley had he won it. I know it was a second rate tournament last year but It's still more prestigeous than his ECW title reign.

 

[X]

Well the big stinker for me has always been and will always be 1995--Mabel, AKA Viscera.

Seriously, nobody even remembers it---that's how bad it was. First of all, why would they have him win when he was still in the tag team division with the godawful Men On a Mission (MOM! Get it? I don't either). Then he wins the KOTR, goes onto a short feud with Diesel for the title which he loses, then disappears for four years until he returns as Viscera. Who the hell thought up this stinker?

I feel I've gotta defend my homeboys Billy Gunn & Ken Shamrock. First off, Shamrock was a great choice at the time, he had already been in the WWF for a year or so, he was popular as hell, he was over as hell in all of his moves and was seen as a legitmate threat, having been screwed many times out of the IC title from the Rock. They really missed the ball though on capitalizing on it--because they didn't. Shamrock, if given the right push I feel would of stayed in the WWF and would undoubtedly have been a WWE champ. He was groomed for that main event spot from the second they hired him, and you can tell from all the times in his early days when JR and Vinnie Mac on commentary would say things like "Shamrock is undoubtedly going to be a many time WWF champ".

And Billy Gunn. I know, everyone on the face of the planet seems to hate the man, despite the fact that his wrestling skills are above average. He was fresh off the New Age Outlaws split, who'd you rather have? Road Dogg or Gunn? And to say that Gunn wasn't over before, during, or after the Rock feud is bullshit. Did you watch the match and the weeks leading up to it? Billy Gunn got HUGE heat from the crowd, especially during their Kiss My Ass match, he played the role in that feud perfectly and was vital in holding off the Rock realistically from the main event scene during Summerslam, which gave rise to a man we know as Triple H. I don't understand why people hate on Billy--maybe's its the Mr. Ass gimmick (I fuckin' loved his music--"I'm an ass man!" dunh dunh)or the fact that he came back into the WWE with an even worse gimmick in the Billy & Chuck fiasco---nontheless, he was a great wrestler(not so much these days)who was great on the mic and had all the skills necessary to get over. But after being buried by the Rock and sticking him back into DX, it became pointless for him to pursue a singles career.

Best KOTR pick was definately Owen...nobody deserved it more then him, especially in the wake of his death and realizing he never got the WWE title, and you know for a fact if he had lived he would've been champ eventually.

 

[Prax]

I also think that Booker was the wrong choice to win it last year. With the way there currently pushing Lashley, he should have won it. Dont get me wrong, Lashley suck's donkey dick. But Booker didn't really need to win it. But it would have done more for Lashley had he won it. I know it was a second rate tournament last year but It's still more prestigeous than his ECW title reign.

Maybe so but king Booker made the gimmick work for like an entire year. Seriously, am I the only one who loved the whole king thing? I thought it was fucking amazing how far he went with it. Lashley probably needed it more but Booker made it work better.

 

[Shocky]

1993: Bret Hart. Easily the right choice with this one. King of the Ring was around before this, but not as a pay per view. They needed a heavy hitter to get this thing over, and Bret was the right choice.

1994: Owen Hart. Easily the best choice in this. It's a shame that the WWE didn't get the strap on Hart, but it did get him into a Steal Cage with Bret at Summerslam.

1995: Mabel. 1995 will go on record as the worst year ever in the history of the WWF. Even current stuff, as bad as it can be, didn't even begin to touch the surface on how bad this product was. King Mable vs. Diesel at Summerslam, ouch. The only other possible choice would have been Savio Vega, so that tells ya something.

1996: Triple H's fuck up with managment is Austins gold. Austin without question, the perfect choice for King of the Ring. Austin 3:16 is the best coronation speach ever.

1997: Triple H deserved it, but I agree, King Mankind may have been the most hilarious thing ever. Regardless, it set up a helluva feud the rest of the summer culminating in the cage match at Summerslam.

1998: Ken Shamrock, horrible choice. I for one, despise Ken Shamrock and think he possibly could have been the most over hyped person to ever compete in a ring. "Oh NO, he's snapped again." The act got real old real fast. How do you not put the King of the Ring on the Rock at this point. The Rock was insanely over, and yes he was IC champ and didn't need the KotR, but he should have got it.

1999: Billy Gunn. Rank this one up there with King Mable. Billy Gunn sucks, period. He couldn't get over in a feud with the Rock, that's how bad the man sucks. Everyone in those quarterfinals sucked. Jeff Jarret should have won this.

2000: Kurt Angle: Hell yes, king Kurt kicked ass. WWE had so many choices that year to put over as King of the Ring, but Cocky/Nerdy Kurt ran with it.

2001: Edge. Edge needed it more then Kurt. He was coming out of his tag team career and trying to establish himself as a singles competitor. It sucks he got lost in the Invasion debacle, and then when that was over got put on the shelf with an injury.

2002: Brock Lesnar. I take Brock Lesnar as my whatever in wrestling any day of the week. Brock Lesnar was the best pure talent to hit the WWE scene in at least a decade. RVD was over, but Lesnar was getting noticed by everyone. Lesnar was hot as hell and was very dominate and the perfect choice.

2006: King Booker. While Lashley may have needed it more, no one has run with the King gimmick like this since the days of the 2 time Slammy Award Winning King of Harts. Booker milked this thing for all it was worth and got a good title run out of it. Good choice here.

 

[adamandcj391]

You have to remember that Lesnar was being groomed as the "Next Big Thing" The WWE was planning on pushing him as the next Hogan. They had no idea he was going to burn out in 2 yrs. Now do I think they put the title on him too soon, yes. Do I think the WWE/F has misused RVD absolutely. But having Lesnar as KOTR was not a mistake.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

In my original post it say's looking back. Not at the time. If WWE looked back at the KOTR 02 now they probably would have thought they've made a mistake. At the time he was probably the better choice. They had spent a lot of time and effort grooming him for a top spot. But they wouldn't have pushed him so hard, and they wouldn't have given him the KOTR if they had known he wasn't going to last long.