MITB vs KOTR

[Macskye]

I recently had a long discussion with my brother, about the MITB PPV, and it's safe to say we both feel it should remain exclusive to Wrestlemania.

One MITB ladder match a year is more than enough. However I do love to see the younger talent get that push to main event status, so I thought to myself, why not bring back King of the Ring with who ever wins face the Champion at Summerslam. They could even change the name of the KOTR if they didn't like it.

Personally I'd rather see an upper mid-card wrestler win a genuine title match at summerslam, rather than watch them jump a beaten down champion and take advantage.

I want to hear what you people think now. MITB or KOTR?

 

[Huggie-Bones]

To be honest I never liked the idea of the MiTB prize...it's more or less a limited and recycled version of the old 24/7 hardcore title. As you said, mugging an injured champion just makes the MiTB winner seem illegitimate as a title holder.
I always liked the King of The Ring as well as any tournament format and would like to see that come back. Will it? Probably not.

 

[Genocide]

That isn't to bad of an idea. the idea of a MITB and a KOTR in the same year sounds pretty good to me. Especially if they were the the two PPV'S before summerslam. talk about the angles they could pull with that one. You could even seperate them a couple months apart. They could do so much in the timeline leading up to summerslam. It could end up as a 3-way or fatal four way for the title. Who knows what they could come up with.

 

[Dudebuster420]

I have to tip my hat on this one for the KOTR. I always felt that the bracket tournament was a good way to make good matches and determine a legitimate contender. Too many things contribute to a MITB victory and most of those things have more to do with luck than anything which makes it hard to find any of the winners credible in some ways. There are multiple ladders and contestants so it's like drawing a name out of a hat. Having a series of singles matches and going by process of elimination seems more logical and results driven to me. Also, it just sounds better to announce someone as the "King of the Ring" rather than the "Money in the Bank" winner.

 

[Stone_Cold_Stunner]

KOTR: A tournement is a good thing not the new WWE KOTR the old WWF KOTR you know the PPV remember that. The MOITB concept is good but it leads to pushes to fast. The KOTR lead to epic pushes Austin HHH though it had a fair share of lame winners Mabel yeah

 

[The_8000]

They are both pretty good for me.

KOTR

I love the idea of the tournament, It helped push a lot of superstars like Brock Lesnar and of course you could say if gave birth to the attitude era when it pushed Austin all the way to the top.
The best thing about it was it was a PPV in its own right, It was something I loved to watch and so did a lot of others. It then later kinda became a thing over a few weeks on smackdown before becoming a one night thing on Raw with Regal winning it (which rocked!)
Although I enjoyed it over one night, I preferred it as a PPV.


MITB

I love the MITB as well, for me it's been a highlight of Wrestlemaina for 6 years on the go. It has the ability to push younger superstars to the top although I would say they would not have the same credibilty as they would if they went through the KOTR.

As for the upcoming PPV, I'm not sure if I really am looking forward to it or not, In some respects I think it should remain as a part of Wrestlemaina as a one time thing but the PPV does have appeal because I want to see how it involves NXT/Cena/Sheamus and Kane/Punk. So it is quite tough.

But all in all I got to say that I prefer Money in the Bank, I enjoyed KOTR but the controlled chaos at wrestlemaina was brilliant. Of course after the next PPV my opinion could change.

 

[Dave]

Personally, I am a fan of both if I had to pick, I would probably for King Of The Ring.

However, this is not because I think it is a better idea. My main reasoning behind picking it is that Money In The Bank, as a Pay Per View, is very much an unproven quantity and could really blow in the WWE’s face. However, it could be one of the most intriguing PPV’s that they have going on all year. I like the idea of Money In The Bank ladder matches because it is as close to exciting as we are ever likely to get with a gimmick match in the WWE nowadays.

King Of The Ring holds some wonderful memories for me though. As a huge Kurt Angle mark, I loved seeing him win the vent after having 3 matches that night. It truly is one of the best events from my childhood. However, it really did lose it’s lustre after a while and now it has been given to people like William Regal. A man who has done absolutely jack-shit in the last couple of years and that is a big stumbling block for me. As much as I would love to see the event return, I have a feeling that it would just be used for shitty mid-card people instead of people who cold actually do something with it. Brock Lesnar and Edge really took it somewhere and it worked out for them.

So yeas, I would go for King Of The Ring right now. Simply because I have no idea how good or bad Money In The Bank as a PPV is going to be. It will likely be one match because of the number of people who would legitimately look good in the match, so I am optimistic that it won’t be over done.

 

[The Scarred One]

I enjoy both concepts as they can help create new stars. I'm not particularly fond of an idea based on Money in the Bank since it has been a WrestleMania tradition, considering they could easily bring back the King of the Ring since the WWE is on a kick regarding gimmick pay-per-views.

Now, I don't personally think one is superior over the other as MITB is still relatively young and a (legitimate and beneficial) King of the Ring tournament hasn't taken place in years.

Some people complain about how the MITB concept is becoming stupid because the briefcase owner can cash it in when the champion is exhausted and beaten rather than being noble and setting a championship match for a future date like Rob Van Dam did. But don't tell me you don't mark out whenever the MITB contract is cashed in like when CM Punk did it against Jeff Hardy or Edge or when Edge did it against John Cena and the Undertaker?

But the thing with both KOTR and MITB is that they provide the launchpad for younger guys. There have been hiccups in both concepts where things didn't work out as planned. Despite helping the likes of Steve Austin, Triple H and Kurt Angle; the KOTR did nothing for Ken Shamrock, Mabel and Billy Gunn. Same goes with MITB when CM Punk had his first reign, as that didn't feel like a successful one as far as I was concerned.

For me, both concepts are very similar to American Idol. Just because you won it doesn't mean you'll be a guaranteed success. All it does is give you the opportunity to be a success. The rest is up to them.

Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

 

[WhyTravisFelt]

Agreed. KOTR was always my favorite PPV as it was the springboard for a lot of stars to go to the next level. Now, MITB does that, but it's been pretty stale the past three years. The match is always great, but I haven't enjoyed seeing anyone win it since Kennedy and it's really depressing to see midcard talent like Christian, Matt Hardy, and Benjamin sell the crap out of it and take harsh bumps without ever get anything out of it. I was really upset with Swagger winning it this year and honestly would be happy never watching another one in my life. I don't understand why there is hardly ever any single elimination bracket-style tournaments in wrestling. It only makes perfect sense.

You know what would be a cool idea: WWE world cup. 32 superstars, eight groups (four raw, four SD), each person wrestles every other person in their group once, top two from each group advances and then do the quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals in a huge ppv.

 

[The Con Volt]

If I were a WWE superstar, I'd rather win a MITB ladder match than wrestle 3 matches in one night. Every single money in the bank breifcase has led to a title win, while I can name 3 people off the top of my head who won KOTR and didn't get shit for it. Viscera, William Regal and Owen Hart.

 

[newc868]

The KoTR tournament always excited - especially the Pay Per View because you knew you'd get to see some of your favourite wrestlers 2-3 times that night and you always carried with you that feeling of "they could actually win this!"... well I did anyway as a child.

It would be brilliant to bring it back and I love this idea as a way to bring it back. However, I'm still so over with MitB because it still retains that unpredicatable aspect of who is going to win because they usually put in 3-4 or guys who people want to see get a big push... this is where the con's of MitB come into it.

Atm it only builds towards an interim summer/winter champion and hardly ever do you see the MitB winners remain in that picture and be involved the WWE title picture. Of the winners - Edge, CM Punk, Mr Kennedy, RVD and Jack Swagger only one of those has been in a WWE/World Championship main event at Wrestlemainia and two fo them are in TNA atm.

Compare this to KotR - Bret Hart, Stone Cold, Triple H, Kurt Angle, Edge and Owen Hart are winners from 1990 onwards who've gone on to be H.o.F candidates and some of them actually being there. Its made better long term stars as well despite the failings of Shamrock, Gunn and Mabel. I'll call Lesnar and in-between because of the UFC thing.

 

[Dolph_Infinnerty]

KOTR hands down. Even if it has been used prominitly years ago if the wwe brought it back it would be a fresh concept to the new generation of fans.
Also with the king of the ring it can build anyone into a believable main eventer over a period of months as opposed to winning one scramble of a ladder match then becoming the champ weeks later, KOTR is a concept that creates a slow transformation of a wrestler from obscurity to superstardom by building them up as legitimate competitor that deserves to be on the main event scene and that want to become huge just like Stone cold, Triple H, Brett Hart, Billy Gun (lol jokes)

The main reason i chose KOTR is because above all it has been proven to be the biggest way to push a wrestler without forcing him down our throats out of desperation to get whoever the man may be at the time over

 

[RKOx7]

I agree with most people here and I think I stated in a different thread that I feel this MITB PPV is a cheap installment of KOTR because MITB is a Wrestlemania spectacle. Everyone at WM is always excited to see who the new MITB winner is. My feeling is that MITB will not be at WM anymore after it is made a PPV

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

I think KotR is better...but the thing is WWE never always kept their promise with the Summerslam match...most got it..some didn't..which wasn't good for guys like Ken Shamrock, Billy Gunn etc... However when you look at MitB...you get a guarranteed world title shot contract...

KotR was good aswell though..prefer it better than MitB, i think mostly because you have one guy who has gone through like 4 wrestlers to get tot he top...

Both very great..I heard they might bring KotR back this year...just as a Smackdown tournament though..could be good..

 

[The_Immortal]

We haven't seen a KOTR in 2 years now. And that was only because Teddy Long had one on Smackdown back in 2008. There is NOTHING wrong with having a tounament style PPV....it's worked in the past. Remember WM4?? I, for 1, would LOVE to see the KOTR PPV back.