Petition - Wrestlezone Tournament Change

[IrishCanadian25]

So I am tossing this "petition" out to the general membership and not just the staff because in my opinion, the more eyes on this idea the better.

Should we just assume that the winner of next year's Wrestlezone tournament will be either: Austin, Undertaker, Michaels, Hart, or Savage? Who else won this thing in the past? Or is that all of them? Has Savage won yet?

Anyway, I am suggesting a format that would eliminate a wrestler after they win. So that means no repeat winners. What will inevitably happen is the same wrestlers will make it year after year and great old school guys (see: Terry Funk) will lose exposure again. Hell, the tourney used to have 256 guys in it - if we lose one each year, will that kill it?

The cons: Will a guy like Goldberg winning a tournament in year 7 after legends like Austin and Hogan win it be nearly as impressive?

The pros: Each year, the tournament is different.

I'd like thoughts.

 

[Minor League Brian]

Why not just remove it so you can't have back to back winners. From there, seed them differently so you're not having Hulk Hogans/Steve Austin facing the Funks of the world?

 

[gd]

Sure.

 

[Alex]

Just remove the winner and the runner up till the next year, that kind of makes it a bit more even.

 

[Ferbian]

Could work. But eventually we will have some odd victories of guys who doesn't really deserve to be winners. Much less guys that deserve to be going that far. Just because they got the easy way into because the better choices aren't there.

 

[Big Sexy]

I personally don't like it. Half the fun for me in the tournament is trying to argue against all the "favorites" like Taker, HBK, and Austin.

 

[Tenta]

Count me in for this one.

 

[Prax]

Can't you just find a way to change the bracketing? A lot of the time people make it to the final 16-8 because of easier competition, so maybe have all the winners compete in a ''winners bracket'' or something like that.

 

[a0161613]

I like the idea but I'm not keen on losing the winner. Surely the seeding could be looked at. Maybe the gimmicks? Or maybe lose the polls altogether?

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

I like the idea of a winners bracket, or maybe have the returning winner face the person who wins the tournament , so say Austin won this year have him face the winner of the tournament next year so that the overall winner can be determind sort of a defending champion.

Because if you keep knocking winners out who would we have left to vote for

 

[Uncle Sam]

There's been no repeat winners yet and the prospect of increasing my potential YouTube workload year on year doesn't thrill me.

 

[Remix]

Not that my opinion matters much, but I'd like sometihng like this.

 

[Phoenix]

Well this year's saw it being randomly drawn without seeds and it was a success. So far there hasn't been repeat winner as there's been 4 different winners.

I think what you could do with next year is bring back the seeding maybe, or have the four previous winners be dedicated to a region and face so-so. I think the fact so much changes in a year that you never know when a favourite goes out.

If you wanted to remove something from the tournament, maybe have the reason "because of their impact on wrestling history" should be removed. I mean if we're removing the favourites, then should at least remove part of their reason for winning out if too.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Not that my opinion matters much, but I'd like sometihng like this.

You opinion counts the same as mine, and the same as anyone else's. Don't sell yourself short.

 

[Tastycles]

No. There's never been a repeat winner, there's never been a repeat final, the man who knocked out both of this year's finalists last year went out in the first round this year. By removing these people all you'd do is make it less competitive and less interesting. I'd rather see two final debates in 5 years that pit Austin and Taker against each other, when we have vastly different membership, than one final debate ever on the merits of Rob Van Dam and Owen Hart as the best wrestlers ever.

 

[Goliath Uterus]

What Tastycles said.

 

[Mantaur Rodeo Clown]

Well this year's saw it being randomly drawn without seeds and it was a success. So far there hasn't been repeat winner as there's been 4 different winners.

I disagree. While it did mix things up again, we also saw guys like Lesnar and HHH get fed to Hogan while Rick Martel and Dustin Rhodes made it deep into the tournament.

 

[Барбоса]

I do not understand the dislike of a potential repeat winner.

Personally, I always liked the potential for big names to go out early on by being drawn against one another in a free draw. It makes the competition more interesting and different each time, yet the cream always rises to the top.

Maybe the only change I would suggest if people do not want this to happen so often is to give the tournament a similar set as the English FA Cup. In it the 20 sides from the top division do not enter the draw until the third round.

For the WZFT, perhaps 16 or 32 seeds could be set aside for the first couple of rounds and then enter at a later round after the initial 128 or 256 have been whittled down.

Personally, I'd much rather stick with the completely open draw

 

[Coco]

Nay. While I can do without the random seeding for reasons MRC layed out, eliminating guys so that new protential winners have an easier road is interfering with the natural order a little too much for my taste.

If they can't win against those guys that would be taken out, they don't really deserve to win.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Aye, what Tasty and Coco said.

 

[D-Man]

Sorry, but I don't like this. The tournament changes every year as the same wrestlers get older. Many posters on this site have different criteria that they use when voting. This changes every year. Even though the same top guys win it each year, different events that transpire during the year changes how people vote.

 

[Alex]

Sorry, but I don't like this. The tournament changes every year as the same wrestlers get older. Many posters on this site have different criteria that they use when voting. This changes every year. Even though the same top guys win it each year, different events that transpire during the year changes how people vote.

True but then if the wrestler is old e.g. Flair and Hogan people will still vote on how they were in their prime

 

[D-Man]

True but then if the wrestler is old e.g. Flair and Hogan people will still vote on how they were in their prime

Not everyone votes the same way. That was a big part of my point.

 

[Slyfox696]

Not only does the attitude of the forum change, but the gimmick matches change each year as well.

I don't think it's necessary.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

You see, this is all great discussion. Exactly what I was aiming for.