Who should have won the Royal Rumble Match each year?

[shooter_mcgavin]

While I agree with this on it's face, it basically turned out as a win for Austin as he is the one who ended up wrestling the Rock at Mania. There basically was no other way they were going to go but with Rock vs Austin at that point in 1999. I kind of agree with McMahon winning in that case also or we would have had a third year in a row of Stone Cold winning the match.

You could argue that is the lazy booking by the WWE. At minimum they could have had the Rock win that Rumble and have Stone Cold win a shot by some other means or just not have dropped the belt in the first place in the months prior

Austin should have won the Rumble in 1999 and just challenged McMahon to a match at St Valentines Massacre and put his title shot on the line.

McMahon winning would have been fine if they had an actual angle to go with it, but they just reversed the whole thing the next night.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

Chris Jericho should have won the 2012 Rumble instead of Sheamus. All the hype for Jericho's return with the "End of the World" promos for weeks before he returned. His return and then the silent promos. Him finally talking right before the Rumble. He needed that win. Once he lost it became obvious that he was going to lose to Punk, and he lost every big match he wrestled in that run.

Sheamus didn't need the W at all, especially when his program with Bryan was not nearly as big as Jericho-Punk. The fans were insanely excited for Jericho-Punk. Giving Jericho the Rumble win was the way to go.

I agree with this. Jericho actually didn't win anything big to get a title shot at WM and looked like a weak opponent for Punk leading to WM28.

If Jericho won the Rumble the WM28 title match could have gotten a lot more heat.

 

[HeenanGorilla]

Either (or both) of Hogan's wins. I can understand Hogan winning one, but they should have had the foresight to start using the Rumble to build someone up rather than put over the champion. In both years you had Hogan eliminating an up and coming heel who really could have used a push from a Rumble win.

My vote would be for Perfect in 90, but I would understand others preferring Earthquake in 91. Regardless, there should have been another heel getting built up at that time. .

I agree with this. In 1990 and 1991, the winner of the Rumble was simply the winner of the Rumble. No title won, no title match earned, just--as the OP said--a chance for a rub. Watching as a kayfabe-invested kid at the time, Hogan ending a PPV by winning was the norm, so it kind of just felt like "there it is". No surprise, no problem. Watching back as an adult, it's more like "this guy again?". Now, that is just me and I am in no way someone who doesn't appreciate what Hogan meant to wrestling then and means to wrestling history now. It just seemed like overkill when both a creative Hogan elimination (maybe 2 or 3 guys or some outside interference, etc.) partnered with a less predictable winner could have really set up several WrestleMania angles.

I think Mr. Perfect absolutely should have won in 1990. It was set up "perfectly" with him pulling the perfect number of 30. Even if the Genius had to get involved to outthink Hogan and help Perfect win, this was the way to go, in my opinion. Like you said, Hogan winning once would have been ok, but back-to-back left much to be desired. Here's the thing though, once they blew it in 1990, they were kind of handcuffed in 1991.

Had Perfect won in 1990 and Hogan won in 1991, no problem. He put Perfect over a year ago, he gets the win now. Still didn't "need" it, but hardly an issue to put over the most popular wrestler ever with a big PPV win. BUT, they didn't do this. So, back to the handcuffing I mentioned, fast forward to 1991 (and as always, we have the benefit of hindsight where they didn't know what the angles would be a year later at that time) they had to double down on Hogan winning in 1991 because of the Warrior losing to Iraqi-sympathizer Slaughter earlier in the show. Warrior not only losing, but losing to Slaughter and at that time--with the war just starting--bummed the crowd to say the least. (I wasn't there, but speaking as someone watching on PPV) At that point, the ONLY choice was to end the event with All-American Hogan winning the Rumble. Warrior's popularity was still strong but in decline and a Hogan Rumble win got people over Warrior's loss real quick. "Ok, Slaughter is champ but Hulk will get him."

So, though in a vacuum Earthquake wouldn't have been a bad choice, I think 1990 was the way to go with a non-Hogan winner--especially Mr. Perfect, given his gimmick--and 1991 was the time for a Hogan win for the USA.

 

[FromGlasgow]

I would change the rule of the winner gets to challenge for the world title at Wrestlemania,
I would prefer to see just random wins the first couple of years it was Jim Duggan then Big John Studd Its difficult to see any plans with either man challenging the world champion at Wrestlemania, It would be so much less predictable instead of in reality of it being the 2 or 3 guys destined to win it could genuinly be any one of the 30 competitors who could win it. It could also mean the Wrestlemania main event could be built longer or booked differently and not boxed into to the automatic title shot also recent winners like Batista and Roman Reigns wouldn't get bood out of the building so much as the winnners wouldn't necessarily go onto Wrestlemania so fans wouldn't have the same dread of this guy being shoved down their throats and automatically challenging for the world title at Wrestlemania.
On changing a previous winner it would have been nice to see Andre The Giant win it once seeing as he's known as kind of the master of the battle royal match.

 

[HBKperfect23]

2015: Daniel Bryan instead of Reigns. This started the trend of live crowds booing Reigns out of the building. Have Bryan win the rumble in Philadelphia, send the crowd home happy, book fast lane the same way with Reigns going over for the title shot and you still get Reigns/Lesnar at Mania. The St Louis crowd wouldn't have been nearly as bad as the Philly crowd.

As mentioned above: Jericho in 2012. I feel the challenger that's going for the title that's closing the show at mania(or in this case the 2nd world title match) should be the rumble winner. Jericho/Punk was built really well but could have been just a bit better with Jericho being the rumble winner.

I'd like to have seen Savage win in 93 and have kind of a passing of the torch match to Bret at WM9. Not adamant about changing this, Yoko/Bret was fine but this could have been cool

 

[relentless1]

Hogan winning the 1990 Rumble made perfect sense storyline wise, Hogan wins so theres nobody left to challenge him from the heel camp and the next challenge has to come from the next most dominant wrestler at the time: Ultimate Warrior, they even teased it in the Rumble match!

Had Perfect won they'd have gone into a program between he and Hulk and we wouldn't have had the WM 6 matchup with Warrior which I don't care what anybody says that was a great match.

 

[HeenanGorilla]

Hogan winning the 1990 Rumble made perfect sense storyline wise, Hogan wins so theres nobody left to challenge him from the heel camp and the next challenge has to come from the next most dominant wrestler at the time: Ultimate Warrior, they even teased it in the Rumble match!

Had Perfect won they'd have gone into a program between he and Hulk and we wouldn't have had the WM 6 matchup with Warrior which I don't care what anybody says that was a great match.

This is interesting. Several things are in play here.

1) At that time, the winner of the Rumble did not set up storylines. Duggan and Studd had both won their Rumble without it being part of a current or future storyline. No title shot. No feud stemming from their victory. They were just winners of a match.
***In fact, in the case of Studd's Rumble, the storylines came from within the Rumble: Mega Powers starting to crumble and DiBiase using his money to a) get number 30 but also b) set up the Twin Towers entering back-to-back earlier in the match to clear Hogan out of DiBiase's way.

2) However, as we now know, the Rumble would soon become a tool for creating/furthering storylines, so let's say that starts here in 1990. The Mr. Perfect gimmick was great. The promos of him excelling in various sports and his undefeated streak--it showed why he considered himself perfect. But that perfection had to have an end in someway, unless he was going to go through his career undefeated, which couldn't have happened because it would have gotten old to the fans sooner than later. Angles like this have to lead to an ultimate showdown. In this case, Perfect vs. Hogan. Taking Warrior out of the picture, Hogan vs. a perfect-record would have been enough to main event Mania. The end to a long, perfect record of an obnoxious heel on the grandest stage of them all. (Remember this is 1990 when Hogan was still hot and Hennig was not as revered historically as he is now--this works then)

3) Bringing Warrior back in and leaving what would eventually become the WMVI main event as is, Perfect still needs to win the Rumble for a payoff with Hogan. This could have been done on a Saturday Night's Main Event, which was a big enough deal back then. The match--which would have featured a great technical wrestler and a non-technical wrestler--could have benefited from creative outside interference. Here is where the Genius can get involved in some way. Beefcake can play a hand in foiling the "genius" plan and cost Perfect the match and his perfect record. This sets up Beefcake/Perfect at Mania (same match we got, yet takes the honor of pinning Perfect first on TV away from Beefer and gives it to Hogan a month or so earlier) Then, with Hogan having beaten the perfect heel, it can be set up as Warrior/Hogan face/face at Mania.

You could maybe have pushed Hogan/Warrior to WMVII--as I don't think anyone would miss the Slaughter angle/match too greatly, see attendance--and gone with Perfect/Hogan at WMVI. Warrior had lost steam by WMVII; but, in this alternate plan, he has not yet had the World title and could have still been on the rise. But, leaving it Warrior/Hogan at WMVI, I still think there was enough time to give that Perfect streak a rightful ending and setup Warrior/Hogan. Regardless of which way they went with this, Perfect had to win RR90 though, in my opinion.

 

[King Patrick Star]

I've seen this topic before...

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=307327

Here is my list of changes.

1988 – Andre The Giant – It’s the Royal Rumble!! Andre The Giant should have drawn number 1 or number 20 and won the entire thing. Either that or Andre The Giant and the Million Dollar Man should have been the final two SuperStars in the ring, then Virgil hands Ted DiBiase a bag full of money, who then proceeds to give it to Andre to buy the win.

1989 – Hulk Hogan – This should have been the setup to the Mega Powers Exploding.

1990 – Ultimate Warrior – This should have been the first match that the Ultimate Warrior wins and Hulk Hogan loses, to plant the seeds for WrestleMania VI.

1997 – The Undertaker – Since Bret the Hitman Hart and Stone Cold Steve Austin faced each other at WrestleMania 13 anyway, they should have let the Undertaker win and go on to face the eventual WWE Champion, Sycho Sid.

1999 – Stone Cold Steve Austin – There was really no point in having Vince McMahon win the Royal Rumble, but it is what it is.

The only two I would add are:

1994 I think it should have been just one or the other. It would have been interesting to see a Triple Threat match as WrestleMania X, or add the King Of Harts, making it a Fatal Four Way match.

2012 Chris Jericho, only because I’m being bias toward Y2J. Hello, my name is King Patrick Star and I'm an Jericho-holic.

 

[Wrestlingaholic]

1988 - doesn't really matter. It was a tv special and had no real bearing on storylines; indeed, it's only fairly recently that WWE have really started to acknowledge it

1989 - Million Dollar Man, after he had such an important year in 1988. I never really got why Big John Studd won it, almost like a thank you present for years of service

1990 - Having read the views on here, Mr Perfect would have made a good winner. And he did have a Saturday Night's Main Event match with Hogan (two in fact, one count out win)

1991 - Hogan was always pencilled in as #1 contender, first for a Warrior rematch and then when Slaughter took the belt. Even though the title shot wasn't on the line officially in the Royal Rumble, it makes perfect sense for Hogan to win here and use it to become the number one contender for Wrestlemania VII

1992 - Flair keeps the win, but should have faced Hogan at Wrestlemania

1993 - Randy Savage. I'd have Earthquake and Yokozuna somehow eliminate each other, building a match between those behemoths at Wrestlemania IX, with Savage winning the Rumble; maybe last eliminating IRS who was easily one of the most over heels in the business at the time (rewatch old Raws on the Network and you'll see what I mean) - then Savage faces Bret Hart at Wrestlemania, losing. Bret loses to Yokozuna (who defeats Earthquake at WM, thus legitimising his threat further) at King of the Ring (Narcissist Lex Luger wins the tournament, the fans start appreciating him more, and the rest of 1993 happens exactly as it did.)

1994 - stays the same, a really well booked Rumble match with its best finish IMO

1995 - the same, though more time between entrants, less quick eliminations, better booking and Shawn v Diesel is the actual main event of Wrestlemania, not playing second fiddle to Lawrence Taylor

1996 - British Bulldog - i'd have loved to see Bret v Davey clash one more time in the main event of Wrestlemania. Given their history, with two brilliant and very close matches, tied 1-1, the Iron Man stipulation would have made far more sense than just throwing Shawn and Bret into it

1997 - Shawn Michaels - make Shawn a repeat winner, but not in consecutive years. Have him win the Rumble at the Alamodome in his home town, with Bret Hart going into Wrestlemania as champion

1998 - same - no one was hotter than Stone Cold in January 1998

1999 - honestly not sure about this one, tempted to keep it the same, but McMahon is forced/cajoled into putting his title shot on the line at St Valentine's Day Massacre

2000 - same

2001 - same given we got Wrestlemania 17 out of it, the best card ever IMO

2002 - Kurt Angle. There was no need for Triple H to win the Rumble, unless Austin was champion heading into Mania. That is the ONLY reason Triple H should have won. Also it started off the sporadic trend of returning headliners winning the Rumble. Angle should have won, and faced Jericho at Mania in what could have been a technical classic

2003 - same

2004 - same

2005 - would have finished on a double elimination, 1994-style. Both Cena and Batista challenged for their respective titles at Mania anyway

2006 - this is where I'd probably have put Triple H's win, especially as he fought Cena at Wrestlemania anyway; I was never sold on the Rey Mysterio experiment

2007 - same, with one of the best 'last two' sequences in Rumble history, only bettered by 1995 and the actual finish from 1994

2008 - same

2009 - same - about time a faction led their leader to a Rumble win

2010 - probably John Cena to be honest. I don't think Edge should have won it, he didn't need a Rumble win to have a reason to feud with Chris Jericho, his former tag team partner

2011 - CM Punk, with assistance from the new Nexus; but I'd have had Randy Orton keep the belt, so Punk v Orton still happens at Mania, just for the title. The Miz cash in can still happen, but later on

2012 - Chris Jericho, for all the reasons mentioned on this thread

2013 - the Rock - instead of announcing on Raw 1000 that he's challenging for the title, Rocky announces he's entering the Royal Rumble match. He wins, and goes on to beat CM Punk for the title at Wrestlemana

2014 - Daniel Bryan - for all the calls for Bryan to win a year later, he SHOULD have won in 2014. Personally, I still think the plan was for Bryan to win the title at Mania all along, and they completely played us, but I would have loved to have seen a Bryan Rumble win

2015 - I would actually keep this the same, but book the match FAR FAR better. One of the worst booked matches in WWE history. Screw Big Show and Kane eliminating everyone the fans cared about (Ziggler, Ambrose, Wyatt...), Reigns could have eliminated them. And Daniel Bryan should 100% NOT been in it. The only reason he should have been in it would be if he was booked to win it, ridiculous otherwise

2016 - Dean Ambrose. Have Ambrose win the title that his friend wore into the Rumble, with Triple H not in the match but somehow screwing Reigns, against the knowledge of Ambrose. Cause dissection amongst the friends and have Reigns beat Ambrose for the title at Wrestlemania, possibly involving an Ambrose heel turn, in a no holds barred main event. Really bring out the lunatic in Ambrose

 

[WWEWrestleFest]

I agree with this. In 1990 and 1991, the winner of the Rumble was simply the winner of the Rumble. No title won, no title match earned, just--as the OP said--a chance for a rub. Watching as a kayfabe-invested kid at the time, Hogan ending a PPV by winning was the norm, so it kind of just felt like "there it is". No surprise, no problem. Watching back as an adult, it's more like "this guy again?". Now, that is just me and I am in no way someone who doesn't appreciate what Hogan meant to wrestling then and means to wrestling history now. It just seemed like overkill when both a creative Hogan elimination (maybe 2 or 3 guys or some outside interference, etc.) partnered with a less predictable winner could have really set up several WrestleMania angles.

I think Mr. Perfect absolutely should have won in 1990. It was set up "perfectly" with him pulling the perfect number of 30. Even if the Genius had to get involved to outthink Hogan and help Perfect win, this was the way to go, in my opinion. Like you said, Hogan winning once would have been ok, but back-to-back left much to be desired. Here's the thing though, once they blew it in 1990, they were kind of handcuffed in 1991.

Had Perfect won in 1990 and Hogan won in 1991, no problem. He put Perfect over a year ago, he gets the win now. Still didn't "need" it, but hardly an issue to put over the most popular wrestler ever with a big PPV win. BUT, they didn't do this. So, back to the handcuffing I mentioned, fast forward to 1991 (and as always, we have the benefit of hindsight where they didn't know what the angles would be a year later at that time) they had to double down on Hogan winning in 1991 because of the Warrior losing to Iraqi-sympathizer Slaughter earlier in the show. Warrior not only losing, but losing to Slaughter and at that time--with the war just starting--bummed the crowd to say the least. (I wasn't there, but speaking as someone watching on PPV) At that point, the ONLY choice was to end the event with All-American Hogan winning the Rumble. Warrior's popularity was still strong but in decline and a Hogan Rumble win got people over Warrior's loss real quick. "Ok, Slaughter is champ but Hulk will get him."

So, though in a vacuum Earthquake wouldn't have been a bad choice, I think 1990 was the way to go with a non-Hogan winner--especially Mr. Perfect, given his gimmick--and 1991 was the time for a Hogan win for the USA.

The first two Rumbles were won by Duggan and big John Studd... two mid-carders. So Hogan winning wasn't a given in 1990. That Rumble wasn't about building up a heel, it was about building up Hogan/Warrior at WM, with Warrior being the first one to beat Hogan cleanly. Having Hogan lose on the PPV before the Hogan/Warrior match would have lessened Warrior's win at WM6. The '91 Rumble didn't matter and someone else could have won it, but Hogan should have won the 1990 one.

 

[skynyrd1611]

1988 - Randy Savage. Realise he wasn't in the rumble but was fast becoming the most over guy in the company not named Hulk Hogan. I'd have delayed his push for the world title and had him take the IC title of Honky at Mania, with Dibiase going over Hogan through Andre's interference.

1989 - Ted Dibiase. Short reign as Champion as I'd have Hogan win it back form him before starting the Mega Powers angle. Win here in the days before a Rumble win would have kept Dibiase strong and the cheating to get number 30 angle worked perfectly with the character.

1990 - Mr Perfect. Hogan didn't need the win when the Rumbles didn't lead to anything, but if Hennig had eliminated Warrior last after his stare down with Hogan, then you have a built in number one contender after he wins the title.

1991 - Hulk Hogan. I'll leave him with this one. Was half thinking Randy Savage but the career ending angle was great as it was. Can't think of anyone else I would have win this one.

1992 - Ric Flair. Great booking as it was, though he should have been in the Main Event at Mania whether again Hogan or Savage.

1993 - Randy Savage. There's a theme here, but him giving Bret the rub at Mania would have put the latter over huge.

1994 - Lex Luger. Bret and Owen doesn't need the title involved as the storyline is already there.

1995 - British Bulldog. He was over and don't think Shawn was yet ready.

1996 - Shawn Michaels. He was ready here.

1997 - Bret Hart. He can still feud with Austin but the rematch with Shawn would be booked for this year.

1998 - Steve Austin - Original intention would have been to finally put him over Bret, but as he was gone Shawn was the man to beat.

1999 - Steve Austin - Vince should not be winning this.

2000 - Rock - It was his time.

2001 - Steve Austin - Can't argue with the booking for Austin-Rock at Mania.

2002 - HHH - It was his time.

2003 - Brock Lesnar - It was his time.

2004 - Chris Benoit - WWE booking it correctly for a few years. Benoit was really over here.

2005 - Batista - Well worked angle to make up for the mess with Orton.

2006 - John Cena - Edge should have kept the title until Mania, with Cena being screwed out of a title opportunity prior to Rumble.

2007 - Shawn Michaels - Sorry Taker, but Shawn was the most entertaining and over wrestler on the roster at this point.

2008 - Undertaker - Cena's comeback was great, but the better feud for Mania was Edge / Taker.

2009 - Randy Orton - Was a great heel at this point.

2010 - Edge - He was due one.

2011 - CM Punk - Could have lost the Mania match but still went on a tirade later that summer after not getting the Main Event match.

2012 - Chris Jericho - He and Punk was the better feud.

2013 - John Cena - Not much else to compare with the Rock title match as a box office event.

2014 - Daniel Bryan - Had to be.

2015 - Roman Reigns - On the basis that they didn't screw his push as fans had gotten what the wanted with Bryan previously.

2016 - Dean Ambrose - Challenging former best friend who should have been well over by this point.

2017 - Seth Rollins - Switches to go after Styles?

 

[ShinChan]

Royal Rumble 2015

The winner being Roman Reigns was a damn wrong decision as has been proved. Roman Reigns was nowhere near ready enough to headline a Wrestlemania and that too against Brock Lesnar.

It should've been Dolph Ziggler. He had gotten a big rub by dethroning the Authority at Survivor Series 2014, thanks to a cameo by Sting. Ziggler would've been the better choice.