Why Won't WWE Let A "Shocking" Underdog Win The Rumble?

[Mouthy Idiot]

Ever since the Royal Rumble concept began , its always been about taking a big name guy and letting him win. I dont understand why every time the winner has to be an established name guy. Why not shock the sports entertainment world and have a complete shock winner. I mean someone midcard with no prior WWE championships, someone you wouldnt expect to win at all. It would create a buzz and be a huge opportunity for that guy and you could really get the guy over with a win in the rumble. I just think it would take alot of guts for Vince and Hunter to allow it to happen but it would be really refreshing. A couple of examples would be someone like Justin Gabriel or Kofi , someone who seems lower level on the current product. It is risky and I understand the importance of the Rumble winner but ultimately they could make it work. Just take a chance with someone , another big name winner like Orton , Jericho , Sheamus , Undertaker , Punk , Cena , Barrett , any of those guys are predictable. Really shock people with someone winning thats a complete underdog , The Miz winning wouldnt be good , hes already been WWE champ.

 

[Big Sexy]

Having a guy like Gabriel or Kofi winning it this year would make no sense. Neither has much going for them right now and neither would make any sense to get a title shot at Mania. That's shock value just for the sake of shock value.

You are also wrong by saying underdogs have never won the Rumble. In 1995 HBK was an underdog, especially coming in at number 1, and he won the Rumble. Chris Benoit in 2004 was an underdog, Rey Mysterio in 2006 was an underdog. Shit, even last year Alberto Del Rio was an underdog. I'd say there were at least 5 people ahead of hm that were considered favorites to win it.

 

[Rayne]

As Big Sexy just said, there have been underdog winners. I think what you're looking for is a Cinderella winner; a winner who everyone thinks has NO chance of winning.

This won't happen, simply because you have to do something with the winner afterwards. You can't just take a guy whom the audience isn't invested in and throw him in a two-month main event program. I think the best you could hope for is a Cinderella winner who ended up losing his shot to a larger star at Elimination Chamber, in a program designed to get said Cinderella exposure in a high-profile match against a large star at a pay-per-view, while still providing plenty of time to promote an all-star WrestleMania matchup. (You never aim low for WrestleMania. They swung and missed last year with Del Rio/Edge.)

So I wouldn't toss out the idea of someone totally random winning the Royal Rumble... if the WWE wanted to put him in a better position down the line. Don't expect to see Jack Swagger wrestling for a World Title at WrestleMania.

 

[MCMG]

The problem is that the winner would have to main event Wrestlemania or at least have a world title match at the biggest PPV of the year. With no prior main event experience it would be a very large risk to see be involved in the feud leading up.
That is why the winner has to be somewhere half way between established main eventer and someone just breaking into the main event. (Barret, Ziggler and Rhodes would fit the bill this year).
I'v always been of the opinion that the winner of the rumble should be someone relatively new to the title picture like ADR last year. Obviously events like Taker and Cena were good to see as well but they should happen very rarely.

 

[H33LTurn]

Because the winner is going to main event the most important event in WWE history. You cant have a guy who doesnt draw or isnt established enough in your main event the one time you're trying to book the best card of the year.

 

[Loveless]

I understand the logic of not dropping someone who isn't established into the main event of Wrestlemania but it's unfortunate because if booked properly it could be an amazing story.
There's little real risk if you give it to a genuine future star and there would almost be a good candidate this year if he hadn't been booked as a heel. Drew McIntyre, after being horribly buried for the last year, would have made a great underdog challenger to someone like Mark Henry had circumstances been different. The WWE had this same chance years ago when they could have had a newish Cena pull off a shock win and face a seemingly unbeatable Brock at Mania. The days when WWE stray from the safe bet though are long gone.

 

[finchrulz]

Im holding out for the rise of the chosen one drew McIntyre

What a way to end his losing streak by entering the rumble , winning , going to mania and capturing his first world title and fulfilling his chosen one prophecy.

Maybe Vince has had this in mind for a while and saving the big shock for the rumble this year

 

[bepunk]

if they had a "cinderella" type winner for the rumble i would imagine it would have to b like a feast or fired concept like in tna. i could picture vince or trips coming out then calling out the rumble winner n telling him how important wrestlemania is to this business n how it calls for the superstar to really step up n shine to prove he deserves to compete for the most prestigous title under the biggest spolight of the year n if he doesnt create a believeable image of what a top entertainer in the wwe should b he will b fired. i could picture someone like drew mcintyre in this type of storyline but he would really need to elevate his game which is the point though.

 

[EastCoastFan]

As it was said earlier, the winner goes to WrestleMania, so the winner has to be a top guy who can draw. An exception to this would be Chris Benoit in 2004. He won the Rumble, but nobody thought Benoit vs. HHH would draw, so Shawn Michaels got added to the main event.

 

[prush80]

The only way I could see it happening is if at the next Raw or PPV, that person put up the shot in a match to lose the rumble stitulation, I thought they may do this lst year with Santino . But still not sure if/how it would work/work out

 

[Rckstrtmmy]

I agree completely. It's too predictable that a big name guy will win every year because then you can narrow it down to five possible winners or so. All they would have to do is have a story leading to WM where the winner is challenged for his spot in the main event. The angle could be used to build several stars instead of just one...How awesome would it be if someone like Drew McIntyre won the Rumble? It'd be cool since they have his whole losing streak angle going on too. He goes from losing to Santino to being the surprise winner of the Rumble. Then have guys like Orton, Barrett, Rhodes all challenge him for his spot saying he's not worthy. Then for the Smackdown elimination chamber they can have a match for the spot at WM instead of for the title. I think it could be a pretty sweet type of angle.

 

[justinept]

If there was ever a year to go with a shock win, it would be this year. People are going to buy WrestleMania this year because of Cena/Rock. I doubt people will really even consider the WWE/World Title matches when deciding whether or not to purchase the event.

I have two trains of thought on this topic. Because the WWE has such a unique opportunity this year - not having to worry about the title matches to create buy-rates - I see it as a perfect opportunity for the company to push their top-tier younger talent (Punk, Ziggler, Rhodes, Barrett) and expose those guys to the Attitude-Era crowd that will only watch this year because of The Rock's involvement.

But - if the WWE was to go with a "shock" win, then I'd prefer they go with an old dog that hasn't won the "big one" in his career. I'm thinking along the lines of Goldust or William Regal. Those two have had really solid careers, but neither has ever been a World Champion in the WWE. The build-up would be simple ... The challenger would talk about how this is his last chance at glory while the champion would taunt him for being "over the hill", "out of his league" and then tell him not to "screw up his last opportunity at being relevant in the annals of wrestling history." That could create some really great drama during the build-up.

On top of that - I wouldn't mind seeing William Regal vs. Daniel Bryan in the World Title match at WrestleMania ... That'd be a hell of a match, and I think Bryan could play that heel part perfectly against his former mentor.

 

[Raiden46]

Simple answer - The winner gets a world title shot. WWE isn't going to push a new guy or a scrub. As long as the world title stays in the picture, a main eventer is always going to win. The exception to the rule is ADR.

 

[scottyshowman82]

I like the idea of an underdog winning. But it would have to be under the right circumstances. It would have to be a new guy that the people really like but would not expect to win. I'd like it. It would be interesting to see how the main eventers would react to this person winning the Rumble and how WWE would make this person look like a real threat to the title in the time left leading up to Wrestlemania. It would be something new and everything's been done in wrestling. I think it will happen.....one day.

 

[tomthebodz]

I don't have an issue with the big names winning, I'd like it if from time to time a big name (Orton, Cena, HHH and co.) would be eliminated by someone you wouldn't expect. Like when Taker was eliminated by Maven. I can't remember the last time something like that happened.

 

[bepunk]

How awesome would it be if someone like Drew McIntyre won the Rumble? It'd be cool since they have his whole losing streak angle going on too. He goes from losing to Santino to being the surprise winner of the Rumble. Then have guys like Orton, Barrett, Rhodes all challenge him for his spot saying he's not worthy. Then for the Smackdown elimination chamber they can have a match for the spot at WM instead of for the title. I think it could be a pretty sweet type of angle.

that pretty much is exactly what i was saying. it'd b perfect. drew would have to win out though n cut a promo after each match saying how opponent sucked n they underestimated how great he was. the promos would b the longest at first n then gradually shorten as we progress to wrestlemania. now that i think about it though this would only work for the whc though. i dont see n dont want to see punk drop the wwe gold to anyone soon

 

[uguess94]

Ok lets be honest here when we were all 5 years old and didnt have Wrestlezone or even the internet for that matter everything was exciting the only reason why we thinj wrestling is stale is because we know whats going on before it happens thanks to the internet. The last time i was really shocked when someone won the RR was 04 when Benoit did it and even 05 with Batista then i discovered the internet wrestling sites and all my excitment and shock disappeared and im not embarrassed to say i thought Smackdown was live for a while and we all lost that shock factor that we are supposed to have without the internet who would have known that videos were for Jericho i sure wouldnt have but to answer your question the reason they dont is for the reason being ratings and the business are at a really low point so to have a no name loser like a Yoshi Tatsu win it would be stupid and ******ed and really if Rhodes wins it will we be shocked or even Ziggler would we be shocked come on your telling me that you want Kofi or JG winning it they are both terrible on the mic and im sorry but you need to be good to build and HOLD and interesting feud through wrestlemania and you know just as well as i do if Vince let Santino win it (it would be the biggest underdog win of all time) we would all say how stupid he is and this is a joke and hes not fit to run it no more and just bash him for doing something that stupid so no one has the right to say anything like what you just said

 

[closet_fan]

what if, instead of having an underdog win the rumble, have him be one of the first participants and let him go all the way until the last 2 are left. the underdog and then the BIG name. they fight for awhile until the underdog finally get tossed over.

they could push someone that way. i have seen many rumbles where a guy makes a name for himself by simply lasting so long.

 

[juggalotus]

Its just not believable for guys like Kofi or Gabriel to win. Maybe get a few eliminations to further along or start a feud, but the Rumble should be won by people that are either lower upper-card, or a big name returning as a surprise entrant. Plus I don't see what the OP is complaining about. They've had quite a few surprise underdog winners recently. Mysterio, Del Rio. Just have fun and watch the match.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The "Underdog" winners have always been predictable... The problem with the Rumble is that it is very easy to see who is gonna win because the WM main events are 90% set before it. The last true shocker was Vince himself winning. Del Rio, Rey no way were they underdogs, they were clearly being pushed.

Someone like a Kofi is never gonna win...Santino's near miss last year was a fun moment but nothing more than that. Drew this year is the nearest... you can see the beginnings of a push... A Rumble win would be a very interesting way to start it, but a long run/unfair elimination would achieve the same.

The original 2 Rumbles were won by Hacksaw and Studd, both mid carders but there was no Mania stip there. If lower wrestlers are gonna win the Rumble, then the Mania stip has to go... and it's too established now.

 

[thebarber]

Simply put, if an under dog won the Rumble, then the main event of Wrestlemania would be shit and a foregone conclusion. Ni point pushing a guy who the company are not interested in investing tv time and booking around. The winner of the Rumble has to be a believable contender, not a rubbish mid carder. If WWE has plans for somebody to hit the main even roster, then they are a massive chance to win the Rumble. Its always been a good way to feature a returning guy and get them right back into the mix. Too much thought gets put into the Rumble when facts show that it is another stepping stone in the MAIN EVENT path for main event talent. This years Rumble is down to JERICHO,PUNK or ORTON winning, no great shock. Ziggler isnt going to headline Mania this year, Barrett more of a chance of winning the Smackdown EC Match next month. Cena is tied up with Kane and The Rock. My pick is Chris Jericho winning, without having to eliminate anybody. He WILL be the number 30 entrant and all 29 others will have been tossed out before he hits the ring. Read it here.

 

[Cookie14]

There are two reasons why a mid card guy will never win the RR.
Firstly, you have the obvoius business reason of taking someone with no history of being a draw and putting them in your biggest money making match of the year.

Secondly, from a storyline perspective, two months between RR and WM just isn't long enough to take someone from mid card obscurity to credible WHC/WWE title contender.

Also, on a side note, if you asked this question3-5 years ago, look at the people who were at the level that Kofi/Gabriel are now, and see how many are stil even working for WWE. Masters, Khali, Matt Hardy, JoMo etc, all gone. Who's to say Kofi, Gabriel, McIntyre will be with WWE in 2015?

 

[GameOver]

Hacksaw Jim Duggan - the very first winner.
Big John Studd - the second winner and never held a title
Rey Mysterio - survived 62mins - ya think he wasn't an underdog
Mr McMahon lol

well there's 4 people that should never have won that did.

They aren't gonna throw in a complete jobber because that would be pointless going into Mania when you want the best of the best in the main event matches, well atleast the best you can get at the time.

Sure they could take them out of the spot b4 Mania but that would be throwing away a match just to please a few people.

 

[#1Dobz92]

Because it's generally too unbelievable. WWE did a great job with it imo back in 2006 with Mysterio but they needed a major story to support the push they were giving Mysterio. Also, Mysterio was an established midcarder who had previously worked with main eventers. WWE would have to do this in order to make it work.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Not to repeat everyone else, but in general the winner of the Rumble is going to be one of the competitors in the biggest match of the year and the financial risk of putting an underdog or no-name is not worth the risk.

On top of that shocking people at the Rumble is kind of pointless since the WWE already has your PPV money and they aren't necessarily going to earn more money because the Rumble has a shock.

However, if there was ever a year to do it this is the year. WM 28 is stacked with Rock-Cena and WM streak match (supposedly). WWE could probably take a risk and get away with it this year.

My idea would be for Jericho to come out in the mid-20's do the whole Y2J running around the ring thing then walk to the back. When the crowd has calmed down have Jericho debut a monster to take his place. The monster dominates the rest of the match and earns his place in the WWE title match at WM with Punk. This would be the meaning behind the "End Of The World". WWE would probably end up giving the monster some corny name like Apocalypse.