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

[GameOver]

Rey Mysterio was not the under dog in that match. He had been getting pushed to the moon before it.

He was still an underdog, that was the whole storyline even more so drawing number 1.

should never have won, winning singles matches is one thing that is totally unbelievable but surviving 29 and lasting 62mins is total bullshit.
If Eddie hadn't passed away Rey would never have even been a consideration

 

[Kanomaniac]

For one i do never condone Kofi Kingston to ever win the rumble or be a main eventer, just stop reading and think about for a second.................yes exactly now lets move on. Rather than an underdog or a cinderella winner if wwe want shock value and the fans do why not make someone make there debut in the rumble someone the fans have never seen on wwe tv before have them turn up in the rumble everyones like wtf and then he wins, he would be over instantly weather for the good or not. If there serious about this rollins or ambrose why not do it to them.

 

[Mouthy Idiot]

I just used Kofi and Gabriel as examples. I dont necessarily think anybody can be a true underdog in a scripted match. To be honest more than likely Orton is winning it this year because the PPV is in st louis which is Ortons hometown. You guys made some good points but I still cling to the hope that they could really shock some people by having someone win that completely would blow your mind. The whole thing about the winner being in the main event of wrestlemania is a joke tho. You guys know good and well that Wrestlemania has about 3 "main events" these days. The last match is the true main event , im guessing Undertaker will be the last match of the show this year. Which means the rumble winner could be like in the 5th match of the card and still be one of the 3 "main events" so it wouldnt hurt the card , actually Cena vs Rock will close this years show so it makes sense for an underdog winner. You guys really wanna see Jericho enter at 30 and win by doing nothing??? thats sad.

 

[HBKistheHOF]

Mid-carders winning??? Some guy making his debut to win the rumble??? Kofi KINGSTON??!!!

Has every wrestling fan gone and hit there head and forgot what the rumble is about and used for?!?! the winner GOES INTO THE MAIN EVENT AT THE WRESTLEMANIA PEOPLE!!! While im not saying that maybe a ziggler, barrett or sheamus isnt too much of a long shot, you have to think of creative for a second. First off I dont think they have every had more than 2 non world champs/first time world champs/first time main eventers in the main event at wrestlemania(1 in each world title match like last year i.e. - Del Rio and Miz, both thier first mania main event). And this year the two men that happen to be holding the world titles are already exactly that(I'm counting Punk cause while he is a former world champ he has never main evented mania). So unless one of these men drop the title at the rumble and win the rumble and/or drop the title at the chamber, it seems like we have our newbies this year and will face the likes of possibly Jericho, Orton, Triple H, etc.

And either way the rumble has never really been used much as a stepping stone like the I.C. title, U.S./European title, MitB, etc. It has always been more of an honor, almost like winning a world title, saying the company picks you has the "employee of the year" type of thing in my eyes. Very rarley have we seen a rare rumble winner like Mr. Mcmahon. Hell, we have barely even seen semi-established mid-carders/upper-midcarders win the rumble like Del Rio, Mysterio, Batista, or when HBK first won. The Rumble is more of a statement saying "I'm the best in the company this year, I'm going to main event no matter what". So really the only guy that isn't a 100% main eventer yet that I could really see winning it would be Ziggler cause he is kind of a main eventer and has kind of won the world title already, besides that Jericho has not won the rumble, Punk has not, hell even the likes of Kane and Show haven't won the damn thing yet, so honestly It doesnt make any sense to do one of those rare "a mid-carder wins the rumbe years".

 

[thebarber]

Rey Mysterio I dont believe was an under dog in 2006. They played all over the death of EDDIE GUERRERRO and it was a no-brainer he was going to win one of the titles as a tribute to the late Eddie. That he entered number one was a masterstroke by the bookers and eliminating Orton and HHH last. Greta way to put Mysterio over, but he was no under-dog, in my opinion.

 

[mrpops]

Why not do a "Real" royal rumble with modified rules to make it easier?(As elimanating big show/mark henry over a top rope is almost impossible)

30 Men randomally drawn on the spot 1 by 1 until all 30 are done. New rule would be that elimination would simply be getting thrown out of the ring BUT it doesnt have to be over the top rope. They just simply have to get thrown out.

That would be fucking epic.

Hell a normal 30 man all in the ring at the same time battle royal would be awesome...but make it REAL. Have them actually trying. No pre determination. Obviously everyone would gang up on big show/henry etc, but after that it would be insane to see who would win.

That my friends is the future and WWE should honestly say fuck it and try it out one day.

 

[f_roEDGE]

The people who complain about WWE booking are the same people who are shooting this idea down. The IWC is ridiculous! With Undertaker's streak, Cena vs Rock, and two World titles on the card, WrestleMania will draw regardless. This is the perfect year for an underdog winning the Rumble.

An underdog winning is great for the simple fact that EVERY wrestler can be made into a main eventer...given the right gimmick. And it sickens me when people deny that. The amount of hate I see for Kofi Kingston is astounding, and I personally would choose him over the Miz any day.

Don't get me wrong, the Miz is a great heel, but that is soo easy to pull off....even Vickie Guerrero can draw heat. Being a face is WAY harder....ask Edge and Jericho. Kofi is a decent face, but a heel Kofi can pull of heel just like everyone else.

Look at this. The IWC complained about Batista. He won the Royal Rumble. And while people continuously berate him for not knowing how to wrestle, he was apart of one of the best Road to Wrestlemanias in history. Why? Because it was great booking.

Mark Henry was berated by the IWC for years, but now that he has the correct gimmick, everybody loves him. Ridiculous. And with that being said, here's a list of underdog superstars that would be great to win the Royal Rumble:

Mark Henry - Yes, a 'main eventer', but still an underdog. Having him as a big threat to any champ would be great. However, I do think he will win the title at the Royal Rumble.

Zack Ryder - My personal favourite. This guy has his own 'Ryder Universe', and the reaction that he received for winning the US TITLE was better than any World Champ in the past 5 years minus CM Punk's win. People will back this guy as long as the booking isn't idiotic.

Kofi Kingston - Let him win the Royal Rumble in some underhanded fashion and trust me, he will get a backing. A heel Kofi with a different gimmick is good. Benoit was never good on the mic but he got over....Kofi (who has better mic skills than Benoit) can surely do the same.

Drew McIntyre - An amazing choice given his current storyline. Teddy can't fire him if he is going to Wrestlemania. 'The Chosen One' has more than enough skills to be in the main event.

 

[TheXChosenXOne]

Basically they would never let an underdog win due to ratings, If anyone wins the rumble it will either be an upper mid card wrestler, and the best they can do with that for shock value would be someone like Rhodes! I have been saying all week, that im going out on a limb and saying McIntrye will do something in this years rumble, if he doesnt win, he will be in the last few people involved! unless wwe continue to carry on his storyline!

 

[Defekt]

Your idea is pretty bad.

Just because something is shocking doesn't mean it's good. The WWE gave the world title to Jack Swagger, and it did nothing to help him. It just made the world title look bad.

If jobbers start winning the Royal Rumble, the event will be devalued and less important. Fans view winning the Rumble as important, because with the exception of McMahon, the guys who have won it are the legends of the business.

Teasing that Santino would win last year was good, but imagine if he had? The fans still wouldn't have taken him seriously, and now we'd have "Royal Rumble Winner" Santino doing jobs for Heath Slater.

 

[mrfantastic111]

Just to point out, you do have lesser drawing superstars win the rumble, but to keep the draw high they'll usually make the match a triple threat to boost investment power.

For example, Benoit won the rumble but he was in there with HHH and later HBK was added. Just like Rey won the rumble and later went into the main event with Kurt and Orton.

The kind of match that would involve an underdog or a lesser established wrestler winning is usually alright, as long as the lack of investment power in counteracted by some kind of extra incentive to be interested in the match.

 

[RRPounder]

I've thought of the underdog/Cinderella winner quite a bit over the years. If there ever was a year to do it, I can't think of a better one. You let a guy nobody ever thought of win. You have two months to see the guy prepare for his big chance in the spotlight. Maybe a legend attaches himself to the wrestler and you have a great Rocky scenario. You could do it the other way too by having a washed up legend win the rumble and is trained by a current wrestler who's laid up with an injury at the moment. Another scenario could be having a guy from FCW guy win...like maybe Richie Steamboat and then his father could train him for the big match. There's lots of ways to go with that idea and EVERYBODY loves an underdog.

 

[Krossbreed]

if wwe sees the potential in zack ryder just based on how he made himself a star...they would have him come back and compete in the rumble and win with a storyline that he did it with a broken back...then in the wrestlemania match make it a 3way title match.

I agree with what the poster of this thread is saying...there was a time the rumble felt unpredictable...and considering that it is live and we dont know the planned winner why not suprise us.

My list would be ryder, or even more of a shocker drew mcintyre...the kid can wrestle...and they can do a storyline on smackdown with teddy saying i always knew you could do it playa...turning drew face with new theme music....

but in all realism...if chris jericho doesnt win it, randy will.

 

[brighamosity]

Why not do a "Real" royal rumble with modified rules to make it easier?(As elimanating big show/mark henry over a top rope is almost impossible)

30 Men randomally drawn on the spot 1 by 1 until all 30 are done. New rule would be that elimination would simply be getting thrown out of the ring BUT it doesnt have to be over the top rope. They just simply have to get thrown out.

That would be fucking epic.

Hell a normal 30 man all in the ring at the same time battle royal would be awesome...but make it REAL. Have them actually trying. No pre determination. Obviously everyone would gang up on big show/henry etc, but after that it would be insane to see who would win.

That my friends is the future and WWE should honestly say fuck it and try it out one day.

If people wanted realism, they'd watch MMA. The reason nothing in WWE is totally "REAL" is because people who are pushed as being tough might get their butts kicked by jobbers. This very thing happened in the late 90's. There was a legitimate tournament in the WWE called the Brawl for All. Now I confess that I was a WCW guy at the time so I didn't actually watch this myself, but a quick look at the wikipedia article for it and it says how much of a failure it was because Steve Blackman, who was being pushes as a tough guy, got knocked out by Bart Gunn, who before the tournament was nothing special.

This isn't MMA dude. These are not trained fighters. If you have any real fighting in WWE, you are risking unneccesary injuries. If the rumble were real, as you say it should be, Big Show would be punching everyone in the face. Mark Henry can lift like 700 pounds. He could literally just benchpress someone and toss them outside. Half the people would leave with broken bones. And you might not even get the best competition because these guys are all co-workers and friends in real life, so what makes you think they even want to have legitimate fights with each other? They don't want to hurt each other, so they would realistically all be "Going easy on each other" so in a sense, it wouldn't even be real. And in the regular rumble, when a person is tossed over the top rope, they anticipate it and fall appropriately; if you just randomly toss a guy over the top rope, and he weren't ready for it, he could break his neck. And then after having them literally beat each other up (as opposed to working together in a match) you expect them to just show up the next night on Raw? Heck, if it were real, this could even potentially create real-life grudges! (I thought we were friends, why would you eliminate me?) This idea is horrible and would probably be the worst decision WWE has ever made. Wrestling is fake. Please lets keep it that way.

 

[DeathClutch]

They've done the shocking wins with HBK first time around in 1995, Austin in 1997, Vince in 1999, Benoit in 2004, Rey in 2006 and to some degree Cena winning in 2008 was pretty shocking as no one knew he was in the rumble apart from a handful of people backstage.

Having of the lower card guys winning the rumble is just a waste of time and match, if they had ANYTHING worth offering they'd be on the weekly shows and PPV's normally if not than why would WWE even give them the Rumble win?

I understand you're giving out a decent arguement but seriously they're a few reasons why lower card guys don't win the rumble.

1. As I previously stated it would be a waste,
2. Some midcarder wins the rumble people won't feel like they've had their moneys worth (Unforgiven 2002, 2006 comes to mind)
3. Some mid carder winning the wouldn't have the effect/pop/surprise win that they'd want, it would feel to fairytale like and insulting fans intelligence, basically no mid carder will win the Rumble unless they've been WAAAAAAY over and taken a back seat in the mid card area and are on the cusp of a renewed main event push.

 

[BK Styles]

If booked properly, it could work. But the safer option is to give it to a guy who is likely to win it, because...

1. It's more believable. You want to believe that the winner can actually come out on top of twenty nine other men.

2. Wrestlemania. The guy who wins is in the 'main event' title match of his choosing. You need to believe that he has a chance. If, say, Evan Bourne won the Rumble, and Cena or Orton was his opponent, there is no way that I could buy him winning that match.

Now, providing that the 'underdog' is popular enough to be accepted by the fans as the winner and has all the tools to become a main event player, all of the points above are negated if the guy is built in the right way, and is booked to be credible. But to be honest, the last time that theory worked for me was with Benoit (I don't count Mysterio because I still don't buy him as a legit threat.). But even here, Benoit wasn't too 'shocking'; he'd had title matches before so it wasn't the biggest deal in the world.

Simply put, they don't let a 'shocking underdog' win because one with all of the tools for it to work has yet to come along in recent memory. If they have a superstar around Rumble time who could become a main event player, it could work. If not, it can backfire MASSIVELY.

 

[TheHeartbreakPunk]

If they had an underdog win it, it would make no sense. It would be alright if it was an established superstar that nobody expected to win it, like rey mysterio in 2006. But if you have a guy who is not over with thhe crowd, doesnt draw, and isnt that great in the ring, pre-wmania raw ratings would be close to zero. The buyrate for wmania woudnt be as high. For example, let's say next year the royal rumble comes around, and curt hawkins wins it. Do you think he would get a big pop? No. People would think that they're being punked.

 

[TLK]

Mysterio was an underdog when he won it, or at least he was booked that way. He was still a credible main eventer because he was over and could draw. As others have stated, you don't want your WM main event to include someone who lacks build and credibility.

 

[legendkillerbsal]

Having a random person win the rumble could be a good idea for someone like Kofi or Mason Ryan or Gabriel but it would be better if whoever the champ is at the time and the rumble winner had some sort of bad blood with them to jump start the fued and remind people of their history. They could have a half of a year to fued then lay off of it until rumble time and BAM there u go u got a good storyline

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Because it'd be a horrible idea. Everyone knows it's planned, so for one, they wouldn't care. Two, that'd be like Coke pushing "Moose Piss" as their next product. This is a business, think of it as such.

It's not going to get them anymore over. People don't go "wow, he won, he's good" they go "this guy isn't interesting at all, I don't buy into this shit, what else is on?"

Not only all that, but "underdogs" win all the time. Guys come in early and last the whole time, Benoit, Mysterio, Austin, etc were all booked as underdogs.

 

[Dagger Dias]

They have no reason to let a "shocking underdog" win the Rumble. Sure it would provide an interesting moment, but then they have to push this same guy into a Wrestlemania world title feud. How will they know he will be worthy of the push? Most guys by the time they earn a Rumble victory push have already established themselves and would thus no longer be an underdog. It would leave them stuck with someone who fans might struggle to see as believable entering a match for the WWE or World Heavyweight Championship at Wrestlemania.

It just wouldn't make sense. Would you put someone like Heath Slater or even Ted DiBiase in a WWE Championship match at Wrestlemania at this point? No. Having someone further down the card win the Royal Rumble should never happen unless they are ready to enter a huge push with plenty of support from creative. It would be a sink or swim moment for that wrestler. I personally think that it needs to be established guys who win the Rumble simply because it leads to a main event push at Wrestlemania. They need someone they can trust with providing a great match at the biggest show of the year, and they are much less likely to get that outcome with someone who would be seen as a shocking underdog winning at the Rumble.

 

[Wrestlemania 20-0]

one thing that you forget, WWE is scripted and the Winner of each matchs has knows by advance and for the show they' make theirs matchs before the LIVE.
One video famous is when you see Taker repeat an scénario in occurence at Great american Bash against Dudleys boys,if the writers makes an winner unknow for the Rumble he ruined the prestigious for WM an big name was bigger for the event.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Mysterio and Benoit were shocking underdogs. You can even say Shawn Michaels was when he won the Rumble for the first time. Alberto Del Rio is probably the most shocking of them all since he has only been in the WWE for such a short amount of time before winning the Rumble. Would fans really rally behind someone like Kofi Kingston if he were to win? I'm sure people would be excited but then soon care less about the winners afterward. Money in the Bank is the best format because it gives up and coming stars the ability to become champion. It gives them time to build a storyline instead of rushing someone new to the main event before they are ready.

 

[Kevolution]

Depends what you call shocking, Rey to many was shocking. Rumble is a script to get a guy to the spot of the main event of WM , not to push a shocking winner i'm afraid.

 

[natey2k4]

I say the same thing. I want someone shocking to win. And I don't mean someone like Curt Hawkins or something. But someone who is a mid-card type guy. A guy like Kofi Kingston or Ted DiBiase. Someone.

People will say "OMG BUT THEY DONT DRAWWWZZ!" Who the fuck cares? The Royal Rumble winner is never in the main event anymore anyway. They can add pieces to the match as well if needed.

This year, for example, you have Daniel Bryan as World Champ.
Ted DiBiase wins the Royal Rumble - you could have added Cody Rhodes and Randy Orton for their past involvement. Bam! Set and done.

And like it matters with The Rock vs. John Cena, CM Punk vs Chris Jericho, and Triple H vs. Undertaker on the card, and Money in the Bank on the card. The show is going to get ordered for Rock vs. Cena ... the rest is gravy.

A year like last year, WWE dropped the ball. Del Rio winning was probably a bad move since the Main Event (Cena vs. Miz) was not quite a Wrestlemania Main Event. It should have been a bigger name.

This year? You could have had Santino winning the rumble and people wouldn't really care except for the IWC.

And PS. Benoit winning the Rumble was not shocking.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

This thread is a good example of wanting to see something happen purely for the sake of shock value whether or not it makes the slightest bit of sense.

Just having someone come out of the blue, like Justin Gabriel or even Santino Marella at this point in time for instance, would garner little real interest after the shock wore off. These are guys that are nowhere near ready to be main event level wrestlers and trying to cram them down people's throats as main eventers simply wouldn't work. In TNA right now, they're trying desperately to get Eric Bischoff's son over by giving him lots of tv time and putting him in an angle that involves Hulk Hogan. It's not being welcomed with open arms by fans or wrestling insiders because Bischoff's kid doesn't have the talent to justify such a hard push. Neither does someone like Justin Gabriel at this time.

The WWE isn't going to just toss a World Championship match at the biggest wrestling show of the year to some unexpected underdog just for the sake of shocking people. That'd be like using $10,000 to wipe your ass with before going to spend it.