Would you like this tournament?

[GLOBAL ICON]

This idea has been rotating in my mind for the past week.

The WWE announces an annual WWE Performer of The Year trophy. For that, they hold a tournament. All the superstars from both brands will be allowed to compete. From the jobbers to the tag teams to the main-eventers, every single superstar will compete in this tournament. The first few rounds until 8 men from each brand are through will be held on respective brands. Then, the round of 16 will be held on one show, quarters on the next, semis on the first and finals will be held on a PPV.

And I know there will arouse a question that "There won't be enough time for storylines then". That problem is also solved. Have all the guys who are in storylines get eliminated in the brand-exclusive rounds so that they can build-up their personal fueds.

Have guys like a John Cena or a Randy Orton win the trophy. Or even guys in the youth movement who havn't got a title like JoMo or Rhodes or McIntyre could win.

So know, do you think this idea will work? And feel free to bash me up and put in some ideas of your own. Thank you for your patience.

 

[richunclescrooge]

I love the idea, I just loved it better when it was called the king of the ring. They used to have everyone compete for it but they no longer do. I wish they'd set up a bracket on the website of every wrestler and do a complete tournament buildup to KOR instead of randomly picking a few guys to have qualifying matches. To sum it up, love the idea, but it should be king of the ring.

 

[GameOver]

Sorry but having someone who's already hugely over being involved in a superstar of the year tournament is pointless, it doesnt help anyone one bit.

now if it was something like up and comer or rookie of the year that could work as a mid card tournament.

Really they should just stick to the old idea of having the King Of The Ring as a PPV and the winner got a push or in the case of the original they got a title shot at SummerSlam

or occasional month long tournaments on Raw or Smackdown to determine a number 1 contender for the world or IC/US titles

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

I dont see the point of this tournament. It is exactly the same as King Of The Ring, but I do like the idea of having more superstars compete for it than they currently do.

Having all wrestlers who are involved in major storylines being eliminated in the brand exclusive rounds makes it obvious that they wont be going through, and spoils the anticipation of who is going to make it through to the later rounds.

A version of this could work... and does...its called King Of The Ring. KOTR is the same format as the one you described and as long as that exists then WWE wont be doing anything like this.

 

[OutsiderDX]

Yes great idea!

This is the kind of forward and progressive thinking that the E needs. Fresh! New! ... I may even say revolutionary!

I can not wait to see your next idea. Perhaps a battle royal match, but only 2 men start off, until all 30 have entered. We can call it the Royal Rumble.

Maybe a PPV which is better than all the rest, with all the biggest stars, and biggest matches. We can call it WrestleMania... or something.

 

[Ytoojae]

I think the basis of having an end of year tournament or award definitely holds a lot of merit. However, to space it out with the entire roster over a few short weeks or month would be virtually impossible without copying the King of the Ring format.

What I'd personally like to see is the WWE use the Slammy Award throughout the course of the year rather than having someone random win it at the end of the season. It's meant to be the WWE's version of the MVP trophy. Yet there is no measurable way of accounting for who that MVP truly is. Each year there's a number of candidates and the WWE ends up slapping it on the wrestler who it most fits a given angle at the time. It doesn't truly reflect the entire year in any measure.

So while I love the idea of having an end of year award that means something it can't just be a tournament.

What would I do? Fairly simple, really and it's similar to what has been spoken of on numerous occasions.

Collate some sort of record throughout the course of the year. Wins on RAW/SD count as 5 points, a win at a PPV gets you 20 points, a title win is worth varying amounts (depending on the title), etc, etc. At the end of the year the "Superstar of the Year" is awarded the Slammy and a shot at their brand's champion at the Royal Rumble.

That way it's not just a silly reward that carries no weight going forward.

 

[LSN80]

Nah, personally Im not a fan of the idea. Especially since WWE just brought back King of The Ring.

The Superstar of the Year should go to someone whose accomplishments have been established over the entire year. A torunament(in kayfabe terms), could produce a fluke that would allow a Superstar less deserving to win the award. A Superstar involved in the 'Youth Movement' shouldnt win this award in any way. I dont like the idea, sorry. The Performer of the Year shoulds be exactly that. Someone whose gotten it done voer the entire year.

 

[Undertaker the 5th]

Not really.

I am not a big fan of having big tournaments like that on the WWE. I like the KOTR, but 8 is good enough for a once a year tournament. They should just do superstar of the year depending on who really stood out. I know guys like Cena and Orton stand out because they are all ready main eventers, but they should give that title to someone like the Miz for example. Not a big fun of him, but he did stand out and made of 2010 his best year in the WWE yet. Either that or just have the guy who brings in the cash, who for the last few years has been John Cena, and will continue to be him.