King of the ring: Should it be brought back?

Discussion in 'PPV's & Specials' started by Stopspot, Dec 30, 2012.

  1. So I am currently watching the best of the king of the ring DVD and it got me thinking, should the concept of the king of the ring be brought back?

    Personally I love the idea of a tournament to crown a king for a year, leading up to a ppv where the final match is held. The thing I am wondering over is, why should it be brought back? What can it offer? The rumble has the title shot at mania, the MITB has the title match at any time. What should come from winning KOTR? It is a brilliant way to create a main eventer so I feel it is a waste to leave it out in the cold.

    I'd personally do it so that it is mostly or only mid card talent involved, guys like Cesaro, Kofi, Slater, Gabriel, Kidd and Sandow mixed with top or near top talent like Orton, Christian, Mark Henry and Big Show, which would help solidify the young guys. Imagine king Cesaro after an intense tournament followed by a massive final match at a ppv. But what should come from winning? Just bragging rights and a crown or something else?

    How would you revamp or alter the KOTR concept?
  2. A shot at the IC title, it sounds odd but could make it worth a slight fuck.
  3. I found them very predictable...when I used to do a pool for the KOTR I had to do it as a random draw....
  4. Loved KOTR, should replace HIAC as a PPV. Winner gets to be king for a year, and its a chance to move an upper mid carder into the ME scene.
  5. Nah, no reason to bring it back. Maybe if WWE tried to make the midcard interesting, but they don't give a shit about it. It would just be a half ass revamp, and I would just as soon not see it. If you need proof of the half ass revamp theory, just look back at the sham of a KOTR tourney Sheamus won a couple of years ago.
  6. That's why it was better as a PPV. A guy like Sandow or Cesaro winning the crown against an established guy, instantly makes him credible in the eyes of the casuals. It also accomplishes it without a title belt on the line. You could theoretically have Sandow beat an Orton or a Cena without hurting their status.
  7. I love tournaments, so I wouldn't mind seeing it back. Even though it wouldn't mean anything, except for bragging rights.
  8. I'd like to have it back, I like tournaments. But done correctly, with a PPV and all it'd be good. But for the bragging rights mostly, followed by a good push.
  9. I think they should definitely bring it back. A lot of winners were able to use that victory to catapult to much more success. IIRC, Austin's 3:16 speech was after he had won the king of the ring in '96ish.
  10. You are correct sir.
  11. Also in response to Dolph's. I believe that just having the tournament, running it well and ending it with a PPV would help make the mid card interesting, since it gives the mid card something to fight about.

    A classic already....:pity:

    But yeah, would love it.. As long if they don't give it to top stars. Just push young stars in it.
  13. It would also be the perfect way to push Shield members. Could also be how they end up breaking up. Rollins/Ambrose in the final, friction begins, etc.
  14. Or. Say Ambrose is eliminated in the semi's. Rollins goes to the final and wins it. Ambrose goes jealous and thus starts the downfall of the Shield.
  15. Sure thing.. Wouldn't mind seeing Riley winning it as well.

    As long as they don't get a ''King'' gimmick like Booker did.. Just.. Yeah.. :maybe:
  16. It is a great way to do it intelligently. Friction built through competition.
  17. I would love it if it returned as a PPV to be honest.
  18. KOTR Show be being back as a PPV in June and the winner of the tournament should MAIN EVENT SUMMERSLAM! if that want to be the 2nd best PPV to WM this would to it KOTR can be the Rumble for SummerSlam and that has a PPV in July maybe TLC PPV? and then SummerSlam in Aug. and then in Sept. MITB PPV! and then move NOC to another month pefectly Dec.!
  19. Sort of a rip off from the Rumble isn't it?