Alternate History: KOTR winners

[TGM]

How would wrestling history differ if the past Kings of the Ring, lost their final bouts to their opponents? I'm only going to do the PPV events.


1993: Bam Bam Bigelow
1994: Razor Ramon
1995: Savio Vega
1996: Jake The Snake
1997: Mankind
1998: The Rock
1999: X-Pac
2000: Rikishi
2001: Kurt Angle
2002: Rob Van Dam
2006: Bobby Lashley
2008: CM Punk
2010: John Morrison

SPOILER: Click to show

{Spoiler}KING RIKISHI

[Deleted]

ALL WILL BOW TO

KING

BUHBBEHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

*bugs out eyes*

[wildojinx]

Summerslam 02's main event would have been RVD vs Rock, meaning Brock's push would be slightly delayed while smarks everywhere celebrate.

[Crappler El 0 M]

I realize this isn't what the OP is asking, but I would only change Mabel and Billy Gunn...

1995: Owen Hart repeats.

1999: Big Show wins in dominant fashion as a rehab to his botched debut.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

I don't think CM Punk as KoTR would've changed much for him aside from being another accolade on his resume.

[4real]

Bigelow would have been cool I always felt he deserved a push. He could have turned face and gone against Yoko.

Razor Ramon was a big star regardless and probably didn't need the win but might have put him over the edge.

Savio would have been in the Mabel, Billy Gunn category.

Jake was past his best and the win would have been wasted on him

Mankind didn't need it as his career did take off eventually but a feud with Bret over the title in 97 would have been cool.

The Rock....well the win would have made no difference whatsoever he was gonna take off regardless

X-Pac - Plucky underdog winner would have been much better than Billy Gunn. Could have had a short program with HHH for the title. Instead he turned heel and never recovered.

Rikishi was already pretty over but wouldn't have been a better winner than Angle. Just wasn't main event material.

Kurt Angle in 2001, well, didn't need it at all. Got a title program with Austin a month later anyway.

Rob Van Dam would have been a great winner but in hindsight going with Brock was the right decision.

Bobby Lashley...thank goodness he didn't win, no charisma, terrible on the mic, couldn't connect with audiences. And we would have never got King Booker. Imagine that crime.

CM Punk - Punk was already MITB wasn't he? Really wasn't a point to have him win it but in the end it was wasted on Regal. MVP would have been a better choice.

John Morrison would have a better choice than Sheamus who had already been WWE Champion and bombed as King. Also would have given Morrison more credibility going against his former partner and WWE Champ at the time, The Miz.

[thegame415]

Again, this isn't what the OP said, but I always felt Triple H should've won 1999. It would make him the first and only two time winner, and would've been a good start to his push to the title.

[Sam Punk]

Savio would have ushered in a new boom period.

[mizerable]

Would an alternate history mean we would have gotten the opposite, hence;

2003
2004
2005
2007
2009
2011
2012
2013

Who would win those? Oh...and I miss the KOTR. It was a nice tournament to set up an easy feud for Summerslam, if they had the right guy win.

[TGM]

Jan 3, 2014 18:38:07 GMT -5 mizerable said:

Would an alternate history mean we would have gotten the opposite, hence;

2003 Cena
2004 Cena
2005 Cena
2007 Cena
2009 Cena
2011 Cena
2012 Cena
2013 Cena

Who would win those? Oh...and I miss the KOTR. It was a nice tournament to set up an easy feud for Summerslam, if they had the right guy win.

[Crimson]

Jan 3, 2014 15:56:03 GMT -5 TGM said:

How would wrestling history differ if the past Kings of the Ring, lost their final bouts to their opponents? I'm only going to do the PPV events.

1996: Jake The Snak

Austin would have never gotten his "Pipebomb." Austin vs McMahon may have never happened and turned the tide of the Monday Night Wars. But most importantly,

TRIPLE H AND DX WOULD HAVE NEVER INVADED NITRO!