Right, you little shits, you brought me back so now you have to deal with the consequences.

Let's have a look at some SCIENTIFIC FACTS as to why the Rumble is broken and needs fixing.

Some Scientific Facts As To Why The Rumble Is Broken And Needs Fixing:

1. It's predictable. The WWE have roughly 800 contracted superstars that could theoretically appear in the Rumble, and only about 8 that could realistically win it, and 6 of those are just Roman Reigns in disguise. To be fair, this makes sense, because it's in January, so if Jason Jordan wins it, you've only got like three months to make him a believable challenger. Also you're not going to have any muppet main eventing Wrestlemania.
   
2. There isn't a lot new you can do with it. People come in, go over the top rope. The fun of the returns is still there, but these aren't usually people likely to win it. Also Kofi's going to end up killing himself one day, so we need to stop it to save him.
   

So, having unanimously decided that we need to sort things out (I'm the only person in the thread right now, because I haven't posted it yet, so it's unanimous), I have suggestions.

Firstly, we move the Rumble. Not get rid of it entirely, because it's not a complete waste of time, but it shouldn't be the Wrestlemania lead-in. So have it after Wrestlemania, like at the next dual brand PPV (so swap that and...MITB? Yeah, sure, we're fix MITB while we're here too). Then, have it so the winner of the Rumble gets the "cash in anytime" thing (so it is basically replacing MITB properly). That gives you a lot more room to build the winner over the course of the year.

But what happens instead of the Rumble? Well, one of my complaints above was the limited number of realistic winners. So I'd have a RAW tournament of 8 guys, and a Smackdown tournament of 8 guys. Both knockout tournaments, because we haven't got time for a G1 Climax style thing (although that would be cool). The eight guys would be "specially selected" by the respective GMs, because Wrestlemania is prestigious as shit. You can still have your surprise returns as part of that tournament, if you want (assuming it's someone good, and not like Sgt. Slaughter again).

So, January is the Wrestlemania Challenge Tournament Finals thing (probably give it a better name). You have the Smackdown and RAW ones as the first matches of the show to decide who's actually going to be challenging for the titles at Wrestlemania, then the actual main event of the show can be Smackdown winner vs. RAW winner to decide who actually main events Wrestlemania. Or you could just have one title shot, and then deal with the other one later, like you'd do with the Rumble anyway.

The new June Rumble can act as a kind of a "reset" for the main event scene, and makes it a lot more viable for a surprise victory to happen. But now MITB is floating around in the nether, stuck in the Upside Down like Will from Stranger Things. To be honest I didn't really think of that, but what you could do is make it a 205 Live exclusive thing, add a bit more prestige to that "brand," and, let's be honest here, cruiserweights are more suited to the match type. Have it as the opening match at Wrestlemania, because I liked when they did that, and I don't think it really needs to be its own PPV.

Before anyone says, I am well aware that this is never going to happen, because it goes against like 30 years of tradition.

I hate the cash in at any time concept.

A tournament would make more scene but it wouldn't change the fact that there's only a hand full of guys who'd win it. We don't watch the G1 thinking that Yoshi-Hassi might win the thing.

My problem with The Rumble is that I feel like it's a crutch WWE uses. If they can't make us want to see a match at WrestleMania they'll just have some main event guy win in and build towards WrestleMania for a few months by having a guy point at the WrestleMania sign.

Although I love the Rumble, I also love the idea of a tournament.

Plus, last year Randy won it and he didn't even main event, he was in the middle of the card.