In this thread, I hope we can have a little input on everyone's opinions o who they feel is the worst Royal Rumble winner(s), and who they would have liked to have won instead. Or, who you felt would have been a better choice to have been the winner in this case. I'm more of an old school fan, so a lot of my choices are going to be from some of the earlier years. Also due to military commitments, there was a time span I didn't get to watch wrestling. I'm going to start with the First one that was a main event Pay Per View deal. So I'm starting with 1989's winner Big John Studd (I know Hacksaw won in 1988 but it wasn't really a big deal that year and there was still a possibility of it being a one off). Nothing against Big John but this guy really shouldn't have won. Also just a few months after winning, he was out of the company. Also, the only real thing of merit he was known for at the time was getting smashed by Andre The Giant repeatedly. Instead, I would have had Hulk Hogan win this year due to the main event going to be him and Macho Man. This would have given the event a big rub and would have added a little more to the main event of WrestleMania. I would have had Hogan accidently eliminate Savage towards the end and this would have given Savage even more reason to distrust Hogan. Other than the Elizabeth stuff. My second choice to win would have been The Million Dollar Man. Him buying number 30 (which he did) and winning after eliminating Hogan last would have been epic. In the other thread I already said Hogan wasn't the right choice in 1990. He was already the WWF Champion, so the only reason I saw giving him the win was giving the event a rub in its sophomore year. I said I would have liked to have seen Mr. Perfect win because he was red hot at the time, and I stand buy that. I would have had him win, and challenge the Warrior sometime after WrestleMania 6. He would have had a legit claim to being number one contender since he won the Rumble by eliminating Hogan last. I still would have had Warrior feud with Rude first, so he would have a top heel to work with since Henning was still new to WWF. I would have kept Perfect strong all year, and then had him take the title off of Warrior at the next Royal Rumble instead of SGT Slaughter. And no, I would have not made Perfect a Iraqi Sympathizer. Keep Hogan's win at the 1991 Rumble and have them go at it at WrestleMania 7. Yeah, Henning may have a transitional run, but maybe it would have prevented the whole Lex Express Crap in 1993 and 1994. 2011 - Alberto Del Rio... Really, why WWE? Why? Why not have CM Punk win instead? I mean, he could have won took the title at Mania, drop it back, and still get the Pipebomb/Summer of Punk. It would have made more sense to me, to have Punk win. I think WWE had Del Rio penciled in to win the WHC at Mania until Edge was retiring, but with the situation with Edge's neck up in the air prior to Mania, I fell a RAW Superstar should have won. Punk made the most sense. Anyway, I could ramble on all day about this, but I'm curious as to what you gentlemen think.