6. A Less Predictable Royal Rumble winner?
From @_NL92_: Should WWE have considered a less predictable Royal Rumble winner? Could have made a new star with Ambrose or Ziggler even with Bryan not winning. There's always talk about them struggling with making new main eventers? Reigns was forced while Ziggler or Ambrose would've been natural.
The Rumble winner is almost always predictable going back to around 1990 when Hogan won for the first time. The two before that were pretty random. That period from 2003 to 2012 where they had two World Champions in WWE was a period where the winner wasn't that predictable. That's because the guy could win it and then have an opening match at WrestleMania while a loser in the Rumble match is in the more important match. Thankfully that era is over. It would have been nice if WWE went with Ambrose or Ziggler just because they are more liked than Reigns, but that's not their plan. They want to pick Reigns as the next big star, so that's what they did whether the fans liked it or not.