This is some what drifting off but to keep it relevant I'll speak generally. Now the reason I don't want it is that its be done so many times the novelty has worn off, the reason which was brought up of people dropping the ball is rubbish because it could be the writers fault. Its not hard for the likes of henery to jump into the title scene on main event level when his story lines revolve around him 1. Attacking people 2. Attacking people.... then placing a chair around and jumping his 400+ pound frame across the chair 3. Talking about attacking people and breaking their ankles. However when the writers decide to take a guy like swaggar who did a great job early on of being a cocky loud mouth with a very legitimate skill set to back it up and give him a christian type winy bitch character requiring alot more mike skills then the prior, is down right stupid. Had swaggar been given an opportunity to be a loud mouth great technical wrestler and not be squashed at every turn he would have been fine. Even when he was given a new character in the brief window applying the ankle lock he did great looked strong but even so writers logic dictated he should return to his winy bitch character he was obviously struggling with. In short MITB has been done well when given the right opportunities
Get Rid Of The Money In The Bank Briefcase
- Thread starter sharpsh00ter23
- Start date
WRESTLING_GENIUS
Pre-Show Stalwart
I Think CM Punks first MITB had alot of significiance to it. He held the title for 4 months and never lost it, this was the start of an already impressive career. He was already ECW Champion and a dormer Intercontential champion losing it 2 weeks prior to winning the briefcase to JBL. Also KANE even though it was for only 45 minutes or so his was significant because everyone didnt think he would win and defenitly didnt think he would cash in the same night and that was his longest World Championship reign out of all 3... So i think the MITB concept should stay around unless it is replaced with the King of The Ring or some new concept that is almost similar but the briefcase works for me it makes me feel anyone can be the champion one day, ANYONE!
George Steele's Barber
Advertise Here $9.95/month
It's good to see the MITB cashin backlash is strong. The Rumble set up is simple but it works without ruining the integrity of the eventual title victory. A MITB cashin just turns in to a cheap victory that does not do any more for the winner other than adding a resume accomplishment.
Going forward, I would like a MITB victory give someone a title shot at a predetermined event (Summerslam, Survivor Series). Even force guys to pick what title they are going for if they win ahead of the match. This will allow heel champions a reason to interfere in the match as a way to avoid a particular challenger and further get themselves over as heels.
Most importantly, if WWE had changed the way MITB worked ahead oF DB's title victory it would have saved us from seeing Big Show try to cry (or try not to cry).
Going forward, I would like a MITB victory give someone a title shot at a predetermined event (Summerslam, Survivor Series). Even force guys to pick what title they are going for if they win ahead of the match. This will allow heel champions a reason to interfere in the match as a way to avoid a particular challenger and further get themselves over as heels.
Most importantly, if WWE had changed the way MITB worked ahead oF DB's title victory it would have saved us from seeing Big Show try to cry (or try not to cry).
James Greiga
Pre-Show Stalwart
I think that they should keep it BUT they should also get rid of the RAW and Smackdown different briefcases. They should just have one again, it adds to the suspense and the wonder of who he could use it on. But with the limitations of just one title and now theyre adding boundaries like the opponent must be cleared to compete. It also makes for better crossbrand storylines.
sharpsh00ter23
Occasional Pre-Show
I honestly think the whole premise behind my post has been misconstrued. My original poll (pre-moderator version) did not ask the question of getting rid of the MITB entirely. It just inquired on whether or not the props should be replaced. I like the MITB for its explosive matches, but I agree with a lot of the posts that state the lack of quality behind the title reigns these days.
Grizzly0u812
Pre-Show Stalwart
never read all the posts about this topic but I like the idea about getting rid of the case and instead of using the Million Dollar Belt which in wrestling terms belongs to Ted Dibiase Jr, why not make a championship belt that represents the money in the bank, clearly who ever has it can wear it to the ring and because to function fully with it on you know if they want to attack the champion they can clearly have both hands free to climb to the top rop etc you get what I mean, instead of fumbling with the briefcase and stuff you have a strap they can ware around their waist like a title and they can present it when they want to cash it in or just wear it around till then.
its like Zack internet belt really has no barring in WWE as a title but he I think wore it once, at least the money in the bank championship bent would mean they can cash it in still like the case but they can wear it rather then carry it around can still clumb someone with it like a normal title belt but its only meaning for it is to cash in for title shot.
its like Zack internet belt really has no barring in WWE as a title but he I think wore it once, at least the money in the bank championship bent would mean they can cash it in still like the case but they can wear it rather then carry it around can still clumb someone with it like a normal title belt but its only meaning for it is to cash in for title shot.
sharpsh00ter23
Occasional Pre-Show
Thank you. At least someone gets the point I was trying to make. All I was saying was give the MITB prop a facelift. I don't need a lecture on the purpose of MITB concept or the obvious fact that there is a contract in the case. I just think it would look more credible for the winner of the MITB to wear a belt that could easily symbolize Money in the Bank. I agree with this post above mine also on the terms of mobility as well. Good point.
Lord Of The "Ring"
New Member
no dont mess with any of it..I think the reason for the money in the bank is to get belts on guys just to see how they do as champion and to see what reactions they get ...
I totally agree with getting rid of MITB...completely...not replacing it with a belt. Just as I think that guaranteeing the winner i of NXT a championship match in his first year. These are 2 reasons that the titles have been so devalued. Just the opportunity to compete in the WWE should be enough for athletes. Some wrestlers have put their whole lives into the business and never gotten a championship title shot but yet they are still happy to have contributed to our entertainment over the years, only to see now that every Tom, Dick and Harry is "given" a shot without even having to "climb the ladder".
I'm sorry but Money In The Bank is honestly becoming a shambles. Love the matches that it produces in order the person to get the briefcase but the whole concept is getting beyond ridiculous and this is by NO means a rant or bare any reflection on Daniel Bryan being World Heavyweight Champion.
I've never had any qualms about the ones that have won it, I think all that have cashed in and won it have all been deserving of holding the belt or even deserving the chance to have their chance to prove what they got...but FIRSTLY: Scripted obviously, but hitting a finishing move on a already beaten half unconcious opponent.....not very credible.
SECONDLY: The list of 3-5 Minute champions that it's slowly producing. Meaning the guys like Jeff Hardy & Big Show who win it only to lose it 2 minutes later to the cashee. Not only does that devalue the meaning of the Championship itself but also if it continues it will further add up the counts of how many times a wrestler has won a championship. It reminds me of the Hardcore Title Concept.
What should be done:
I believe the victor in whatever Championship match it happens to be, should be deemed ready to compete just like what happens before most pre-determined WWE matches. If the competitor has had a pre match beat down and is unable to compete...the match doesn't happen simple. It also eliminates the idea of someone like Jeff Hardy being a 3 time World Champion because he fought in one match valiantly only to lose it 2 minutes later.
That way it can actually showcase people like Daniel Bryan legitamately winning the Big One not just jumping in the ring and pinning someone who is unconcious. I mean seriously does that even sound right?
If they really want to make the cashing in concept a surprise factor, let the competitor choose the gimmick of the match whether it be Hell In The Cell, Ladder match etc.
I've never had any qualms about the ones that have won it, I think all that have cashed in and won it have all been deserving of holding the belt or even deserving the chance to have their chance to prove what they got...but FIRSTLY: Scripted obviously, but hitting a finishing move on a already beaten half unconcious opponent.....not very credible.
SECONDLY: The list of 3-5 Minute champions that it's slowly producing. Meaning the guys like Jeff Hardy & Big Show who win it only to lose it 2 minutes later to the cashee. Not only does that devalue the meaning of the Championship itself but also if it continues it will further add up the counts of how many times a wrestler has won a championship. It reminds me of the Hardcore Title Concept.
What should be done:
I believe the victor in whatever Championship match it happens to be, should be deemed ready to compete just like what happens before most pre-determined WWE matches. If the competitor has had a pre match beat down and is unable to compete...the match doesn't happen simple. It also eliminates the idea of someone like Jeff Hardy being a 3 time World Champion because he fought in one match valiantly only to lose it 2 minutes later.
That way it can actually showcase people like Daniel Bryan legitamately winning the Big One not just jumping in the ring and pinning someone who is unconcious. I mean seriously does that even sound right?
If they really want to make the cashing in concept a surprise factor, let the competitor choose the gimmick of the match whether it be Hell In The Cell, Ladder match etc.
FlexAmerican Dynamite
WZCW WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION
I think a way to reinvent it is to make it that instead of any point or anytime cash in, make it more like you have to set up your world title match a week before.
Money in the Bank is fine, but you bring up a nice proposition. I think a good idea will be if they make more of the winners make a cash in date like RVD did, and what Bryan said he was going to do @WM. That'll take away the garentee new World Champion factor, and bring back some prestigue to the World Championships.
I know WWE is in a transition period, and they're looking to make new monumental superstars like Steve Austin and The Rock, but they're rushing putting the strap on too many people. Too much of the roster is a former World Champion. I remember back then only a few held the World Title. It's still a fun gimmick.
I know WWE is in a transition period, and they're looking to make new monumental superstars like Steve Austin and The Rock, but they're rushing putting the strap on too many people. Too much of the roster is a former World Champion. I remember back then only a few held the World Title. It's still a fun gimmick.
MrMojoRisin
Championship Contender
The MITB reminds me of a kid telling a good joke.
When he first tells it, the joke is funny. But being a kid, he hasn't learned self control, and starts telling the same joke to everyone in the room. By the time you've heard the joke half a dozen times, it's not that funny anymore.
MITB is a great concept. Win this brutal fight, and you get a shot at the World title anytime in the next year. Even the surprise that it can be cashed in when the champ's hurt and not ready is fine too.
But unfortunately like the kid with the one good joke, WWE creative keeps pushing the one idea down our throats, without even the pretense of changing it up.
You know that whenever someone wins the briefcase, they're going to hold it until the perfect storm happens with the champ being completely incapacitated in the middle of the ring. It doesn't even matter if the bell rings and the champ turns out not to be as hurt as first thought. The MITB winner will just grab his briefcase, hightail it, and keep waiting for his perfect storm.
They've used this idea for MITB so much, that it's been completely ruined. Even when they try teasing that they won't do it again (Daniel Bryan this year), they cop out and just do it anyways. It doesn't even matter if the MITB winner is a face or a heel. They're going to do the same thing... which is really odd, because the MITB finish is the least honorable finish they could use, and how much sense does it make to cheer anyone who uses it?
They can fix it though. Just start by setting some parameters.
- once the briefcase is handed to the ref, it's been used. Even before the bell has rung. If the champ turns out not to be completely incapacitated, then too bad.
- you can only hand the briefcase to a referee that is already in the ring... you cannot bring your own in. This way, if the champ is beat down during an interview segment, you cannot take immediate advantage (although you could make your announcement that you're cashing that night after the beat down - nice way to have a strong heel cash in)
- if you announce that you're cashing in on a specific night (ala RVD), then you get a bonus MITB rematch option should you fail. Kayfabe incentive to have someone use a different finish. You could even set it up so your initial challenge is just you and a partner who runs in beating the champ within an inch of his life... then immediately cashing in the MITB rematch you'd earned. Fresh way for a sneaky heel to get the win while picking up a ton of heat in the process.
- conversely when you announce your intentions, that's it... as in Daniel Bryan stated that he was going to cash in at WM against the champ. Boom, that match is now booked. No stating one thing and then pulling a swerve.
There's obviously many other ways they could breathe some fresh air into the concept, but the point is, that the concept does need fresh air.
When he first tells it, the joke is funny. But being a kid, he hasn't learned self control, and starts telling the same joke to everyone in the room. By the time you've heard the joke half a dozen times, it's not that funny anymore.
MITB is a great concept. Win this brutal fight, and you get a shot at the World title anytime in the next year. Even the surprise that it can be cashed in when the champ's hurt and not ready is fine too.
But unfortunately like the kid with the one good joke, WWE creative keeps pushing the one idea down our throats, without even the pretense of changing it up.
You know that whenever someone wins the briefcase, they're going to hold it until the perfect storm happens with the champ being completely incapacitated in the middle of the ring. It doesn't even matter if the bell rings and the champ turns out not to be as hurt as first thought. The MITB winner will just grab his briefcase, hightail it, and keep waiting for his perfect storm.
They've used this idea for MITB so much, that it's been completely ruined. Even when they try teasing that they won't do it again (Daniel Bryan this year), they cop out and just do it anyways. It doesn't even matter if the MITB winner is a face or a heel. They're going to do the same thing... which is really odd, because the MITB finish is the least honorable finish they could use, and how much sense does it make to cheer anyone who uses it?
They can fix it though. Just start by setting some parameters.
- once the briefcase is handed to the ref, it's been used. Even before the bell has rung. If the champ turns out not to be completely incapacitated, then too bad.
- you can only hand the briefcase to a referee that is already in the ring... you cannot bring your own in. This way, if the champ is beat down during an interview segment, you cannot take immediate advantage (although you could make your announcement that you're cashing that night after the beat down - nice way to have a strong heel cash in)
- if you announce that you're cashing in on a specific night (ala RVD), then you get a bonus MITB rematch option should you fail. Kayfabe incentive to have someone use a different finish. You could even set it up so your initial challenge is just you and a partner who runs in beating the champ within an inch of his life... then immediately cashing in the MITB rematch you'd earned. Fresh way for a sneaky heel to get the win while picking up a ton of heat in the process.
- conversely when you announce your intentions, that's it... as in Daniel Bryan stated that he was going to cash in at WM against the champ. Boom, that match is now booked. No stating one thing and then pulling a swerve.
There's obviously many other ways they could breathe some fresh air into the concept, but the point is, that the concept does need fresh air.
Paralyzer Z
Fuck honor
I for one see no problem with the concept so far:
The matches themselves are always great, I will agree with you on that.
The guys have usually already been involved in a grueling match prior to the cash in, they most likely have already taken a finisher in the match that precedes the cash. Hitting a finisher is the only logical thing to do in that situation and since the booking for the cash-in contains common sense, you have to hit a finisher. The credibility of the superstar is not affected since the winner used common sense, and the looser was already tired.
I honestly believe that the length of a title reign in no way determines the value of the belt. As long as the way you lost it makes sense (Pinfall, Submission, taken out before match) a reign is a reign no matter how long or short. The value of the all WWE championship is determined within the prestige and place among the card. Just because someone has a short duration with the belt doesn't devalue it at all. You would have to have the title change hands 6 times in one night to devalue it.
Sorry but the MITB concept does it job fine and shouldn't be changed. A different type of cash in or loss would freshen things up, but as long as a new main eventer (or even temporary one) is the output in the end, mission accomplished. As far a shock factor goes I recall the crowd going wild every time there is a surprise cash in, so it hasn't worn off.
The matches themselves are always great, I will agree with you on that.
The guys have usually already been involved in a grueling match prior to the cash in, they most likely have already taken a finisher in the match that precedes the cash. Hitting a finisher is the only logical thing to do in that situation and since the booking for the cash-in contains common sense, you have to hit a finisher. The credibility of the superstar is not affected since the winner used common sense, and the looser was already tired.
I honestly believe that the length of a title reign in no way determines the value of the belt. As long as the way you lost it makes sense (Pinfall, Submission, taken out before match) a reign is a reign no matter how long or short. The value of the all WWE championship is determined within the prestige and place among the card. Just because someone has a short duration with the belt doesn't devalue it at all. You would have to have the title change hands 6 times in one night to devalue it.
Sorry but the MITB concept does it job fine and shouldn't be changed. A different type of cash in or loss would freshen things up, but as long as a new main eventer (or even temporary one) is the output in the end, mission accomplished. As far a shock factor goes I recall the crowd going wild every time there is a surprise cash in, so it hasn't worn off.
ITALIAN NYC
Getting Noticed By Management
Id scrap the whole idea of it completely. We already have the rumble for someone to get a title shot. I dont really like the idea of not completely earning a title shot in general.
In essence, someone can be a glorified jobber for months at a time, then randomly become the champion of the world. The idea to me makes the title look weak.
You can also say the same about the rumble, but at least in the rumble you know its going to be at mania and it will be a normal match, not some cheap cash in like money in the bank.
In essence, someone can be a glorified jobber for months at a time, then randomly become the champion of the world. The idea to me makes the title look weak.
You can also say the same about the rumble, but at least in the rumble you know its going to be at mania and it will be a normal match, not some cheap cash in like money in the bank.
Rampage Bentley
Saving WZ one post at a time.
I think holding the briefcase should reflect the character who holds it.
A guy like Daniel Bryan should NEVER cash it in like he did, unless they plan on turning him. Only the sneaky underhanded heel types should be cashing it in against beaten opponents.
They also need to stop giving it exclusively to up and comers. It would do wonders for the briefcase if established former champions like Randy Orton, Undertaker, or Cena won the briefcase every now and then.
The problem with the briefcase is that originally it was unpredictable, but it's unpredictability has become predictable.
The next MitB winner needs to walk up to a fresh champion and hand the ref his briefcase.
A guy like Daniel Bryan should NEVER cash it in like he did, unless they plan on turning him. Only the sneaky underhanded heel types should be cashing it in against beaten opponents.
They also need to stop giving it exclusively to up and comers. It would do wonders for the briefcase if established former champions like Randy Orton, Undertaker, or Cena won the briefcase every now and then.
The problem with the briefcase is that originally it was unpredictable, but it's unpredictability has become predictable.
The next MitB winner needs to walk up to a fresh champion and hand the ref his briefcase.
I agree with your point about the short title reigns. It might not necessarily decrease the value of the title itself, but I think it does make the wrestler who loses the title via the cash-in look bad, especially if it's someone like Jeff Hardy who hasn't necessarily had strong title reigns in the past.
That being said though, I think the positive responses that the surprise cash-ins get outweigh the negatives of the quick title changes. If every cash-in were planned beforehand, a lot of the appeal of the gimmick is lost in my opinion. The whole point of going through hell to get the briefcase is to earn the right to cash in anywhere and anytime you want.
I think the best thing they can do is just be careful who the cash-ins are going against. That will help retain the excitement and cut down on any possible predictability. I'm not one of those people who always claims to know whats going to happen in wrestling, but Jeff losing the title that way was one of the few things I could see coming. (I also must admit to being a Jeff Hardy fan. I just can't help it, ok? He's a charismatic enigma!!! I just want to root for him!!! lol)
But overall, I don't think the MitB concept really needs to be changed. I think just being careful with whom the cash-ins are going against is enough.
Remember, the inevitable first unsuccessful cash-in will also breathe some intrigue into the gimmick, whenever that happens to come along.
That being said though, I think the positive responses that the surprise cash-ins get outweigh the negatives of the quick title changes. If every cash-in were planned beforehand, a lot of the appeal of the gimmick is lost in my opinion. The whole point of going through hell to get the briefcase is to earn the right to cash in anywhere and anytime you want.
I think the best thing they can do is just be careful who the cash-ins are going against. That will help retain the excitement and cut down on any possible predictability. I'm not one of those people who always claims to know whats going to happen in wrestling, but Jeff losing the title that way was one of the few things I could see coming. (I also must admit to being a Jeff Hardy fan. I just can't help it, ok? He's a charismatic enigma!!! I just want to root for him!!! lol)
But overall, I don't think the MitB concept really needs to be changed. I think just being careful with whom the cash-ins are going against is enough.
Remember, the inevitable first unsuccessful cash-in will also breathe some intrigue into the gimmick, whenever that happens to come along.
LegendKiller716
I Had Sex With The
Here is what I would change about Money In The Bank.
1.) I think the PPV should be a one night tournament. Have 6 matches, they don't all need to be singles matches, and then have the six winners in the MITB match.
2.) Only make it a six man match. I think that the 8 man matches are over crowded and I like the 6 man format better.
3.) Only one winner. It's much more predictable when the briefcase holder can cash in on either brands champion.
4.) Be consistent. In the past they wouldn't let people cash in unless the champ could stand up. Big Show wasn't even conscious. I like the rule that they have to be able stand up.
5.) Make a rule where the champ has to also sign the contract that's in the briefcase. I've never been bind to a contract I didn't sign lol.
1.) I think the PPV should be a one night tournament. Have 6 matches, they don't all need to be singles matches, and then have the six winners in the MITB match.
2.) Only make it a six man match. I think that the 8 man matches are over crowded and I like the 6 man format better.
3.) Only one winner. It's much more predictable when the briefcase holder can cash in on either brands champion.
4.) Be consistent. In the past they wouldn't let people cash in unless the champ could stand up. Big Show wasn't even conscious. I like the rule that they have to be able stand up.
5.) Make a rule where the champ has to also sign the contract that's in the briefcase. I've never been bind to a contract I didn't sign lol.
I wouldn't say there is anything wrong with the MiTB concept, but I do think that WWE needs to re-introduce a suprise element by having someone cash in and lose. That will take away the expectation of a guaranteed title reign that we currently have when someone wins MiTB and willl also give a massive boost to the champion that defeats someone cashing in
VinnieSunshine
The lord of darkness
Ill quote the same thing I said in another MITB thread about how it has become backwards booking...
If nothing else WWE needs to just get rid of it altogether. Go back to CREATING champions from the ground up. They've done this with Ziggler well WITHOUT giving him the MITB. I hope he does not get it this year cause Ill be disappointed.
WWE needs new ways of doing things. They need to figure out a way to raise a champion without giving them the easy title win. Bryan took the heel way in cashing it in. I would've liked it better if Henry hit him with a chair and then laid Big Show on him. It would've made for a better story and still given Henry something to while he recovers from his injury. Imagine...Show gets pissed at Byran for trying to cash in on him (Show can still turn heel), Bryan is pissed at Henry for making him lose the chance (Bryan still face), and Henry can sit back and watch them destroy each other until he can come back.
If nothing else WWE needs to just get rid of it altogether. Go back to CREATING champions from the ground up. They've done this with Ziggler well WITHOUT giving him the MITB. I hope he does not get it this year cause Ill be disappointed.
WWE needs new ways of doing things. They need to figure out a way to raise a champion without giving them the easy title win. Bryan took the heel way in cashing it in. I would've liked it better if Henry hit him with a chair and then laid Big Show on him. It would've made for a better story and still given Henry something to while he recovers from his injury. Imagine...Show gets pissed at Byran for trying to cash in on him (Show can still turn heel), Bryan is pissed at Henry for making him lose the chance (Bryan still face), and Henry can sit back and watch them destroy each other until he can come back.
I love it where people say that MITB should not be changed. We all know that WWE is pre-determined, we all know it's aimed towards kiddys these days but theres a reason the UFC audience views WWE as a joke when you have someone that is unconcious and just jumps in and wins the World Heavyweight Championship?
Going through hell in ONE MATCH? Bullshit. Going through hell is more than one gimmick match for christ sakes. This is ONE of the reason why people fail to take Alberto Del Rio seriously.
Well if having 3-5 minute title reigns does not devalue the Championship then shit me. We may aswell have David Arquette come in for a guest appearance again or have Shaq come in and win the World Heavyweight Champion if we are going to play hot potatoe with one of the richest prizes in the game.
As much as I love the surprise element of it all, the message it sends across is bullshit. So todays lesson kiddys, is if the competitor is down & out and you want to make yourself seem like you earned your hardthought victory...wait till the guy is laid out and unable to fully defend himself. RIGHT.
Going through hell in ONE MATCH? Bullshit. Going through hell is more than one gimmick match for christ sakes. This is ONE of the reason why people fail to take Alberto Del Rio seriously.
Well if having 3-5 minute title reigns does not devalue the Championship then shit me. We may aswell have David Arquette come in for a guest appearance again or have Shaq come in and win the World Heavyweight Champion if we are going to play hot potatoe with one of the richest prizes in the game.
As much as I love the surprise element of it all, the message it sends across is bullshit. So todays lesson kiddys, is if the competitor is down & out and you want to make yourself seem like you earned your hardthought victory...wait till the guy is laid out and unable to fully defend himself. RIGHT.
This makes absolutely no sense. Why change something that there is nothing wrong with in the first place? The current format of MITB is perfectly fine. The qualification matches, the red and blue briefcases, even the cash in's other than one or two that could have been done differently. Secondly, the Million Dollar Belt is a championship. Not a ticket to a world title match. I completely disagree with the opening post. They should keep the briefcase format because it makes more sense. Why win a title if that title's only purpose was to get you a world title match? The briefcases help make the heels look more opportunistic and the faces more determined to break into the main event. I say keep MITB the way it is.
One to Remember
Championship Contender
OP created a backlash against himself when he insert the M$ championhip..he took the phrase "money in the bank" literally and that's y he's gettin ragged on.
I also find it odd that my deleted topic of a similar name had poll questions worded the exact same way as urs lol
I also find it odd that my deleted topic of a similar name had poll questions worded the exact same way as urs lol
King Patrick Star
K. O. T. R. 2007 - Team Undisputed
I think the problem here, in regards to the Money In The Bank briefcase, is the fans short term / long term memory. In less than a year, and I have been guilty of feeling this way too once or thrice, we tend to forget how the Mr. MITBs got the briefcase in the first place. Each Mr. MITB defeated multiple SuperStars (6 in 2005 and 2006, 7 in 2008, 10 at the 2010 WM, and 8 for all the other years / PPVs) to earn their World Title shot at a time and place of their choosing. Realistically, if I somehow defeated 5 to 9 other SuperStars for a Case that holds a contract at a World Title shot, you can bet your @$$, Im taking the shortest possible route to the Championship, especially after going through hell to be in that spot. I dont thin the cash-ins hurt the Brand in any way, but adds a storyline twist to whatever is going on at the given time.
I dont think it failed to jump start anyones career, because every time I hear the announcers refer to a MITB winner as a former World Champion (Swagger, Miz, Alberto Del Rio, etc.) I think, mission accomplished. Im not exactly sure what you mean by creating mere disruptions in Championship lineage.
If anything, I think WrestleMania should have an Inter-Brand MITB match where the winner can challenge either Champion of his choosing and also have the MITB PPV to feature a Raw MITB match exclusively for the WWE Title and a Smackdown MITB match exclusively for the World Title. I was hoping for Jack Swagger not to case in until after the Miz and Kane won their respective cases, but oh well.
I dont think it failed to jump start anyones career, because every time I hear the announcers refer to a MITB winner as a former World Champion (Swagger, Miz, Alberto Del Rio, etc.) I think, mission accomplished. Im not exactly sure what you mean by creating mere disruptions in Championship lineage.
If anything, I think WrestleMania should have an Inter-Brand MITB match where the winner can challenge either Champion of his choosing and also have the MITB PPV to feature a Raw MITB match exclusively for the WWE Title and a Smackdown MITB match exclusively for the World Title. I was hoping for Jack Swagger not to case in until after the Miz and Kane won their respective cases, but oh well.
