MITB or Feast or Fired?

[stryfe604]

If this forum has already been made I apologize and tear it down.

But I pose a simple question. Money in the Bank or Feast or Fired which is your preference?

For me personally Feast or Fired is my choice. For the reason of how feast or fired can mix things up. I love how the audience doesn't know whats going to happen. Is the supreme underdog, small sized Rudy (movie reference) going to get the World title shot and achieve a dream? Is the monster, powerhouse of the company going to get the fired case? So many questions and great scramble match happens with it.

Don't get me wrong the spots and intensity is amazing in MITB, But it still has a sense of predictability. I love when I feel like a fan from my childhood watching wrestling before the internet, where the doings of the business was tight lipped and secretive. Where you couldn't miss a week because of it was a surprise when someone would win a title, or appear. Feast or fired brings that out in me personally, MITB doesn't.

What does everyone else think?

 

[NSL]

I'm a big fan of the Feast Or Fired match, because it covers all of the divisions, and also has the added risk of someone being "fired". It's always got an eclectic group of guys together, and the match is rarely "bad".

But, I also like MiTB. It's a neat gimmick match, with 6-8 guys all gunning for a singular goal, and there is only 1 winner. What can be wrong with that?

 

[Dagger Dias]

But I pose a simple question. Money in the Bank or Feast or Fired which is your preference?

I like them both, but I like Money in the Bank more. Feast or Fired provides so many different possible outcomes due to there being multiple winners (although the grabber of the "fired" case can't really be called that). However, I think Money in the Bank has had a far bigger influence because everyone who has won it has gone on to become a world champion (Kennedy doesn't count.) and then there is also the fact of how the MITB match is anticipated every single year because of how much potential it has to entertain, and that is why I voted for it.

 

[JJ "the Devil's Advocate"]

Money in the Bank - without a doubt! every year people say MitB is a Match of the Year candidate, where as NO ONE talks about feast or fired, and MITB means a lot more,

ie: Punk's cash-in vs hernades's (he won the FoF last year) cash-in,

 

[Theo Mays]

I went with the MITB. Mainly because I enjoy it more than FoF. The MITB is always a great match and it is for A WORLD TITLE MATCH. The FoF is for each division and a firing slip. Both are good, but I'll take the MITB any day of the week.

 

[Blade]

I don't dislike Feast of Fired. The match is usually a little bit of a clusterfuck, but it's an entertaining one. But the thing is, the whole point of feast or fired is to supposedly "shake things up". But not once have I ever seen a wrestler holding a feast or fired case who has shaken things up.

From what I can remember, there has never been a world title win from a Feast or Fired case. In fact, Hernandez's attempt was pathetic. The only FoF case cash in that I remembered was one of the tag team ones.... Eh.. I think it was Lethal Consequences cashing it in out of nowhere to steal a win only to be beaten a week later or something? Either way, none of the cash ins were memorable.

Money In the Bank has always been memorable. Edge's cash in's, which were a huge swerve at the time? RVD vs Cena in front of the rabid ECW fans? CM Punk giving Edge a taste of his own medicine and, a year later, his subsequent heel turn? They've all been awesome moments. And I always enjoy the MitB matches, they've got genuine mark out moments. When your favourite wrestler is on the ladder, reaching for the case, you can't help but shout encouragement. Plus, as we watch the match, it's like we see into the future of WWE. Which is just cool.

Money in the Bank. Every time.

 

[King Patrick Star]

I picked “No Preference”. I like them both. They are very similar to each other.

I like MITB, because of the idea of someone having a Title shot against “any” Champion at any time. The unpredictability that provides is the greatest thing next to an Undisputed Unified Champion.

I like FOF, because of the idea of having multiple winners not knowing what they won just yet. It’s like two “games” in one. I also like the idea of the X – Division and the Tag Division (hopefully this year, the Legends Division as well) being included.

So, I like the Money In The Bank match for what happens after the match and I like the Feast Or Fired match for the multiple cases.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

Ah yes, Feast or Fired. Before I go on a rant, let me explain why the WWE gets it right with Money in the Bank.

Six to eight competitors, who are all on the cusp of superstardom, battle it out in a very entertaining match where Shelton Benjamin basically kills himself every year, as well as other very entertaining spots. It's the can't miss match on the Wrestlemania card. It also propels the winner into the main event, with the exception of Kennedy who has the worst luck ever. Fact of the matter is that Kennedy, if he wasn't so injury prone, would have been a WWE Champion, considering he had all the momentum in the world.

It's been a success, and a guaranteed title win for the winner. The winner cashes in at his most opportune time... and it brings in a lot of excitement when the briefcase is cashed in.

Feast or Fired on the other hand... ho boy.

If you are one of the four people who succeeded in BEATING the other competitors, you had a 25% chance of being fired. I remember the first time they did this, Chris Harris pointed out in kayfabe, the problem with the match.

There's also a point where Daniels asked Senshi to give him the case that he won. The biggest problem here is that they didn't reveal what was in the cases. People paid money for the PPV, they should have at least had a payoff of seeing what was in the cases. But I digress. Moving on, Senshi decided to quit the company, and they had to move the case over to Daniels. I see a problem with the cases being transferable to begin with, but whatever. Daniels won the case in a match, all was seemingly right in the TNA world.

Fast-forward a week later, when they revealed what was in the cases. Daniels's case HAD THE PINK SLIP. They took the case off of the quitting Senshi so that Christopher Daniels could be (kayfabe) fired. Instead of Senshi. Who had quit.

Then there was the shenanigans between Petey and Steiner, where they traded briefcases, until Steiner finally got the Heavyweight Title shot case. Steiner then informed Angle that he wouldn't cash in the Title shot at Lockdown after the match between Angle and Joe, but at the PPV after, because he knew he could beat them at their best. This came after he had already lost to both Angle and Joe in singles matches.

TNA handled the Feast or Fired gimmick badly the first time, and they did this year as well.

Hernandez was in possession of the World Title shot, and he decided to cash in despite being greatly outnumbered by the Main Event Mafia and he brought absolutely no backup. He was given another chance to win the title since he lost his match unfairly, but his case was ultimately given to another wrestler.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

MITB outlived it's usefulness several years ago. They'll never be able to surpass the surprise cash in like they did with Edge and they'll never book a title win with the same effect they had at One Night Stand 2006.

It stopped serving it's purpose when the person who won it didn't cash it in and it's pointlessness was further highlighted when CM Punk won it two years in a row. Mostly because they had nobody better to give it to.

They don't even fill the match with a great selection of wrestlers. Look at the star power in 2005 in comparison to 2009. The Money In The Bank match was made to fit important wrestlers on the card, but if you look at this years show they only really needed to find a match for about three of the wrestlers involved.

But I'd still pick it over feast Or Fired. At least the MITB served a purpose at some point. FOF is a rip off of MITB, only instead or improving on the concept they've made it dumber. So what if BG James wins a tag title shot and picks his Dad as his partner, he lost the match. Hernandez won the world title shot last year. Instead of doing the obvious thing and cashing it in for a one-on-one title shot. He used in a match with four other guys in which his odds of winning were reduced. He was also taken out a minute into the match.

There's nothing wrong with predictability in wrestling. Having the MITB winner always claim a world title is how it should be. TNA doesn't even do that with their secondary titles.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

I'll take Feast or Fired over Money In The Bank for two reasons. Firstly, Feast or Fired gives out multiple briefcases for specific title shots. With Money In The Bank, it's pretty much a given that the winner of the briefcase will challenge for either the World Heavyweight Championship or the WWE Title. Secondly, the last time I saw the opening of the Feast or Fired briefcases, Curry Man got fired in a priceless comedy segment (I am honestly not sure if there has been one of these matches since).

So, I'll take the multiple title possibilities and the potential comedy over whom gets fired over a bland aftermath any day of the week.

 

[Phoenix]

The element I least like about the Feast or Fired match is that we don't find out who gets what title shot and who is fired on the show, to me that's just lazy booking from TNA. If they want to make the match more interesting, actually show who won what on the same night. But also, the benefits of them have been booked poorly much like how it has been for CM Punk's two runs as a benefit of the MITB briefcase. Naturally the first 3 MITBs have been great because they gave suprising winners and created World Champions (bar Kennedy), but the last two were predictable which was what took the magic of MITB away really.

I feel they both have been dragged out and I would honestly like to see TNA make more effort in how they book the FoF match so the results don't drag out and WWE needs to give MITB some guys who all deserve a push in the match rather than one or two obvious choices so the match ends with some unpredictability, but also give a honest booking of how it is used after, I mean Edge and RVD's cash ins were epic (and Punk's first in some parts)! But so far out of 5 cash ins, 4 have been after a big match and 1 has only been a pre-planned match. Both need some refreshed and good bookings, nothing lazy like what they have done of late.