Money in The Bank and Royal Rumble vs. Bound for Glory Series and X-Division cash in | WrestleZone Forums

Money in The Bank and Royal Rumble vs. Bound for Glory Series and X-Division cash in

oldschool123

Pre-Show Stalwart
WWE and TNA each have two routes to getting a guaranteed title shot. Which combination do you prefer?

I think I will have to go with Money in The Bank and Royal Rumble primarily because they are my two favorite matches to watch.

I also enjoy the concept behind the X-Division title cash in except I would tweak it a bit. Instead of just whoever happens to be X-Division champion when Destination X comes around getting a title shot I would have it be that you have the option once you have defended the belt successfully 10 times via pinfall or submission(or ultimate x).

The Bound for Glory Series is just too long and drawn out, it lacks excitement.
 
Hmm well I enjoy both RR and MITB matches. I'm not really keen on the cashing in the briefcase at any time as it can result in that briefcase holder looking very weak as champion. Royal Rumble winner depends on the scenario, you can start at 1 and win it and look amazing or come in at 30 and win it flukily (is that a word? It is now! :lmao:) making the match before kind of redundant.

Now with TNA's two concepts, BFG Series is only in its 3rd year and the D-X cash in 2 years. So we haven't seen as much from them but at the moment I would actually prefer these two. BFG Series makes almost everybody in it look good and a showcase of the best talent going against oneanother as well as the points system for different outcomes. I feel much more thought goes into this and also you have so many options and has more potential to be unpredictable.

Option C I also really like since it makes the X-Division look better and puts them on more of an even playing field to the main event. The only problem I have with it is guys wanting to win the X-Division title specifically so they can cash it in. Sabin said he would do this as soon as he returned from the injury, Jesse Sorenson in a promo also said he would do it. What I mean to say is wrestlers should never say this on the mic, it should always be more of a dilemma for them in kayfabe, so it keeps the suspense of "will they, won't they".

So I prefer TNA's. but it's probably because they're fresher concepts, ask me again in a few years!
 
WWE has the better automatic title matches. Money in The Bank is a much more intersting thing than either of TNA's automatic title matches. The suspense on when where and how are something that is unquestionably the best drama in wrestling.

I will admit that the Bound For Glory Series tournament is something that is intersting in that it is a tournament that is prolonged and interesting however I've never liked the end format of it as the entire tournament is ultimately decided in 3 matches.

As for The Royal Rumble this PPV is constantly one of my favorites and I think it surpasses TNA as well. It's a classic and whilst cashing in a title is cool to win a new one I think that in general WWE just does this concept better.
 
I don't really think this is a contest. WWE wins this comfortably. The Royal Rumble is my favourite night of the wrestling calendar. Some years the winner is easy to envisage but usually it is unpredictable, exciting and just pure entertainment. There is nothing that compares in wrestling. From dramatic returns (Cena '08) to a superstar breaking through the ceiling (Batista '05) the Royal Rumble just delivers everything.

The Money In the Bank is another concept I love. The match itself is like the Royal Rumble, unpredictable and incredibly enthralling. For the majority of MITB matches the winner has been someone who has used it to break through to the main-event. Never mind there is the cash-in itself which usually comes as a shock.

The Bound For Glory series has never won me over. It takes far too long and some of the matches don't belong in, what is on paper, a good concept. It could be something very good and unique but it just hasn't delivered for me.

Staying with TNA, the Feast or Fired idea was something I actually liked. The match was different and entertaining. Moreover, similar to MITB, there is the unpredictability over the outcome and who will get the world title shot.

I have mentioned "unpredictability" several times. That is something that I crave as a wrestling fan. Both WWE and TNA can be very easy to predict and that means my interest levels drop. Hence, why moments like the cashing in of a MITB briefcase or the 08' Royal Rumble are stand-out moments.
 
oldschool123 said:
WWE and TNA each have two routes to getting a guaranteed title shot. Which combination do you prefer?

I think I will have to go with Money in The Bank and Royal Rumble primarily because they are my two favorite matches to watch.

I also enjoy the concept behind the X-Division title cash in except I would tweak it a bit. Instead of just whoever happens to be X-Division champion when Destination X comes around getting a title shot I would have it be that you have the option once you have defended the belt successfully 10 times via pinfall or submission(or ultimate x).

The Bound for Glory Series is just too long and drawn out, it lacks excitement.

For me it has to be tna's not to aay I don't like wwes way but I find tna to be more prestigious.

bound for glory you jave to firstly gain enough points to qualify for a top 4 place then win a semi final amd a final. this means you could show a peraon to dominate the entire series. or you could have some person that only just scrapes through then wins despite the odds basically.

x division cash in. your giving up a title for a shot at a bigger title. what could be bigger.



Posted from Wrestlezone.com App for Android
 
Royal Rumble
I love the idea of the Royal Rumble winner getting a shot at the WWE / World Championship at WrestleMania. The only drawback, as someone mentioned, is that someone can get lucky and draw number 30 and win, though I myself don’t see that being a huge issue. The only thing I would change is that the Royal Rumble winner’s WrestleMania match should go on last at WrestleMania.

Money In The Bank
I love the idea of the Money In The Bank winner getting a shot at the WWE / World Championship at any time, at any place, against anyone they want. Winning the Money In The Bank briefcase is challenging enough to warrant such an advantage. Sometimes, by the time the winner cashes in, the fans tend to forget how hard it is to go against 4-9 other participants and climb the ladder to retrieve the case. It does come off as a cheap victory, but it’s really not when you look at the big picture.

Bound For Glory Series
I love the idea of the Bound For Glory Series winner getting a shot at the TNA Championship at Bound For Glory. I was one of the few that thought that there should be a WrestleMania Series of sorts. The only thing I don’t like is the points system. It’s damn near annoying to keep track of, if you keep track of it. Instead of what they have, I would have rather gone with 4 points for a submission victory (Figure 4, WOOOO!!), 3 points for a pinfall victory (1-2-3, get it??), 2 points for a count-out victory (cause you didn’t really win, the other Star lost), 1 point for DQ victory (cause the other Star lost on purpose), 0 points for a Draw (cause no one won), and no minus points and no special matches, just one-on-one matches. I also would have the bound For Glory series start right after Bound For Glory and I wouldn’t limit the number of participants. It would just be a yearlong (or 11 months) win / loss stat tracker that culminates at Bound For Glory.

X-Division Champion’s Option C
I love the idea of the X-Division Champion trading in his X-Division Championship Title for a shot at the TNA Championship. Option A was to cash it in. Option B was not to cash it in. Option C was to cash it in at Destination X. Well, the only thing I didn’t like about it was Option C, that it had to be at Destination X. I think TNA should have just treated it like the Money In The Bank cases and stuck with Option A. The element of surprise is then there and Zema Ion would have been TNA Champion by now. HAHA!!

I really can’t pick between to the two companies two choices. I love them all, but I would tweak the TNA’s two just a little bit. Oh, so I guess, by saying that, I pick WWE’s.

Oh, and I really loved Feast Or Fired!!
 
I think they are all great ideas. My least favorite is probably Money in the Bank, not because of the matches though. Just because the winner looks weak when he ultimately cashes his contract in on a vulnerable champion.

The Bound for Glory Series is awesome, this always put out good and unique matches. Also puts an importance on the matches and winning which should be the focus. It also ensures that the next possible champion EARNED his way to the top. Yes, the ending could use some tweaking. I also think during the Series is a great time for the X-Divison cash in, since you need a World Title challenger not in the Series. It gives a smaller guy the chance to prove they can succeed when the company heads and maybe some fans don't always think so, at least this gives them A CHANCE.

And the Royal Rumble is just of course amazing, 30 men.. one match, its a spectacle. A bit unfair though based on when you enter can make a huge difference.

Overall the BFG Series is probably the most competitively legit way of doing things. But MITB and the Royal Rumble are just too entertaining to pass up, and the X-Divison cash in is just a great opportunity that there needs to be more of for wrestlers like that.
 
I prefer Money In the Bank and the Royal Rumble personally. There is so much nostalgia and history with the Rumble. Money In the Bank, while predictable these days, is a concept that continually fascinates me. I look forward to both every single year. Both are events I highly anticipate no matter what. Neither are going anywhere anytime soon and will only continue to increase the amount of history associated with the events. Seeing someone not be opportunistic more often with the briefcase couldn't hurt though, and the same goes for the winner of the Rumble getting to close Wrestlemania more often.

TNA's two routes have not been around as long but when given a few years they will both grow in prestige and importance. I give them a ton of credit for trying to come up with something new. That's not always easy, let alone concepts that work. The X Division cash-in at Destination X has made both that particular show as well as the X Division Championship more important. The Bound For Glory Series creates more hype for the biggest show of the year and generates a ton of good matches along the way. I'm a fan of both, but just happen to prefer WWE's routes a little more.
 
I've always loved the idea of the Royal Rumble and Money In The Bank. More often than not though, the Rumble is used to solidify people that are already near the top and push them even further, such as John Cena's most recent win or to reestablish fallen stars. The same goes for the RAW MITB, it's used to push people that have already achieved a fair amount in their time in the business. Whereas the Smackdown MITB is used to create new stars, such as Daniel Bryan, Dolph Ziggler and hopefully soon, Damien Sandow. While the other 2 methods can be used to push fresher talent, such as Batista's rumble win in 2005, I prefer the Smackdown MITB because it's almost guaranteed that a fresh face will win the briefcase.

As for TNA, I quite like the idea of the BFG series, very much like a league to see the best superstars competing on a weekly basis. The problem is, it goes on for too long. TNA need to find a way to shorten the length of the series, otherwise it just gets boring. Shortening the league to 8 superstars would be an OK start.

And the X-Division cash-in. Am I the only person that REALLY doesn't like this? It pretty much devalues the belt as a stepping stone to the title. At least with MITB it's exciting to see the unexpected cash-in and it's not a belt that is defended regularly. I'd have no problem with it if was something that didn't need to be defended (like Feast or Fired), but it's just going to encourage people to constantly cash it in whenever they win it. It's just silly.
 
All of the concepts have their positives and negatives just like anything else does.

The Royal Rumble has become part of WWE tradition. As it pertains to a gimmick of a wrestler earning a guaranteed championship match, it's really WWE's first one outside of a #1 contender's match or a tournament. As the Royal Rumble only happens one night a year, that gives it a novelty that's managed to keep it fresh overall. At the same time, it does seem kind of stale, which is something that plagues all traditions at some point. Even though you still enjoy it, there's part of you that would like to see something different, just to shake things up a little.

As for Money in the Bank, it's got an element of unpredictability about it and that's extremely rare in modern pro wrestling. After all, with the internet, it's common knowledge for dirtsheets to release information on spoilers for upcoming TV programs, matches being planned for upcoming ppvs, stories on who is getting pushed to a title run, etc. With MITB, the winner can cash in anytime and anywhere. At the same time, the drawback for MITB has become that some people have gotten tired of the opportunistic cash ins and the fact that there are two separate MITB briefcases. When there was only one case, that meant that both the WWE or World Championships were in potential jeopardy; so the briefcase holder could go after either one of them at a moment's notice. At the same time, however, the MITB matches are probably the most popular gimmick matches in wrestling. They're consistently entertaining and very physical matches that people get excited about.

For the BFG Series, it offers something that we don't see very often in pro wrestling: a tournament that's ultimately booked in a way that gives it a lasting impact. Even on rare occasions where either WWE or TNA hosts some sort of tournament, it doesn't come off as a big deal. Sure there are some entertaining matches but, at the end of the day, the tournament doesn't make any sort of significant mark on the company landscape. The BFG Series is able to do that. A possible downside to the BFG Series is that it lasts for so many months and a lot of matches don't really feel like they're all that meaningful. Maybe if they added something where those two or three with the lowest level of points at the end of each month is eliminated, it might add some urgency to those matches and help keep the tournament from dragging. Another possible downside is that the excitement can depend on the make up of the competitors. This year's line up, for instance, doesn't come off nearly as strong as last year's. Jay Bradley, Hernandez, Kazarian and Joseph Park have no hopes of winning it and I can't help but wonder why they're even part of it in the first place.. Mr. Anderson hasn't been relevant in more than 2 years and his career hasn't recovered from the two mediocre runs he had with the title; so I don't think anyone is in a hurry to see a third. Samoa Joe hasn't been all that relevant for much longer, having spent most of the past 4 years or so floating around in limbo. Magnus, while very talented with a lot of upside in my opinion, doesn't have the credibility at this point to be viewed as a genuinely viable challenger for the top title at TNA's top show. Daniels has been an X Division & tag team scene mainstay in TNA since its inception and has an outside chance, though probably not a big one. So that leaves Jeff Hardy, AJ Styles, Bobby Roode and Austin Aries as really the only genuinely viable competitors. Don't get me wrong as I'm not saying that there aren't some good matches going on, which is always nice to watch in & of itself.

As it pertains to the "Option C" gimmick, I can't say that it does much of anything for me as a whole. It worked with Austin Aries great last year because TNA had built him up as a star in the X Division. Even though he was wrestling, for the most part, against the same handful of wrestlers time & time again, his charisma & overall ability was enough to shine through and get people to notice him. Since dropping the title, it's gone back to being mediocre and generally meaningless until it gets around the time for Destination X. Chris Sabin is a talented wrestler but TNA hasn't put a tenth of the effort into him that they did with Aries. He wasn't pushed as a strong champion the way Aries was and he hasn't been booked strong as TNA WHC, which is why I think he drops it tonight. The format of the X Division is that TNA puts on random triple threat matches that features forgettable, interchangeable & replaceable cruiserweights that attempt to cramp 15 minutes worth of wrestling into 4 or 5 minute matches. There are no feuds or character developments for the X Division wrestlers and the matches are generally forgotten about as soon as they're over. Option C is worthless when the X Division is worthless.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top