There are a large number of reasons as to why the Money In The Bank Ladder Match should remain it's own PPV attraction as opposed to being a 'Mania deal. I am firmly saying NO to the idea. It does more harm than good in the long run and it degenerates into being the match used to clutter (in lazy manner too) whoever can't fit into a storyline heading into the biggest show of the year.
- Money In The Bank has proven to be a draw in itself. With so many B-level PPV's, placing the match on 'Mania's card takes away from the mystique of the annual MITB PPV or it can outright kill it. With that in mind, it makes way for more PPV's of the caliber of Venegeance or Capitol Punishment. Utter filler.
- At Wrestlemania, the spotlight is on the main matches. MITB is not one of the main matches at Wrestlemania. It's the opening match used to hype the crowd. What makes the winner of that match mean more? Opening Wrestlemania in a match designated purely as a spotfest? Or winning one of the main events of a PPV designated to highlight future stars A.K.A. June's Money In The Bank PPV? MITB is in essence the updated version of the King Of The Ring. The winner is in line for a push. Something that becomes a greater highlight when the match is the central theme of the PPV.
- 2 winners are better than one. Regardless of how much of a joke the brand extension is, with 2 World titles, 2 shows and 2 rosters, it's a positive move to offer 2 guys a push. Last year we got Kane and Miz. Kane cashed in immediately to finally get his reward after so many years of being so loyal while Miz continued to grow until his time came. This year, we had Del Rio and Daniel Bryan. Del Rio's time of glory came and went thanks to MITB and we are now seeing Bryan use his push. The ratio of new guys entering the main event and giving it new life is obviously greater with 2 winners.
- The Midcard of Wrestlemania means more without MITB around. Last year, the likes of Cody Rhodes, The Corre, Dolph Ziggler and John Morrison got built storylines heading into their matches at the event. While their matches for the most part weren't much to talk about, Cody Rhodes stands out from the list. The current reigning Intercontinental Champion would be stripped of the chance to defend the rebranded belt and have a major feud like last year heading to the event because he would most likely be added to MITB to fill it out. Yeah, he might be the potential winner. But what of the title he's worked so hard to build up? And for that matter what about Zack Ryder's U.S. title? Both would end up absorbed into the match out of near necessity. Since Wrestlemania X8 and the brand extension the IC title has only been defended once and the U.S.title twice. None under the same show. MITB only makes that problem worse. The two titles haven't meant as much in a long time and adding MITB to the 'Mania card would strip these two legendary pieces of hardware from being defended at the show yet again.
I'll repeat. MITB SHOULD NOT TAKE PLACE IN WRESTLEMANIA.
Killjoy, you make a lot of great points, but there are still other aspects to consider. For instance, though without a Money in the Bank last year we got to see some impressive midcard match-ups, note that they were mostly upper midcard wrestlers as opposed to guys further down on the roster like Zack Ryder. In fact, Daniel Bryan and Sheamus, who were among the more over mid-carders at the time, were still relegated to the preshow and their match cancelled in favor of a lame battle royal.
My main point is that around WrestleMania time, mid-carders sometimes get forgotten. They either get funneled into lame celebrity angles, like what happened to Dolph Ziggler and John Morrison last year, or are entirely neglected as WWE focuses more on utilizing their main eventers. It's sometimes completely derailed mid-card storylines that were developing before the Road to WrestleMania and perhaps cheats those mid-carders out of raising above their station.
I do agree with some of the points regarding the Money in the Bank match in particular, that it would perhaps ruin the selling point for the pay-per-view (which they should definitely keep) and could result in lazy plans for the cash-ins, as you could argue was the case for Jack Swagger. They didn't seem to have a good, long-term plan for him and I remember hearing he was decided as the winner on the very day of WrestleMania 26.
So perhaps a third Money in the Bank match isn't the best way to have a large multi-man match, but I do believe they should have one to give those mid-carders relevance at WrestleMania, when they'd otherwise just be neglected. They don't get more time just at the show, but usually they have qualifying matches on RAW and SmackDown!, as well as promos between the contestants, like when Matt Hardy and Christian argued over who'd win going into WrestleMania 26.
Even if it takes some time away from other talents, they need some sort of mutli-man match so viewers don't forget about developing mid-carders. And no WWE, a preshow battle royal doesn't accomplish that. Maybe if they thought of a new gimmick match, perhaps with its own prize, or maybe something as simple as a multi-man US or Intercontinental Championship match. Say they make five wrestlers relevant to the US Championship scene by the time of WrestleMania, they could then book a 10-minute Championship Scramble, benefiting at least those five wrestlers, making the US Title relevant and probably putting on a damn good match.
