Money In The Bank Needs To Be Restructured

[TheKingHustla]

Interesting responses.

1. Let's me explain again why former world champions should only be in this match.

These young guys winning Money in The Bank with no build is very bad. They are not over as a main eventer. The closest two to being over were Punk and The Miz. However, no one took The Miz as a serious champion.

No one took The Miz as a serious champion, but his character plays into that. His character fit in with the MITB better than anybody else in recent memory. And the fact that nobody considered him a serious champion, although he held it for months, just shows that if it is spun right, it could work.

Sure this put Punk in the main event but did it help the overall quality of his programs? No, really as he was booked as a weak champion.

Once again, the entire idea of MITB is based around weak contenders. Contenders who "couldn't compete" in a normal title match, that's why they cash it in after matches instead of when guys are promoing or fresh. With that aspect, he was booked correctly because MITB winners are usually portrayed as weak heels. The type of heels who take cheap wins, which the MITB is a cheap championship win.

I want these young guys to have build and win the title without a cheat trick. So far none of the young guys except for The Miz had any build to win their money in the bank ladder match.

So you want the young guys, who need an advantage some how to build up, but you want a former champ to win it? Why give someone who can compete from fresh an advantage like that, or like even you admit, is a cheap trick? It wouldn't make sense to give a real contender a cheap title win, unless he's someone built around that, i.e. christian or edge.

To DB supports, DB is not over. I've seen his promos and matches on Raw and Smackdown. No one cheers for this guy. Just like ADR, he gets no reactions.

I absolutely agree with you here. I think they could have picked a better winner, maybe Rhodes, or someone who would do something crooked, that's why I like the ADR win. He gives you that sneaky, crooked, get it how you can, type of guy. You see how at MITB he came running out there smiling when Vince told him to cash in. He doesn't care how he gets it, just that he gets it, which fits into the MITB idea perfectly.

Also, I honestly believe that this is the year that someone loses the cash in, and these two are set for a big lost like that. D-Bry and ADR could lose and nobody would be that much surprised or upset.

 

[Mercer the Ruthless]

The point of the Money in the Bank match is to put the unrealized superstar into the limelight, make a storyline and try to promote the superstar the right way. Money in the Bank has always thrived off the underdog may come out on top. Then they cash it in in a surprising fashion. Taking that away spoils it all.

 

[DeadmanFan]

I agree there should be only one MITB per year and it should be at WrestleMania- god knows this year's event could have used it.

I also think they need to get rid of the cash in on wounded champion angles. That shit worked with Edge and when CM Punk did it against Edge in 08 as revenge but every other time it's just crap. Now you know that a MITB winner will basically be guaranteed to win a world title so the title becomes even less valuable in addition to the wounded champion thing.

The rules should change so that the MITB winner can cash in the contract any time he wishes- but that he can make a title match at any event that he wishes so the champion is ready to face him, not literally any time any place. How about you know, having a guy win MITB and fight to defend it as well as his up and coming status all year long and then cash it in at WrestleMania- a good long build? What a novel concept.

 

[Dagger Dias]

That is the problem. MITB has not made anyone into a Superstar besides from Edge.

RVD only fell out of the main event due to his own personal mistakes outside the industry. CM Punk won both of his cash in's, and it helped establish him as a main eventer. Without MITB he would still be a midcarder. Kane became a worthy holder of the World Championship after his cash in, random or not. Then there's The Miz. I hate him, but can still acknowledge the fact that MITB made him a star because it got him through the glass ceiling and into the title picture. Clearly you're wrong. It helped everyone who won it, it's just that some guys either made mistakes (RVD), got suspended (Kennedy) or would rather put others over (Kane) while the rest did become bigger stars out of it. Bryan and Del Rio will be the next ones to add to that list.

 

[Arsenal 4 life]

I agree that there should only be one MITB match, and that u should be able to cash in on any championship , I DO NOT agree that the MITB hasnt put miz over as a main eventer. He's so much of a ME that he's now putting A-ry over?

 

[JP Lioneye]

I'll agree that a lot of the past MITB winners have ended up being busts, but as mentioned before that's not really due to the match itself.

Jack Swagger cashed in the Smackdown after he won the MITB, there was no build to it, the guy wasn't over enough for them to really do anything with him as the champion. His run was good for what it was, but the crowd just didn't believe him as a world champion.

Kennedy had a great storyline going with him deciding to wait until the next Wrestlemania to cash in his title shot, but thanks to an injury he had to drop the briefcase to Edge who went on the cash it in a few weeks later.

Kane winning MITB wasn't really to get him over, it was just an excuse to give him the belt for the upcoming feud with Undertaker that in turn managed to get Kane over, all be it for a short amount of time but it did it's job.

As for Punk it's a little iffy, his first run as champion after winning MITB was booked terribly. I'm not going to argue that one, but the second cash in managed to do a couple of things for Punk that ended up helping in the long run. Just because of who he cashed in on it got him over as a heel instantly and he's proven since that feud that he is one of the best heels to ever grace a WWE Ring. Did he need MITB for a heel turn? No, but it was an easy excuse to do it anytime the WWE wanted to.

Edge, RVD and The Miz's runs after winning MITB were done perfectly for their characters. Edge was just the mid-card guy that nobody really cared about, and in turn he made everyone forget that he even had the briefcase until he cashed it in on Cena which created the Ultimate Opportunist gimmick he would use for the rest of his career.

RVD was the first face to win the contract, and he was respectful when he cashed in. He told Cena straight up that he wanted his shot on his home turf. He didn't wait for the champion to get attacked because as an ECW guy he wanted to out wrestle the champion to prove he deserved his spot which got him over big with WWECW coming in.

As for The Miz his whole run was great, from being the US Champion, to teasing a cash in for months to finally main eventing WrestleMania a couple of months ago against the face of the company. Did winning MITB get Miz over? No, The Miz got The Miz over but with the help of having that MITB contract it managed to make him come off as a arrogant prick which was a good thing for the guy.
_______

1) I 100% agree with that, there's no reason for them to have two guys running around with briefcases teasing to cash in every fucking week. Not to mention that they put 16 different guys into these matches when a lot of them could be working other matches, I'd like to see it go back to the original formula of just 6 guys going for one MITB contract that can be cashed in on any champion at any time.

2) NO! NO NO NO NO NO! I think that someone winning the MITB is HUGE for an upper mid-card guy's career when it's booked right. Look at the run Edge had after the first MITB, it made the guy into the main eventer that would end up becoming one of the most decorated World Champions in WWE history.

3) I hate all these themed PPVs, it takes away that sense of unpredictably in a feud when you know exactly what stipulation there going to get at the next PPV, but that's a subject for another thread. I think that MITB should stand as a main attraction on a PPV, but having it's OWN PPV is ludicrous, and I don't mean the rapper.

 

[EADESER]

They over use the match, just like hell in a cell and elimination chamber. They should have kept it at wrestlemania because winning at wrestlemania is huge. They also shouln't have two of them on 1 ppv.
I think they should have 1 mitb match with 4 stars from raw and 4 from smackdown. It would be more fun to watch because you would be wondering will a raw guy get it or a smackdown guy.

They also need to stop promoting the shit out of the winner and i know that sounds stupid but think about it if we werent reminded every week who won we might start to forget who won ( kinda like when nash won the breifcase in tna and when he cashed it in i think everyone forgot he even had a breifcase)Then when that person finally cashes in its more of a shock cus you kinda forgot that person had it.

I'd also love to see the winner cash in at mania that would be cool to see