Will WWE try to make us forget what we know?

[chicagokmc]

Historically, the Money In the Bank winner had a year to cash in on that contract. Assuming Lesnar remains champion for awhile, and that even if he lost at WrestleMania he'd be involved in a rematch storyline, where does that leave Seth Rollins? Will creative try to make us forget that MITB has an expiration? There aren't a lot of options given that WWE won't book heel vs heel, especially with WM time approaching. I'm not sure what Lesnar's contract situation is but I'm feeling as long as he's around he's going to be the champ. How could he not given how dominant he's been made to look? And would it be plausible for someone who beat Lesnar to then turnaround and lose to Rollins?

I'm not sure what's going to happen but I have a feeling that Rollins is going to be holding on to the title of Mr. Money In the Bank for a long while. Thoughts?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Rollins could easily cash in at WrestleMania XXX to win the title. He could cash in on Raw the next night.

If Brock Lesnar's final date is the post WrestleMania Raw, at which Lesnar is advertised to appear, and he loses the title at WrestleMania, I see him getting his rematch on the post WrestleMania Raw. Lesnar wrestling for free on television for the first time since his return will probably pop a pretty good rating. If Rollins cashes in at Mania on whoever beats Lesnar, then it could be a triple threat match on Raw the next night since both Lesnar and whoever will both be former champs. If Rollins doesn't cash in at Mania and Lesnar still loses, he can still have his rematch on Raw the next night. He can still come up short, then Rollins can cash in and take the title.

 

[chicagokmc]

Rollins could easily cash in at WrestleMania XXX to win the title. He could cash in on Raw the next night.

If Brock Lesnar's final date is the post WrestleMania Raw, at which Lesnar is advertised to appear, and he loses the title at WrestleMania, I see him getting his rematch on the post WrestleMania Raw. Lesnar wrestling for free on television for the first time since his return will probably pop a pretty good rating. If Rollins cashes in at Mania on whoever beats Lesnar, then it could be a triple threat match on Raw the next night since both Lesnar and whoever will both be former champs. If Rollins doesn't cash in at Mania and Lesnar still loses, he can still have his rematch on Raw the next night. He can still come up short, then Rollins can cash in and take the title.

This makes sense Jack but I wonder, if Reigns turns out to be "the guy" and is the one to beat Lesnar, would they go thru all of this drama waiting for him to return and pushing him, only to have Reigns be a 24 hour chump and turn the belt over to Rollins immediately? I wonder...

 

[Zycho32]

Historically, the Money In the Bank winner had a year to cash in on that contract. Assuming Lesnar remains champion for awhile, and that even if he lost at WrestleMania he'd be involved in a rematch storyline, where does that leave Seth Rollins? Will creative try to make us forget that MITB has an expiration? There aren't a lot of options given that WWE won't book heel vs heel, especially with WM time approaching. I'm not sure what Lesnar's contract situation is but I'm feeling as long as he's around he's going to be the champ. How could he not given how dominant he's been made to look? And would it be plausible for someone who beat Lesnar to then turnaround and lose to Rollins?

I'm not sure what's going to happen but I have a feeling that Rollins is going to be holding on to the title of Mr. Money In the Bank for a long while. Thoughts?

They won't try to make us forget. They'll just run with their script and leave it all unsaid, much like Brock Lesnar's 30 day title warranty. And in the end, only us Diehard Smarks with little life to speak of will care.

That said, I would guarantee Seth cashes in real soon after Brock is stripped of the title finally. It helps keep the drama flowing.

 

[Teddy Irving]

Riegns will be about to win the title at Mania when Rollins runs in attacks him with the briefcase and then curb stomps Brock, to which he will get the 1,2,3 and win the title.
The following night on raw Lesnar will come out and demand his rematch, which Rollins will win when Heyman turns on Lesnar to cost him. This leaves WWE with the option to resign Lesnar for a new big fued, or they let Lesnar go and still keep the heat that Heyman had and move it onto Rollins, who will move on to face Reigns.

That's what I reckon will happen so I don't think they will need to pretend it doesn't last a year

 

[Mr.Maikeru_Sawyer]

Historically, the Money In the Bank winner had a year to cash in on that contract.

I'm not sure what's going to happen but I have a feeling that Rollins is going to be holding on to the title of Mr. Money In the Bank for a long while. Thoughts?

He does have 1 calender year to use the briefcase. but you seem to be under the assumption the timeframe ends at Wrestlemania. did you forget that he won the case on 6/29/14.
Which would put his one year to use it date at 6/28/15 which is almost 3 months AFTER WM.

What is the rush with him cashing it in.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Seth Rollins has 12 months to cash in Money In The Bank. As much as I want to see him cash in at Wrestlemania, he has an entire year to use his title shot. This year's Money In The Bank PPV takes place 1 day short of a calendar year from when he won it in 2014. So, the longest they could drag it out is for him to hold the briefcase long enough to cash-in on THIS year's winner, if they decided to cash-in that same night and win the belt. That'd be crazy. The World Heavyweight Champion loses the belt to a cash-in, only to lose it again to Seth who waited until the absolute last second to use his. It's such an important push that I highly doubt WWE will try to make us forget Seth has the briefcase. They try to make us forget other things like the fact that Undertaker VS Triple H had already had a Wrestlemania match before 27, or stating the name of the winner of 20's triple threat main event. On the contrary, I think they'll keep reminding us often until he does cash-in whether that be this coming monday, at Wrestlemania, or even at Money In The Bank 2015. He probably will indeed hold onto it for a while, but a Wrestlemania cash-in seems the most likely, and on a face who just finished defeating Lesnar making them too worn out to withstand Rollins cashing in.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

I know there is no such thing as a cert in wrestling but WrestleMania ending with a negative result is pretty close to a cert NOT to happen. In thirty Manias, only three events have ended with a heel victory - Triple H's fourway victory at WM2000, SCSA's heel win over the Rock a year later and Miz's 'victory' over Cena that was only to advance the following year's Mania.

As such, I believe Rollins cashing in is highly unlikely to happen, because he isn't at Triple H's or Austin's level and a cash in doesn't strike me as a big way to push WM32. The following RAW, possibly... but I'd say the smart money would be on Extreme Rules were the Champion really is likely to have taken a pasting and be perfectly prone to an opportunist like Seth.

 

[rbv13]

A lot of individuals assuming Rollins is successful with his cash in. I say look for him the fail when he attempts to become the champion. This could happen as early as the Rumble and all be thanks to Orton.

 

[rmp0012002]

A lot of individuals assuming Rollins is successful with his cash in. I say look for him the fail when he attempts to become the champion. This could happen as early as the Rumble and all be thanks to Orton.

That's a possibility. They could also save Rollins and his MITB shot if Reigns doesn't get over very well as champion. They have to clear up the Rollins/Heyman tie in though.

 

[kadroan]

Historically, the Money In the Bank winner had a year to cash in on that contract. Assuming Lesnar remains champion for awhile, and that even if he lost at WrestleMania he'd be involved in a rematch storyline, where does that leave Seth Rollins? Will creative try to make us forget that MITB has an expiration? There aren't a lot of options given that WWE won't book heel vs heel, especially with WM time approaching. I'm not sure what Lesnar's contract situation is but I'm feeling as long as he's around he's going to be the champ. How could he not given how dominant he's been made to look? And would it be plausible for someone who beat Lesnar to then turnaround and lose to Rollins?

I'm not sure what's going to happen but I have a feeling that Rollins is going to be holding on to the title of Mr. Money In the Bank for a long while. Thoughts?

WWE does what they want to do despite what they think fans don't know.

Ex: Bryan got stripped of the title because he couldn't defend the title in 30 days due to injury yet you got Brock who hadn't defended the title since Night of Champions in September.

Part of me feel he could try to cash it in at WrestleMania or the night after RAW to give Reigns a big feud going into their unofficial "Big 4" PPV, Extreme Rules, but they could hold Rollins' cash in to the dull period after Summerslam, the fall or the top of the year going into WrestleMania.

 

[FlairFan2003]

WWE could quietly ignore the 1 year to cash in rule, just as they quietly ignore the mandatory 30 day title defense rule for Lesnar (same thing they did for Hogan in the 80s).

However, just because Rollins won the MITB doesn't mean he has to win the title. He can get cash in and lose, which in fact would be a great way to pump up Lesnar's unbeatability, have him survive a hellacious bout and emerge victorious against someone like Cena AND then have the cash in, followed by another Lesnar win. If they did that at the Royal Rumble it would truly make him seem like an unstoppable force.

 

[L@RISANO]

WWE does what they want to do despite what they think fans don't know.

Ex: Bryan got stripped of the title because he couldn't defend the title in 30 days due to injury yet you got Brock who hadn't defended the title since Night of Champions in September.

Part of me feel he could try to cash it in at WrestleMania or the night after RAW to give Reigns a big feud going into their unofficial "Big 4" PPV, Extreme Rules, but they could hold Rollins' cash in to the dull period after Summerslam, the fall or the top of the year going into WrestleMania.

Not directed at you, but I see this point being brought up all the time without understanding why that rule is sited as being such a big deal during Brock's title reign.

Basically, that rule was used on Bryan by his arch-enemies because it does exist and such, it was done to reinforce the animosity between both parties.
With Brock, however, he is a heel and those who usually are in-charge are heels anyway(right now,regardless of one night GMs, the guy in charge is Vince), thus, put 2+2 together, and anyone can see that the 30 day rule won't ever be enforced on Brock due to him being a heel. It just wouldn't make sense unless there is a Babyface running the show.

 

[Tyler44]

I could easily just see Reigns winning at Wrestlemania, and then Rollins comes in and cashes it in.

Sets up the next long feud between Reigns and Rollins, while also keeping the title on a heel. It's always better with the face chasing the heel for the title, than vice versa.