One instead of two.... Money In The Bank

[Hard Hit Prince]

I am talking about the Money In The Bank Ladder Match... For almost three years now, WWE has one pay-per-view where two superstars will have a shot to become either WWE Champion or World Champion. For some it's a good way to push talent, for others it may very well seem that someone will get to the top very soon (like Jack Swagger for instance). Originally the match was held at WrestleMania, with the winner being able to cash in at either world title's in the WWE, but now it's not like that anymore.

So, do you like the current two separate Money In The Bank Matches, or would you prefer to have one match, instead of two? I know it's early, but in the current roster who would you like to own the MITB briefcase this WWE's new season and why?

 

[MCMG]

I think two has obvious benefits. There are two opportunities, two story-lines, two superstars made. I miss the MITB from Mania. It adds excitement and provides "wrestlemania moments" that were sorely lacking this year. I think that the benefit of having the ppv it can be a catalyst for something exciting during the middle of the year - Kane and ADR are good examples.

I would love to see Cody Rhodes or Wade Barrett get a push into the main-event but the latter is busy. Since they have two briefcases they can use one of them to add to the Shield storyline.

Moreover, the ppv itself has been incredible the last 3 years. Sheamus/Cena (Nexus interfering) Punk walking out on the WWE and all the ladder matches make this a must-see PPV. I would much rather have the Money In the Bank ppv than a crappy ppv + a MITB at Mania.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

In all honesty, I do think it's possible that WWE might go back to having simply one MITB briefcase and one briefcase holder. Look at some of the last gimmick ppvs they've done.

For the Hell in a Cell ppv, there was only one Hell in a Cell match. For Elimination Chamber, there was only one Elimination Chamber match. If WWE follows suit, then there might wind up being only one MITB match at this year's MITB ppv. In my opinion, having one of the gimmick matches on the card is reason enough to simply end the gimmick ppvs altogether.

I personally like the idea of WWE going back to having only one MITB briefcase holder as it adds a bit more unpredictability to things. With only one briefcase, the holder could go after either the WWE or World Heavyweight Championship, thereby opening multiple feud possibilities.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

There is nothing wrong with Barrett winning MITB and being IC champion, in fact it'd be a good way to build the IC title up... Barrett goes on another "Barrage", picking up wins higher up the card... when he cashes in he becomes a dual champion.

Of course they'd then have a tourney, but that in itself then gives something to help push talent later in the year for a belt that would again mean something and they get Barrett back to where he should be.

As for having 2 MITB's I am not a fan of both World titles having one. I think it's much better to have the World level one able to pick his belt and the 2nd MITB being for any of the other belts... It'd be interesting to open up those stories.

You could have someone like Sandow win the 2nd one... does he pick a tag shot with Cody or go for the IC or US belts solo...if he does the latter does that start a feud with a now pissed off Cody.

For the World belt, I think the Shield makes sense, but would it be a shot each for them? How would it work? If you're picking one member it'd likely be Ambrose but I see them Freebirding the tag titles against Brothers Of Destruction later in the year (Bryan "injured" at their hands)

Personally I'd love to see RVD back and winning the World MITB again. It'd be an excellent feud with Ziggler, the Show Off facing the whole F'N Show in an immediate cash-in would be a great way to kickstart a feud for the title.

 

[Miki]

Actually i had the same kind of idea earlier today while waiting for bus. I was thinking that it would be cool if they had only one money in the bank match. Now i only liked it because of what i had in mind which is this: towards the end of the match when everybody hits their signature and finisher moves to each other and pretty much everyones given the match all they got and then suddenly enter The Shield! Imagine them laying out all the superstars in the match and "kidnapping" the briefcase and then have them threatening both WWE and WHC title holders of the threat of cashing in at anytime and no one can stop them. I just thought this would be cool.

 

[brochester8]

I kind of like it the way it is because there are supposed to be two shows superstars are on however that's not the case nomore because they show up at both. I like the one winner better because there was more of a suprise in cashing it in. You didn't know which champ they would go after and when. Both work for me though as I think it's an important part of WWE now.

As for this years PPV.

I would like for Cody Rhodes to get the Smackdown MITB Briefcase. I think he's proven his talent and deserves a run with it and the title to see how well he does with it.

Then for Raw Briefcase I think I'd go with someone from Shield probably Ambrose. I think it would work great with how great this storyline is. there undefeated and have beaten all the top WWE Guys, Cena, Orton, Ryback, Sheamus, Big Show, Jericho. I think it'd be another way to sneak into the ring and capitalize on someone for the title.

Other's I could see win - Barrett, Kofi (and turn heel when he cashes it in), Daniel Bryan. (Suprise - Dibiase or McGillicutty) It would be a big suprise for them to jump into the main roster or maybe eliminate someon from the match before it even starts and GM lets them replace them. Then go in and suprise everyone. Repackage them of course. (this won't happen but a suprise winner would be interesting)

 

[Swiggs]

I much preferred just the one briefcase however it only worked when the WWE title and WHC were at about the same level. At the current state the WHC is in I don't see a superstar making a legitimate choice of picking it over the WWE title.

It was like when WWE-ECW was around and the Rumble winner (can't remember who) had all 3 world champions in the ring. Like hell he was going to pick the ECW title to go after at Wrestlemania.

BUT with that being said it does add an element of excitement not knowing what title they will cash in for.

The way I would like having 2 MITB cases on the line, is if two younger up and coming guys win them i.e not Cena winning the case because really he doesn't need it, he is solidified as a main eventer. I would prefer a midcard guy who needs that edge to break into the Main Event scene win the case and cash in to get his first title win.

 

[Mr. HD]

I much preferred just the one briefcase however it only worked when the WWE title and WHC were at about the same level. At the current state the WHC is in I don't see a superstar making a legitimate choice of picking it over the WWE title.

It was like when WWE-ECW was around and the Rumble winner (can't remember who) had all 3 world champions in the ring. Like hell he was going to pick the ECW title to go after at Wrestlemania.

BUT with that being said it does add an element of excitement not knowing what title they will cash in for.

The way I would like having 2 MITB cases on the line, is if two younger up and coming guys win them i.e not Cena winning the case because really he doesn't need it, he is solidified as a main eventer. I would prefer a midcard guy who needs that edge to break into the Main Event scene win the case and cash in to get his first title win.

I remember this one. It was The Undertaker in 2007.

I personally prefer one briefcase to two briefcase holders. One creates suspense and makes things rather unpredictable because they could go after EITHER Championship whenever they want. Both champions would need to watch their back.

Two briefcase creates a bit of a mess, IMO.

 

[Ziiro]

I still like two of the matches. They are definitely NOT over done yet. MITB is quickly becoming one of WWE's major PPV's. If they only do one MITB match for a major title, I wouldn't mind seeing a MITB match for a tag team title shot. With the way WWE is going lately building the division on the backs of Daniel Bryan and Kane, this could help further the re-building process.

 

[A11oftheLights]

I think two has obvious benefits. There are two opportunities, two story-lines, two superstars made. I miss the MITB from Mania. It adds excitement and provides "wrestlemania moments" that were sorely lacking this year. I think that the benefit of having the ppv it can be a catalyst for something exciting during the middle of the year - Kane and ADR are good examples.

I would love to see Cody Rhodes or Wade Barrett get a push into the main-event but the latter is busy. Since they have two briefcases they can use one of them to add to the Shield storyline.

Moreover, the ppv itself has been incredible the last 3 years. Sheamus/Cena (Nexus interfering) Punk walking out on the WWE and all the ladder matches make this a must-see PPV. I would much rather have the Money In the Bank ppv than a crappy ppv + a MITB at Mania.

Your looking at the overall PPV Punk walking out would have happened wether it was at extreme rules or some other stupid gimmick PPV

Mania should be the place for MITB however now that the PPV has been around for a few years now if WWE were to go back to one at Mania then they'd basically be admitting they were wrong to change it from Mania in the first place kind of like how WWE changed the Rumble to 40 but then straight back to 30 because it was stupid

 

[MWRedskins]

i personally liked the one Briefcase, but only because of the importance of it. having 2 of them doesnt make the cash in better as you know it's going to be on the World Champion (if they get the blue one) or the WWE one (if they get red). however, when Punk or Edge had it, they could cash in on ANY title at any time and made it more of a mystery.

 

[HBsam31]

I much preferred just the one briefcase however it only worked when the WWE title and WHC were at about the same level. At the current state the WHC is in I don't see a superstar making a legitimate choice of picking it over the WWE title.

It was like when WWE-ECW was around and the Rumble winner (can't remember who) had all 3 world champions in the ring. Like hell he was going to pick the ECW title to go after at Wrestlemania.

BUT with that being said it does add an element of excitement not knowing what title they will cash in for.

The way I would like having 2 MITB cases on the line, is if two younger up and coming guys win them i.e not Cena winning the case because really he doesn't need it, he is solidified as a main eventer. I would prefer a midcard guy who needs that edge to break into the Main Event scene win the case and cash in to get his first title win.

I agree with this totally. I think one briefcase would be best as it adds intrigue as to which title they would be going for and when. The fact is though in its current state I can't see anyone going for the World title over the WWE title. As it stands right now I think they need to have two for this reason. That way each title gets its due, and to be honest I liked the way they did it this year with Cena cashing in right away and having Ziggler hold onto his for a while. When done right having two works, but if the titles were seen on the same level, I would much prefer one.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

I think having one briefcase is better because you can have a more versatile story when it's cashed in. I also think that it means you don't have to plot out two different styles of multiman ladder matches.

 

[JRogers36]

I personally would love to see two matches, with two briefcases but the winners could go after any belt. I would love to see a storyline where say someone cashes in on the WHC. They win. While they are celebrating the other MITB winner cashes in on them. With the right scenario it has potential to be a great angle. Plus with the winners of MITB it still has the mystery that they can go after either belt.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

I think they could pull off having 3 Money in the Bank matches. One of the requisites would be that the competitors must not have held the titles they are competing for. For example, Big Show can't compete in either the Main Event or Midcard ladder matches, because he's held every title involved. But Zack Ryder can compete in the Main Event one, but not in the Midcard one. Etc. Anyway this is how the card would be:

1. "Breakthrough Money in the Bank Ladder match" (For a shot at the Intercontinental or United States Championships)
Alex Riley vs. Justin Gabriel vs. Evan Bourne vs. Sin Cara vs. Damien Sandow vs. David Otunga vs. Heath Slater vs. Mark Henry

Most of these guys want to step up and become a champion. You'll believe how much it means to someone like Riley to win this match because it will actually get him on TV. Mark Henry however is just upset that he can't qualify for the main event match so he decides to qualify for this one in protest. He adds some necessary star power to the match.

2. WWE United States Championship
Rey Mysterio vs. Antonio Cesaro (c)

3. Sheamus vs. The Big Show

4. "World Heavyweight Championship
Kane vs. Daniel Bryan vs. Dolph Ziggler (c)

5. "Tag Team Money in the Bank Ladder match" (For a shot at the WWE Tag Team Championship)
Alberto Del Rio & Ricardo Rodriguez vs. The Prime Time Players vs. Chris Jericho and The Miz vs. Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose

This one is self-explanatory. To be eligible, none of the teams must have won a tag team title before. Both Jericho and Miz go around that rule by using a loophole. Although they have been tag team champions before, they have never been champs together, so their team qualifies. That would be a good way to feud with Seth and Dean.

6. Christian vs. CM Punk

7. WWE Diva's Championship
Kaitlyn (c) vs. AJ

8. WWE Championship
John Cena (c) vs. Randy Orton

9. "Main Event Money in the Bank Ladder match" (For a shot at the WWE or World Heavyweight Championships)
Ryback vs. Kofi Kingston vs. R-Truth vs. Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes vs. Roman Reigns vs. Wade Barrett vs. Fandango

This would be the big match. They'll build it up as the most important one because it gets someone a shot at the biggest titles in pro wrestling. If it weren't for WWE having a TLC PPV, I would even say that this specific match should be held under TLC rules just to show how important it is.

*It will be great to put over that both of last year's Money in the Bank winners are entering as WWE and World Heavyweight Champions.

 

[Mustang Sally]

I'd be happier if the concept was banished altogether. Failing that, one is better than two.

To me, a championship match should be pure: there are many tactics and plot lines that can be used to get the belt from one guy to another, but shortcuts .....such as matches with one more two guys in the ring......or a MITB contest.....should be limited. Instead, we've had two of the latter per year for the past few.

I like title matches to be one-on-one; winner take all. The idea of using a gimmick match to determine a title is fine once in a while, but the MITB concept has devolved into a way to get the belt away from a face and around the waist of a heel. Once, when a face owned the briefcase (John Cena), he lost the match upon cashing in. Every other time, a heel gets the case and takes the duke. Too predictable.

Consider Dolph Ziggler these past 9 months: how many times did he come to the ring while the champion was in a match, poised to cash in if the champ looked helpless..... and changing his mind if it didn't look like a sure thing? What a rotten way to see a title change hands.

Still, if they simply must have the MITB, have only one...... make the briefcase holder eligible to go after either world title........and for gosh sakes, try to switch things up every once in a while and have the heel lose when he cashes in.