Should Money in the Bank be scrapped as a PPV?

[Terry Gyimah]

Especially with the brand split back and in full effect I figured that Money in the Bank should be scrapped as a PPV and they should bring back Money in the Bank at WrestleMania and why?

Because if WrestleMania from now on is going to have Ladder Matches on the card it only makes more sense for the Money in the Bank Ladder Match to return

8 men...4 RAW superstars and 4 Smackdown Live superstars with a ladder hanging high above*

The winner not only becomes Mr Money in the Bank but the winner of the briefcase could cash in on his brand's Champion or he could cash in on either Champion depending on what brand he's on further adding to the unpredictability of Money in the Bank

 

[Dagger Dias]

Absolutely not. Quite the contrary. Money In The Bank and Night Of Champions need to join the Big 4 creating a Big 6. Out of all the newer PPV brands, Money In The Bank is by far the most popular. The concept of a championship contact inside a briefcase that can be cashed in at a time of the winner's choosing for the next calendar year is such a great idea and it is justified to keep this as its own show. It would be a huge mistake for WWE to not keep this as a dual-branded show. There are two titles again so the winner could pick to either cash in on the World Heavyweight Champion OR the Universal Champion. Also.... by this summer it might just finally be time to also have a Women's Money In The Bank match at the event. I expect Money In The Bank to be around for quite some time. Why get rid of the 5th biggest show of the year? Exactly.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

I don't think it should be scrapped simply because the MITB PPV has quickly become one of the best PPVs that WWE puts on each year. There was a lot of talk about MITB replacing Survivor Series as one of the big four PPVs.

I get what you are saying about the unpredictability of the cash in, but honestly I'm over the cash in concept. We have seen just about every type of cash in you could imagine. The RVD/Cena face style announce the cash in ahead of time deal. The Seth Rollins cashing in at Mania deal. Ziggler cashing in after Mania. Edge cashing in as a huge shock. Kane and Ambrose cashing in on the same PPV. It has all pretty much been done.

I do like your idea of having four guys from each brand competing though. Have the winner be able to choose the title they are going for. That will be fun for a year or two and take my mind off the boring "Will he or won't he" teases.

Sadly, we are probably gonna go back to the two briefcases system and have someone underserving or boring *cough* Sheamus *cough* win the case each year.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Sadly, we are probably gonna go back to the two briefcases system and have someone underserving or boring *cough* Sheamus *cough* win the case each year.

You make a valid point here and you're probably right. I'd still support it if they went back to having both a Red and Blue briefcase. No cash-in will ever top Seth's or Edge's at this point anyway so they might as well create more opportunities. I've always loved the concept so I'm fine with one briefcase or two. I can see why some might not like the idea. Could be worse though. I would be more concerned about WWE limiting it to a brand. Why should the Raw guys get left out if they make it a Smackdown show? It's popular enough to be dual-branded and I wouldn't want it at Wrestlemania where it will get overshadowed.

 

[Azane]

Money in the Bank is only 1 or 2 rungs below Royal Rumble for me now, if not for the simple fact there's usually a chance for most the men involved to win. (but I also want a woman's MITB with 3 from each brand, they could make the case pink and all that misogynistic crap WWE has to do)

Survivor Series is a dead concept, since the SS matches never matter, and nothings REALLY on the line, the buildup to SS and Goldberg/Lesnar outshining the entire card is a testament to this. knock SS down to a C PPV, and make MITB a big 4, or just make a big 5th, and make MITB a crossbrand event to make another B PPV.

Using the Case as a way to transfer shows adds a lot of interesting feuds, you could have someone threatening to cash in on Smackdown, cash in on Smackdown's Title, then bring it to RAW next week and start all types of drama there.

I guess the reason I really like the MITB Concept is that it follows similar to Rumble's concept, where you can have an array of underlying story telling in a seemlessly random mashup, where you could have 5 or 6 feuds between the 8 guys and after 1 walks out, you have 3 or 4 ppv quality feuds escalated or created from the aftermath.

Similar to how Wrestlemania usually have 3 or so Marque matches that get teased at the Royal Rumble, the aftermath from MITB usually sets the tone for the next couple months.

 

[Vanilla Midget]

I like Dagger's idea of making MITB and NOC into dual brand events. This cuts down event fatigue by reintroducing two more months with only one event and also addresses the question of why those events are held by only one brand.

The MITB concept has worn thin. The biggest issue with it is that it pigeonholes creative into having a briefcase holder every year. They must have a briefcase holder regardless of wether or not their is someone they want to push into that position.

This demand for briefcase holders has lead to some forgettable and unnecessary title wins. Sandow: rubbish. Cena: Punk could have turned heel anyway, the case lifts right out of the story other than needing to write out the briefcase. Del Rio: wasn't ready to be champion. Miz: would Miz have won the title in 2010 had they not had to give someone a MITB briefcase?

Another example of this pigeon holing is the Rumble. Every year you have to have a Royal Rumble winner. This is fine though, because every year you want to have a WrestleMania main event, therefore the Rumble title shot helps set that match up.

There's a big difference between the two. WrestleMania must have a main event. There's a tangible entertainment and financial value attached to that. Can MITB stake that claim given the random time of the cash in? It cannot.

The event was interesting at first, and it jumped the shark with Jack Swagger for me. I believe he was the last one to win the Case at Mania. That year also lead to the first MITB PPV, and the concept that ultimately watered it down: two briefcases for each title.

MITB should become another gimmick that's randomly trotted out once per year, possibly less if it has to be a concept any longer at all. You don't even need it to emergency put the title on a heel.

There was an Elimination Chamber PPV (possibly it was still called No Way Out) where McMahon made Cena defend against Batista after John just captured the title in the Chamber match. Big Dave had no briefcase, he was a heel on Smackdown while Cena was on Raw during the stricter part of the brand extension. A heel authority figure just placed a heel into a "MITB" type situation without the magic luggage. MITB is pointless when an authority figure could just force a beat up guy to defend against a fresh one at a whim.

Another example is No Mercy 2007. Orton was awarded the WWE title, lost it to Triple H who was forced to defend it against Umaga and the again against Orton who ultimately won. All on the same night. A heel authority figure just easily supplants the need for the briefcase.

In MITB's defence, it's pretty exciting for casual fans. It does offer hardcore fans a look at who will be a future champion (unless you're Damien Sandow) and there is some value there. The concept has been around for about 12 years now, and there is some tradition there I suppose. The original WWE world tag team titles were around for about 50 years though and they were unceremoniously dropped like a bad habit.

If we need the race for luggage to continue, then it has to evolve. It's clearly evolved into something greater than itself given the way the event draws, so if it has to stick around then it need a few things. One case for both brands, and it has to be given to someone proven, it can't always be given to an up and comer. Swagger, Del Rio, Kennedy, Sandow, and even Sheamus are all arguably worse off having won the match when they did.

One thing no one has done yet with the case is pull the RVD/Cena babyface declare in advance cash in, but take the shot at WrestleMania. Maybe Reigns wins MITB this year and picks Mania, then carries the case for the following months. Rollins wins the Rumble and Ambrose is the champion, you get your Shield triple threat at Mania through logical storytelling.

It doesn't have to be those three, but just as an example of how it would work while still including the Rumble winner.

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

Money In The Bank has been the only successful PPV after the whole special PPVs thing began. It has given us great matches and moments, like Punk vs Cena/Bryan, Styles vs Cena. It should definately not be scrapped, but instead, it should join the other big 4 PPVs and become part of them as an interpromotional show.

I read rumors that WWE wants to make it a SD only PPV. Big mistake IMO. Have both brands appear in it, but have one, interpromotional ladder match, giving the winner the ability to cash in on any show.

 

[The Life Of Pablo Ren]

It needs to be something that both brands fight over, or at the very least have the format it had from 2010-2013. If Smackdown gets MITB I would assume RAW would get an equivalent, maybe something like KOTR or something completely new, but I don't want that. It would greatly diminish the show and in my opinion, the Money in the Bank itself. If it's going to be offered to only one brand, then yes, I'd like it to be scrapped and then just have the match take place at WrestleMania. If it's going to be a dual branded show, absolutely keep it, as said above my pretty much everyone, it's consistently been one of the best shows they have.

Another issue with keeping it brand exclusive though, and this is especially true on the Smackdown side (based off the current roster, which I'm sure will be different come June/July)... the MITB match calls for at the very least 6 competitors, the rest of the card could wind up being very thin.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

MITB should really go back to Mania... It needs that "event" match each year and the IC title needs to go back to being defended properly.

There is a way to get the same buzz for MITB into a PPV AND get NOC over... King Of The Ring.

For this to work, there is a fundamental change... The titles reset every year at NOC because there will always be a US/IC champ facing a WWE or Universal titleholder.

So Miz has to get to NOC as does Jericho... Assuming both got to Summerslam, they face off there in a non title match... Jericho wins, he goes to NOC to get his title shot. He wins, US gets vacated as he's Universal Champ.. He loses, US gets vacated.

KOTR then takes place on which ever brand has the vacant title as a PPV to crown the new champion... they've then got to try to defend for the year, just as the IC champ does to get that title shot. Add the MITB case in and you have threats to the World champion... and maybe open it up so they can cash in on the US/IC to get that NOC title shot... Imagine if Jericho went that whole year... got to the start of NOC and Owens cashed in on him? drama... or cashes into the Summerslam match to make it a title match triple threat?

 

[The Perfect Max]

I have always preferred the idea of holding the Money in the Bank ladder match at WrestleMania. The spectacle of the match, for me, is so much bigger that way. Like you said, 4 guys from each brand. With guys like Sami Zayn, Rusev, Dolph Ziggler etc. probably not getting one-on-one matches at the event, I'd much rather see a focus of 6-8 guys in the ladder match, then have some great talent get lost in the André the Giant battle royal which, quite frankly, has lost its allure since WrestleMania 31. Just my opinion.

Having said that, the Money in the Bank pay-per-view (can we still say that lol?) is one of the more popular events and, in the tough summer months, it provides some anticipation to see who takes the case. The idea of the women having a version of the match is very interesting and I would like to see that. So, with multiple MITB matches, you'd have to have a special event. And that's okay. What I hope they don't do is introduce a case for the Raw and SmackDown titles again. It saturates the idea by having two guys carrying it around. It's so much more unpredictable when it's just one guy.

One guy and one gal holding the briefcase with the power to cash it in any time and on any brand is appealing to me, and ultimately, the special event is a draw which is lost if slotted into WrestleMania, even if I do prefer its placement there.

 

[Wrestlingaholic]

Money in the Bank ranks 5th on WWE's ppv list, as proven by the fact it is the only non-big 4 ppv to go nearly four hours since they started extending the times. It's also, along with Payback, usually one of the best ppvs of the year. It needs to stay seperate. 'Mania can have an alternative multi -man ladder match - this year probably the Cruiserweight tile match.

With regards to how to book MITB, I would like ideally one ladder match (or maybe two of the second is a women's match), or if they have two, I would like to see the seperate brands react differently. Like, Raw could stick to the same rules as have been used since MITB began in 2005, but have Bryan and Shane declare that the Smackdown winner HAS to declare his intentions, like in Lucha Underground. I didn't mind the 'any time' stipulation at first, but it got old fast, especially when sometimes it didn't even come after a match (like when Batista speared Edge after a promo and CM Punk cashed in) so an amendment to the rules so it is more like the RVD cash in would be preferable - and makes the result less predictable too

 

[LODemolition]

There's plenty of ppvs that should be scrapped with the oversaturation of them since the brand split (arguably even before), but MITB is certainly not one of them. It's replaced Survivor Series as one of the big 4 and is one of the most anticipated events of the year. The ladder match for the IC Title at Mania is what should be done away with. It's a good way to open Mania and everything, but with MITB likely holding 2 ladder matches for the foreseeable future (1 for each brand), the one at Mania would be overkill.

 

[justinept]

Interesting. I was just about to post a thread about why it made sense to bring back MITB to Wrestlemania this year. I suppose it can be re-arranged a bit to fit here.

The crux is that - No, I don't think the pay-per-view should be eliminated by any stretch. But I'm also reading rumors that suggest the event will be exclusive to Smackdown. If that's the case, then it absolutely makes sense for Raw to hold their own branded MITB match at Wrestlemania.

Doing so would also solve a lot of issues with the card. I've been looking at a lot of the rumored matches, and I put together a sampling of the card thus far:

Goldberg vs. Brock Lesnar
Roman Reigns vs. The Undertaker
Triple H vs. Seth Rollins
John Cena and Nikky Bella vs The Miz and Maryse
AJ Styles vs. Shane McMahon
Bray Wyatt vs Randy Orton
Chris Jericho vs. Kevin Owens
Charlotte vs. Bayley vs. Sasha Banks vs. Nia Jaxx

What's striking about this potential card is how few superstars are being used as of yet. We have 8 rumored matches featuring just 20 superstars (14 men; 6 women). The WWE has tried its best to include all of its talent on the Wrestlemania card the past few years, but that's going to be incredibly difficult given this potential lineup. Now, I get that Wrestlemania has a two-hour pre-show. I also understand that it's scheduled for four hours, and that last year's event went 40 minutes over that mark. But that event was absolutely crucified for running so long, and it only actually featured 12 matches all night.

It's going to be next to impossible for the WWE to include all the talent on the show without running longer than last year. Consider that we're probably going to see an Intercontinental Title Match (Ambrose vs Corbin?). We're definitely going to see a Cruiserweight Title Match (Neville in a fatal 4-way?) We're going to see a Smackdown women's match (a six-person tag between Natalya/Bliss/James vs. Lynch/Naomi/Carmella?). And we're going to see at least one tag team title match (Club vs. New Day?), possibly two (American Alpha vs Usos?). Now we're up to at least 12 matches, and we haven't found any spot for Braun Strowman, Samoa Joe, Finn Balor, Big Cass, Cesaro, Sheamus, or Sami Zayn.

Sure, you have the Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal, but we all know that match is nothing more than the WWE's attempt at getting everyone on the card. It's there for guys like Heath Slater and Goldust to make an appearance. It's not there because you ran out of options for Finn Balor or Samoa Joe! That battle royal needs 3 or 4 credible challengers and the rest is just fodder. To stack it with the aforementioned guys would be a huge, huge waste.

So I do think Raw should have their own MITB match featuring Strowman, Samoa Joe, Finn Balor, Big Cass, Cesaro, Sheamus, Sammi Zayn, and one other superstar (Tye Dillinger?) The MITB match allows them to showcare their talents much better than a battle royal would.

 

[rge2010]

Love this PPV...........it is centred around the Briefcase and I am looking forward to two matches this year!!!

I would keep it to 6 in each and I don't think Owens will retain all the way until June.

Raw - Brawn Strowman (winner), Finn Balor, Kevin Owens, Sami Zayn, Samoa Joe, Seth Rollins

I think Strowman would be an excellent choice to win. It would really do his credibility good winning this one and imagine the fear of him holding the briefcase. He could tease on a weekly basis.

Smackdown - AJ Styles, Apollo Crews, Dolph Ziggler, Baron Corbin (winner) James Ellsworth, The Miz

I think Corbin will be in for a big push this year. I think he would be a worthy winner and it would elevate him to the next level.

 

[ShinChan]

I have always liked this gimmick PPV. Just like Elimination Chamber. It actually has me interested such match takes place.

So, this PPV shouldn't be scrapped at any cost. I agree with the notion that it should be joined with the Big 4. But I don't think that Night Of Champions should join these 5.

About scrapping, I think that Hell In A Cell PPV should be scrapped. A Hell In A Cell match is all good but 3 on the same PPV is too much.