Money in the Bank PPV

Puertorique · Post #1 » by **Puertorique** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 3:40 am

So WWE is going to have a Money in the Bank ppv on July 13th. I thought it was great for WM and it should be kept that way but hey who knows?

Post #2 » by **Stanford** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 4:00 am

what are the other matches going to be?

skbucks1985 · Post #3 » by **skbucks1985** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 4:40 am

I'm guessing it'll be just like a regular PPV except with 2 MITB matches, one for each company.

I'm personally a fan of this for two reasons, one there's no better star creator in the WWE right now than MITB. Every guy whose won it has wound up winning the title and it was there elevation to main event status. Also I think this year's match was the worst they've had and its in large part because there were too many particiapnts. I think the ideal number for this match is 6 and I think both companies have enough depth to get a solid 6 man MITB. For Raw it would probably be: Bourne, Morrison, Miz, Dibiase, R-Truth and either Jericho or some lesser name like Zach Ryder. For Smackdown it would probably be Christian, Dolph Zigger, Kofi, MVP, Matt Hardy and Drew McIntyre.

Post #4 » by **Stanford** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 4:43 am

safi wrote:one there's no better star creator in the WWE right now than MITB.

That's why I think it's a bad idea. Having three a year makes it meaningless. It worked when you won it at the biggest PPV of the year and could cash it in against any champion.

I really think three a year is a bad idea.

skbucks1985 · Post #5 » by **skbucks1985** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 5:25 am

Stanford wrote:
safi wrote:one there's no better star creator in the WWE right now than MITB.

That's why I think it's a bad idea. Having three a year makes it meaningless. It worked when you won it at the biggest PPV of the year and could cash it in against any champion.

I really think three a year is a bad idea.

I disagree. The match itself is fine, but I think its the result of the match the future title shot that makes it special. I don't really think its any different than your typical number one contenders match.

Although I will say this, I think everyone agrees that the next evolution in the MITB match is the guy who cashes it in the night of the PPV. I do think that should be saved for WM.

Dominator83 · Post #6 » by **Dominator83** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 12:38 pm

Not bad as long as theres not 10 freakin guys in each one

Post #7 » by **Stanford** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 4:05 pm

safi wrote:I don't really think its any different than your typical number one contenders match.

I think it's clearly different. Your typical number one contenders are going to be guys who are already main eventers, who have probably won a major title in the past. Add on top of that the fact that it's much more believable to the fans when a guy who has never won a title before, all of a sudden wins it because they're cashing in when the champ has already had the life beaten out of him.

MitB has proven to get new faces over much better than anything the writers have written. Take a guy like Sheamus who didn't go over well with the fans when he won the number one contender match, and then look at guys like Edge, Punk and Swagger who have immediatly gotten over with the fans when they cashed in and won the championship.

I think the prize for winning is the concern, not the match. Right now MitB is working brilliantly for them (the result, not the match), but if we see three people cash a year it's going to mean less and less each time. That's a lot of times in one year.

skbucks1985 · Post #8 » by **skbucks1985** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 5:29 pm

Stanford wrote:
safi wrote:I don't really think its any different than your typical number one contenders match.

I think it's clearly different. Your typical number one contenders are going to be guys who are already main eventers, who have probably won a major title in the past. Add on top of that the fact that it's much more believable to the fans when a guy who has never won a title before, all of a sudden wins it because they're cashing in when the champ has already had the life beaten out of him.

MitB has proven to get new faces over much better than anything the writers have written. Take a guy like Sheamus who didn't go over well with the fans when he won the number one contender match, and then look at guys like Edge, Punk and Swagger who have immediatly gotten over with the fans when they cashed in and won the championship.

I think the prize for winning is the concern, not the match. Right now MitB is working brilliantly for them (the result, not the match), but if we see three people cash a year it's going to mean less and less each time. That's a lot of times in one year.

I think the opportunism aspect of MITB does make it different, but if you build up a feud properly I think it can have basically the same effect.

As far as it meaning less and less, I think it depends on the guy. Maybe if they put over guys whom the fans don't particularly care for but if somebody like Christian wins they'll pop like crazy and if Miz wins they'll boo like crazy.

Celtsfan1980 · Post #9 » by **Celtsfan1980** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:07 pm

Does this mean Wrestlemania won't have a match like this in the future? It'd be hard to make it seem fresh so I'd assume this means no match at Wrestlemania anymore.

Dominator83 · Post #10 » by **Dominator83** » Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:59 pm

I dont think it will get that stale if its only at Mania and this PPV, but we do need to see less of that bush league cashing it in after the champs already wrestled in a huge match. We need to see a few more Rob Van Dam type winners that cash it in and win the belt fair and square in a scheduled match. He didnt do it the b**ch way and beat Cena after he already won a match just seconds before. He set the match up ahead of time and beat a fresh Cena for the title