|
Post by BrIaNMeRcY on Sept 13, 2020 22:58:51 GMT -5
I never understood why people find the concept stale. I think there's many scenarios they haven't explored with the stipulation. Someone holding the briefcase and world title would be an awesome idea. Having a champion lose their title, beat up their opponent after and cash in would draw some serious heel heat. I like this idea a lot. Why? Real heat = $$$ I feel the Money In The Bank concept has been poorly handled since 2015: - Dean Ambrose winning and cashing in the same night feel meh. Ambrose was such a cold champion - Baron Corbin winning only to lose the match. They used this to build "heat" for the Corbin/Cena match at SummerSlam 2017 - Braun Strowman was at the right place but at the wrong time. His cash-in match ended in a No Contest - Brock Lesnar just because Vince wanted to give it to a top guy. Only then to win the belt, become a placeholder champion, and drop it soon after. - Otis, really? The last two cash-in's that had a lasting impact was Seth Rollins and Sheamus.
|
|
|
Post by Decky on Sept 13, 2020 23:14:43 GMT -5
Because why fight and get hurt when you have a contract to cash in on the champion when they're down. Its like going to work if they pay you to sit at home and do nothing.
|
|
ℍ𝕒𝕣𝕕 𝕋𝕠 𝕂𝕚𝕝𝕝
Main Eventer
ask me about how Verizon owes me over $4,000
Joined on: Nov 4, 2016 15:44:22 GMT -5
Posts: 2,621
|
Post by ℍ𝕒𝕣𝕕 𝕋𝕠 𝕂𝕚𝕝𝕝 on Sept 14, 2020 10:44:47 GMT -5
I felt like this was going to happen when Rollins was Mr. MITB and wrestled for the title at Rumble 2015 with Cena and Brock.
Another first: I am wondering if Otis' MITB will just expire. What the hell do you do with it?
|
|