Remember the turmoil in the judgment day about when it was the perfect time to cash in and Rhea talking Priest out of it because he was injured?

Priest not cashing in on RAW today was a perfect example of this gimmick having run its course. It’s almost been 19 years since this concept was introduced so they got good mileage out of it but things like Theory cashing in for a mid-card title and Otis losing his briefcase to Miz are examples of it.

1. It creates lazy booking

Have two guys you can’t decide who goes over? Have some shenanigans and cash in at the end.

2. It devalues the mid-card titles

I feel this way about the WHC but before that’s existence and there was no current MITB holder the US and more so the IC title felt more important and would frequently main event shows in Reign’s absence.

3. The surprise cash is over done

Especially the fake outs, we’ve seen the edge and Rollins cash ins done. The well is dry. And just challenging for a further date isn’t exciting to the average viewer.


Your thoughts?

I'd be shocked if there's still a diehard Money in the Bank fan out there.

The question is, when did the concept lose its lustre for you?

For me, I would have been happy if they moved on from it after RVD's cash-in. Off the success of the original Money in the Bank, I could understand running the concept back and RVD's more traditional cash-in made sense. John Cena had no reason to be at One Night Stand, so Rob forcing him onto the show and giving himself the best opportunity and giving ECW this one huge historic moment made every sense in the world.

However the second Money in the Bank match paled in comparison and while the third was a step in the right direction, having both members of Rated RKO involved felt like a waste.

I think it only diminished in value each year. Punk winning the title was a huge shock but it didn't seem like the company was really behind Punk as champion in 2008 and he lost the belt in one of the most forgettable ways imagineable that it became unforgettable. Despite cashing in twice, Punk never really felt like THE guy until 2011...and they nearly ruined that by cashing in on him.

Then Swagger won it and never truly got over as anything more than an upper mid-card despite opportunity after opportunity.

I definitely think Theory was a new low and that's taking into account Baron Corbin which just seemed like one giant rib on him.

It'll be interesting to see if they shift away from it. Like Survivor Series, Money in the Bank felt like one of those traditions they brought into make the promotion itself feel larger than life. However the booking seems a lot more logical and serious under HHH, I can see it being quitely retired in the not too distant future.

I agree completely. The MITB ran its course at least a decade ago. Probably more.

But it's a WWE institution, so it's here to stay, forever, despite how dumb and tired it is.

It should've stayed a match only booked at WM.

If they changed it from 1 year to cash in to let's say.....48 hours, I'll enjoy it more

It ran its course the second they allowed it to be cashed in with no forewarning. One of the least credible gimmicks in wrestling. Get rid of it.

The cash-ins still garner a reaction, & fans still enjoy them. MITB is a part of the fabric of WWE now. The match is here to stay.

There’s one angle I’ve wanted to see since originally introduced.

Babyface wins the briefcase.
Babyface earns a No. 1 contenders match for the title (champion also being a Babyface).

Champion wins in a close match.

MITB hold snaps, beats the shit out of the champion, cashes in. Instant heel turn.

It would be different and great TV.

I want to see a World Champion go for it to prevent any cash-ins and as an insurance policy if they lose it within the year after winning.

The Women’s MITB holders have been pretty decent, except for Nikki Cross but hey at least they gave her a shot and pivoted quickly, unlike with Theory.

The other thing with the Women’s MITB is how quick they cash in, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

Honestly when Edge held the case while also having a title shot I instantly figured that's where it was gonna go.

I would've liked to see it shift away from random aspect of it and more centered on the RVD title shot, but a KOTR just doesn't excite people.

Feel like there's plenty of ways to make it fresh, but people are too used to the formula. Also LOL @ 20 years going by in an instant. Still remember Benoit doing his little fish sell when Edge won the original match.

Jan 23, 2024 20:38:08 GMT Ness said:

Honestly when Edge held the case while also having a title shot I instantly figured that's where it was gonna go.

I would've liked to see it shift away from random aspect of it and more centered on the RVD title shot, but a KOTR just doesn't excite people.

Feel like there's plenty of ways to make it fresh, but people are too used to the formula. Also LOL @ 20 years going by in an instant. Still remember Benoit doing his little fish sell when Edge won the original match.

The gold rush tournament! Same!

The title doesn't make the man, the man makes the title.

It's no different with MITB. Putting the briefcase on someone isnt going to make them a main event star.

It should be a vehicle for someone who will likely become a main eventer regardless or is close. Edge obviously being the best example. Hunter in 99, or GUNTHER maybe today. The opportunistic nature of the MITB is where the credibility starts to fade away. To wrap up two points, if GUNTHER won MITB, he doesnt scratch and crawl and eventually outlasts 5 other guys - no, he decimates and humiliates 5 other guys. He then declares his intentions the following week and wants the one on one match. That's how you restore credibility to the MITB. It's Royal Rumble, but where and when the challenger wants the match instead of at Wrestlemania, booked in advance.