- Next story Monday Night Raw – April 19, 1999: WWF Needs Ritalin
- Previous story Monday Night Raw – June 16, 2014: Sooner Than Later
Sponsored Links
Random Review
Recent Comments
- Mike M. on Dynamite – November 20, 2024: This Didn’t Make Me Any More Interested In Full Gear
- Thomas Hall on Ask KB
- Grandmaster B on Ask KB
- Thomas Hall on Smackdown – September 21, 2007: The Wedding Show
- Liam Fenech on Ask KB
Sponsored Links
Categories
- AEW (623)
- Columns (426)
- ECW (102)
- General (1,687)
- Daily News Update (813)
- Hidden Gems (51)
- Match Compilations (2)
- Guest Posts (16)
- Impact (766)
- Miscellaneous (683)
- NXT (1,185)
- PPV Previews (408)
- Raw (1,697)
- ROH (518)
- Site Stuff (472)
- Smackdown (1,142)
- TNA (159)
- TNA PPV (211)
- Uncategorized (4)
- WCW (545)
- WCW PPV (162)
- WWE (1,567)
- WWE PPV (1,499)
- WWF PPV (1,112)
Sponsored Links
I think its fine to hold off the eventual Ambrose/Rollins Match or Matches and put them in the 2nd MITB. I like having one for the Title and the other for the Contract with their now being only World Title. Granted having both Contracts on the line was cool but this works. MITB has arguably been the Best PPV of the year its first 4 editions.
Just curious, if the 2nd ladder match wasn’t taking place, how would you like to see the rest of this PPV booked?
That’s part of the problem this year.
Usos vs. Wyatts
Rollins vs. Ambrose
Paige vs. whoever
This is where the MITB match gets annoying as there’s almost nothing else you could put together. Having a second one makes it even worse because you’re going to get a bunch of lame matches that people don’t care about.
It definitely makes for an uneven card. Rollins and Ambrose are already in the second ladder match. I’m guessing Barrett, Ziggler, Kane, Kofi, and maybe Big Show join them. That leaves the Usos/Wyatts, Paige/Who Cares, a Rusev squash, and I don’t know what else. I wouldn’t mind seeing them have Neville defend the NXT title to give him some exposure to those who don’t have the WWE Network.
I assume with this being announced that the Rollins/Ambrose match will be built up even more to Battle Ground or maybe even hold out until Summerslam if they can keep the flame going. I imagine the ladder match to include most of the guys who lost qualifying matches for the other ladder match.
KB, why the hate on this? Do you find the concept to be played out or something?
Oh no. I found the concept played out five years ago. Now I find it to be the thing I dread the most all year. It’s such a lazy way of getting something done and we have to wait for it to get done for months at a time like the Sword of Damocles. Instead of building someone up (like they did with Daniel Bryan), we get something lame like Jack Swagger. If you notice, almost none of the MITB cash ins have done much good long term. It’s because there are no roots to a lot of what happens and it doesn’t hold up.
I agree with you. I think the only person who was elevated somewhat from MITB was Edge and he was going to get there anyway. I also still enjoy the way Van Dam cashed in, laying down the challenge in advance.
While you’re right about the long-term staying power being pretty much non-existent, I still find it exciting because it can come from anywhere and there’s always the hope (sucker) that it works out. Dolph’s cash-in had a lot of fans interested. When Daniel Bryan won the briefcase I think people were interested with where it could go.
Their track record isn’t great but I think I still enjoy the concept of it more than not having it at all.
So why is the World title match billed as a “Money In The Bank” Ladder match if there isn’t a “Money In The Bank” briefcase?
Of course. They aren’t just lazy. They’re stupid.