Should Money in the Bank lose the "anytime cash in"?

[Andrew is Good]

I was thinking about that during Impact with Gunner and his briefcase. No one has really won with it in TNA, and while WWE has made that stip really good, there are some huge downfalls. The whole concept of cashing it in at anytime really hurts the potential future of whether a guy is main event ready or not. Sure, when Edge cashed his in, he was main event ready. But everyone else pretty much stuck around the mid card and Money in the Bank was never a break out moment.

Punk went back down the mid card for awhile, and only after his "pipe bomb" and subsequent WWE Championship win as he really considered a major player. Daniel Bryan I feel is still at least somewhat of a main event guy, even with this Wyatt Family stuff. All this happened long after the cash ins. And then you see guys like Jack Swagger, The Miz and Dolph Ziggler, who really have almost tarnished the concept of being a World Champion by the way they're booked. I think it's because they have no faith in this person being a World Champion so they do the surprise cash in. And while it's good for a reaction, maybe they should stop doing that. I actually felt the Miz finally became a main eventer with how he was built up that year when he won Money in the Bank, but obviously, that's not the case.

I guess now with just one World Title, it might be easier to choose someone who can cash it in down the line. One of my issues with the two world titles was that they were traded around like nothing. Instead of living in a world of "the greatest wrestlers to never hold a World title", we have a whole bunch of guys who held the World Title and they're nobodies. We've seen them lose steam, go downhill and loss all the time.

So yeah, I know it's a good surprise when it happens, but I think now with one World Title, they should ditch the anytime cash in concept, and really think about who they want to be the next big star, like, really consider it, instead of, well, let's have Jack Swagger win.

[Deleted]

I would prefer it if they offered the winner to either do that or they choose the stipulation of the match. It allows for more variety.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

Yes the anytime cash in concept should be scrapped.


However, I don't think that they need to be overly strict or selective with MiTB winners

The Money in the Bank winner does not absolutely HAVE to be the next break out star, because if we have to make sure this guy is "ready, brother" BEFORE giving him the briefcase, then it somewhat renders the MiTB concept redundant. If the briefcase is only given to guys who are "ready", then even without the surprise cash in, the briefcase is still seen an "automatic title win" in some sense. Also the briefcase goes to a guy who doesn't "need" it.

The Briefcase should be to give a title opportunity to someone who wouldn't get one otherwise; to any guy who can't just walk out and call out the champion for a title shot (this also applies to demoted). With only one world title, I think there should be more non-championship accolades to give wrestlers a rub without having to slap a belt on them

The briefcase holder's purpose should just be to break the monotony so that the title picture isn't just a constant stagnating rotation of Cena/Orton/Punk/Bryan.

It would be nice if someone like Zack Ryder won the MiTB, cashed it in for a legit match, lost, but still had the accomplishment of winning the actual ladder match to put on his resume and the rub of being able to go toe-to-toe with the World Champion to give him some credibility.

Alternately the MiTB could serve as what the World Heavyweight Championship was in its final years. The briefcase itself could be the new "test run" prize. The MiTB holder should be "evaluated" and the outcome of the cash in would hinge on how well he performs with the briefcase over a period of time no less than three months and no more than one year. If he does well, he wins. If he does not live up to expectations, he loses

["Cane Dewey" Johnson]

I'd honestly just rather have the MITB get a guaranteed WWE Heavyweight Title Match at Summerslam at this point.

[Unaffiliated]

Yes. Enough with the surprise cash-ins. It worked the first few times as a novelty, but now it's just tired and overdone. The stipulation I believe they should go with is have the winner cash-in any time he wants, but with a set minimum amount of time between the MITB holder announcing his cash-in and the title match itself.

[Chip]

Just get rid of the briefcase all together and have the match be for a #1 Contender-ship. I don't think many people would miss the concept, I think people just really like ladder matches.

[kidkamikaze10]

They might as well do it NJPW style: set a date for the title shot. And by a date, I pretty much mean Summerslam. Even though NJPW has the cash-ins happen in their biggest event, we all know that wouldn't work for the E.

Hell, because of the messed up Naito push, it may not exactly be working for NJPW, though it does make G1 Climax VERY important.

[Starshine]

Yeah. Theyu should get to pick the time and place, but it should also have a period of grace between the challenge and the match.

For example, at an extreme I'd be fine with a MITB winner cashing in his briefcase at the start of the show for a match in the main event. But I'm really tired of the ambush cashing in.

[Emmet Russell]

I'd certainly rather the briefcase be retired at this point, especially with the loses from Cena & Sandow; the briefcase has been tarnished a lot. I like the ideas suggested that it should become a number one contenders match - especially for Summerslam - like when King of the Ring in 2002 where the winner was promised a title match at that years Summerslam event. It was an idea that worked extremely well.

Or they could just bring back the King of the Ring PPV.

[Jiren]

Jan 3, 2014 1:38:16 GMT -5 Emmet Russell said:

Or they could just bring back the King of the Ring PPV.

Pretty much

Or Keep the title "Money In The Bank" but use KOTR tournament format

[Reflecto]

The big problem is- as long as MITB is around, "the anytime cash-in" is out there. And if people stop doing it that way, they will look like an idiot when they do cash it in [and inevitably lose.] The anytime cashin has hurt the future of a lot of midcarders- but it's needed for a once-a-year freshening up the card when the show needs a shock to the system like that.

If I had to change it, though, to help the wrestler prove himself, I'd institute one change for it to potentially help the wrestler rise the ranks and prove themselves:

The Three Strikes rule for the MITB briefcase: The Money in the Bank briefcase is defended like any other title (giving the test run.) In addition, however, the MITB briefcase does not become eligible to be cashed in until the MITB briefcase holder has successfully defended the briefcase in a singles match against three former World Champions. (If the briefcase holder cannot defeat three former World Champions in one year, the MITB contract expires.)

Same effect, but allows the anytime cashin to stay, but also forces the MITB winner to be put in featured matches against "proven" competitors (or gives three separate places to pull the plug if the guy isn't taking without wasting that quick refresher option.)

[Mozenrath]

I would prefer that more of them would set up a match ahead of time, picking a stipulation for it that suits them, like RVD did.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

Jan 3, 2014 1:58:00 GMT -5 Reflecto said:

The big problem is- as long as MITB is around, "the anytime cash-in" is out there. And if people stop doing it that way, they will look like an idiot when they do cash it in [and inevitably lose.] The anytime cashin has hurt the future of a lot of midcarders- but it's needed for a once-a-year freshening up the card when the show needs a shock to the system like that.

If I had to change it, though, to help the wrestler prove himself, I'd institute one change for it to potentially help the wrestler rise the ranks and prove themselves:

The Three Strikes rule for the MITB briefcase: The Money in the Bank briefcase is defended like any other title (giving the test run.) In addition, however, the MITB briefcase does not become eligible to be cashed in until the MITB briefcase holder has successfully defended the briefcase in a singles match against three former World Champions. (If the briefcase holder cannot defeat three former World Champions in one year, the MITB contract expires.)

Same effect, but allows the anytime cashin to stay, but also forces the MITB winner to be put in featured matches against "proven" competitors (or gives three separate places to pull the plug if the guy isn't taking without wasting that quick refresher option.)

An authority figure can easily veto the anytime cash in rule anytime he/she chooses. If that big shock is needed, that then the briefcase holder can win the title in a real match. Some people should cash in and lose, since the other issue with The MiTB briefcase is that it's basically become an "automatic title win" button. I think the briefcase SHOULD be sacrificed if a wrestler doesn't cut it, because the briefcase shouldn't be an I Win button. A fresh contender or champion can be chosen by other means

One big problem I noticed with keeping the anytime cash in in play, is that whenever there's a title match, the fans will just sit on their hands waiting for the match to end so they can see if the briefcase holder will cash in or not, and then act disappointed or pissed off when it doesn't happen. Some of us on this board were doing that when Ziggler and Sandow held the MiTB. Also because of WWE's "every 'important' person has to be on every show" method of booking, the briefcase holder gets saddled into meaningless feuds simply because leaving them off the card "telegraphs" the potential cash in as that wrestler's token appearance of the night.

[mizerable]

Depends on the cash ins. In truth, even if someone ends up winning the title later, the actual cash in's that result in nothing, are usually the ones that should have been failed cash ins;

Jack Swagger
The Miz
Alberto Del Rio
Dolph Ziggler (if THAT's what they wanted, then they may as well have had him lose)

Take away their title wins, and it doesn't really matter to where they are now. I could make the same argument for guys such as RVD or Punk, but RVD really didn't have much further to go at that point, and Punk only surpassed his MITB wins (by winning at the MITB PPV...hmm).

[burdette25159]

Jan 3, 2014 1:59:42 GMT -5 Mozenrath said:

I would prefer that more of them would set up a match ahead of time, picking a stipulation for it that suits them, like RVD did.

I agree with you on that.

[Essential1]

Jan 3, 2014 1:38:16 GMT -5 Emmet Russell said:

I'd certainly rather the briefcase be retired at this point, especially with the loses from Cena & Sandow; the briefcase has been tarnished a lot.

If nobody lost though then the whole thing would be even more predictable.

[Mozenrath]

Jan 3, 2014 10:38:46 GMT -5 Essential1 said:

Jan 3, 2014 1:38:16 GMT -5 Emmet Russell said:

I'd certainly rather the briefcase be retired at this point, especially with the loses from Cena & Sandow; the briefcase has been tarnished a lot.

If nobody lost though then the whole thing would be even more predictable.

My problem with the MitB briefcase has less to do with how predictable it is, which does not bother me all that much, but is more because it completely takes the energy out of any other title program. No one expects the title to change hands, with their eyes on the briefcase, and it just turns into "Is he going to cash in?" for weeks to months on end, every time the show stops for 3 seconds.

[mrjl]

no, because it stops being Money in the Bank, something that you're virtually guaranteed if you lose the surprise cash in

May as well lose the briefcase do and make it a clipboard and look real cheap like they've done occasionally with number 1 contender matches

[Deleted]

I don't think they need to stop the stipulation so much as they need to get back to characterizing the MITB as a truly scummy heel move. Edge worked because when he did it it was at the worst possible time and came across as a truly awful thing to do. RVD's worked because he said he was using it face to face in an environment of his choosing, but still wanted to fight like a man. The MITB has SO MUCH potential as a way to drive character development. Want to remind us a guy is a jerk sneaky heel? Easy, cash in on an injured opponent. Want to promote a babyface who's going to try and break through to the upper echelon? Have him go at the champ face to face.

Just imagine a CM Punk esque anti establishment face with that case going "You held me down over and over again, but now I've got this and there's nothing you can do to stop me." Hell, you could get months of story out of that if the authority thing were going around MITB time. Daniel Bryan trying to qualify for MITB because he knows that shot means he can get the shot again, the authority trying to stop him by giving him tough qualifying matches and paying off guys in the match to stop him, tons of stuff.

The problem isn't the stipulation, it's that they're so damn lazy with it.