Money in the Bank Possible Swerve Coming In The Main Event

Discussion in 'PPV's & Specials' started by The GOAT, Jun 11, 2014.

  1. http://www.pro-wrestling.com/news.php?a=1&n=NTg0NDQ=

    lol I remember this being rumored for TLC last year as well (the rumor being that Cena would grab the WWE Championship and Orton would grab the World Heavyweight Championship, essentially swapping world titles with each other.) I hadn't even thought of it being a possibility for MITB. The only logical reason behind it would be splitting the titles again, but I don't see any reason for that. And having two people grab separate titles and then "re-unify" them in a match between them at Battleground would be kinda dumb.
     
  2. Am I the only one that can see Bryan or Brie coming and getting them, so then even if Hunter strips him again, it'll be another month until the next PPV at which point Bryan might be back anyway?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Zing! Zing! x 1
  3. I see 2 reasons to do that.... Wyatt and Reigns... right now they have 2 new guys they want to push but they only have 1 title... if Orton grabs one then he and Reigns could wrestle for it eventually... if Cena grabs the other then he and Bray could wrestle for it... it will give a reason to not only extend the current storylines but to also add some reasoning behind them. Wyatt/Cena has no reason to go on anymore... but it seems like WWE wants it to.. so battling for the title makes sense. Adding the title into the mix with Orton/Reigns puts another log on the fire. Plus having the separate championships gives us as fans much more to look forward to each PPV.
     
  4. That would be terrible. The prospect of crowning a new champion is at least exciting, especially since there's a few different candidates who could plausibly win it and no certainty as to which will. Bryan just coming down and taking the title (and then being stripped again, only to hold an ordinary match for the vacant title the following month at Battleground) would make the ladder match and everything leading up to it a total waste of time.

    I guess that makes sense, but if it's a heel who walks into Summerslam as champion (I assume a rivalry with Bryan will begin there), then I like them keeping the title for at least two months instead of just one.
     
  5. Yeah, I could see Bryan vs Wyatt for one of the titles at Summerslam
     
  6. One of? Thought we were discussing the notion that two men each grabbing a championship would likely lead to them squaring off at Battleground so that the two titles could become whole again.

    Also, Bryan versus Wyatt is what I'm hoping for for Summerslam, indeed.
     
  7. I'd like the titles to be separate again actually... I like the notion of 2 champs/2 main events/2 opportunities to reach the top of the ladder. I think it opens everything up more.. gives creative more to work with, to me it just makes everything more exciting.
     
  8. I'm in support of bringing two world championships back only if they resurrect the brand split and especially brand-exclusive PPVs along with it. At the moment, I don't see enough star power to maintain two rosters, or even just two main event-caliber rosters. If you just push any superstar that has talent and potential to a world championship with the roster of superstars as it is now, the midcard will take a serious hit. And some guys (Cesaro being a prime example) could remain an upper-midcarder at best for their entire career (with maybe one world championship win somewhere in there to show that they "made it" at least once, ala Benoit and Guerrero) and I wouldn't mind. Not everyone is meant to be a full-fledged main eventer.
     
  9. I think this would be kind of neat if it led to a final unification match where one title was completely removed. No? Or keep em both, that's cool too.
     
  10. I'm still not sold on the unified title. With the size of the roster it makes sense to have more belts, it gives them more opportunities to utilize more people.
     
  11. Trips should take the belt. I really don't think it makes sense for a company to have two world titles when there's no brand split, nor am I a fan of a "world" title that's really just a glorified midcard belt that doesn't matter.
     
  12. I've always hated this perception that someone can't be relevant unless they're carrying a championship or fighting for it. There were plenty of entertaining angles and matches in the Attitude Era (and before) that weren't centered around a title. Too many championships on a show takes away from the prestige of any of them.
     
  13. I'm not saying that people aren't relevent unless going for a title. It just means we get an extra champ and more feuds. Yes, the Attitude Era did have good storylines- but this isn't that Era anymore. Creative can't seem do anything well at the moment- I guess I'm living in hope that the belt split might encourage something better.
     
  14. I don't see a need to create two "world titles" again when you've already got two midcard belts that you're trying to make relevant again. And it's almost starting to work. Barrett with the IC Belt is starting to come up (I think it suffered a bit when it ended up with Sheamus on top and going into the ladder match for the WWEWHC), but it still has a ways to go. Meanwhile, you've put the US Title on a former world champion who's wrestling regularly on Raw and SD, which will bring more visibility and relevance to that title.

    Meanwhile, you've got one world title that's "in turmoil" at the moment, which is in itself interesting television. It feels more to me that you had one week too many to fill time on, which means that the last week's Raw sorta dragged.

    As to the idea you have to have a title for a feud to be relevant: Reigns/Orton doesn't need a title to be relevant. Ambrose/Rollins doesn't need a title to be relevant. Cesaro/RVD doesn't need a title to feel relevant.

    The problem with WWE Creative is actually their simple inconsistency, not to mention the fact that HHH seems to not be paying so much attention to the whole show as he is to the Authority!Evolution/Shield angle, as he was when he was not participating so actively on television. It's given him the tunnel vision that most successful wrestlers have, but a good booker can't afford.

    wk
     
  15. Read a rumor DB will snag one of the belts
     
  16. Having Del Rio and Shitemus in MITB for the WWE-WHC is not best for business, Hunter. Get your shit together, WWE. Now if Cena gets added, it's only gonna get worse.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. Two successful former world champions (including one of the top draws in Mexico), by which I mean Sheamus and ADR, in the WWEWHC match isn't best for business? Sheamus, although hated by the IWC, sells a ton of merch and is over with the live crowds, particularly the kids. He also has the "championship look" and is entertaining on the mic and in the ring to everybody who's not too cool to be entertained. Alberto Del Rio has been one of the most successful heels in the business (and didn't do a bad job when he was turned face, although he never got over as much as he probably should have) and he's really only been overshadowed since the Punk Championship heel run. Since then, he's sorta floated around the upper midcard, but he's probably one of the best in-ring performers in the WWE.

    The IWC is the only group of people on the planet who don't think Sheamus and ADR shouldn't be in this match.

    wk
     
    • Zing! Zing! x 1
  18. Instead of Separating the titles again and having to pretend the WHC is as important as the WWE championship, they could just add another title that is above the current mid-card titles, but below the main title. I'm not sure if there is a extinct title that fits the profile, but if there isn't they could do the following.

    Unify the IC title and the US title and make it a upper-midcard title. Then introduce a mid-card title like the Cruiserweight title or even the European title. That would make sure the WWE has a neat, defined hierarchy without separating titles in brands(which wouldn't make sense right now) or keeping too little titles for the current size of the roster
     
  19. But there's no reason to do all of that. You can accomplish it with the current title structure, just book the belts right and write decent storylines for them. Unless you just want to bring back the European Championship, which would be alright with me, but the U.S. Title has a more prestigious history to the majority of the WWE's fanbase. Book the IC as upper midcard and the US as lower midcard/lower card (the current booking actually would suggest they're already moving this direction). So, a guy like Bo Dallas would be booked into a series of feuds leading to the US Championship. After carrying it and defending it for a while (and losing it to an up-and-comer), he would be elevated to the IC Title scene, where he would eventually win the IC. Again, he carries it and defends it, then loses it. After that, you boost him to the main event. Obviously, there's a lot of pitfalls between debuting and main eventing Wrestlemania, but that's the sort of path the general career would take.

    As for bringing back the Cruiserweight Championship, you could do that with the current title structure in place. The Cruiserweight or Light Heavyweight (originally the CW Title was in WCW and the LHW Title was in WWE) would be treated somewhat separately, much like the Divas Championship or Tag Titles. Only certain wrestlers would compete for it, so you could keep the current title structure and still have it.

    wk