[MondayNightJericho]

How could they go without this match? I ALWAYS look forward to it. I guess it's because they have the MITB pay per view now...but still. They could have given us that instead of Snooki doing the most awkward and out of sync stunts that I've ever seen.

it would have been hilarious if they gave MITB the same amount of time Snooki and that match had... haha i just want one MITB match to end in like 3 minutes with a guy just sneaking up and taking the briefcase

 

[Brettles]

Because they have a whole PPV dedicated to it now????

 

[Outkazt2k9]

$$$$$$$$$$

 

[soxfan93]

3 MITB matches in 3 months destroys it. Just like HIAC, EC, TLC, etc. don't mean shit anymore.

Am I the only one that understands this?

 

[TJTheGr81]

Gimmick matches are dead.

 

[pwester]

Snooki got WWE more publicity than a MITB match would have.

 

[Stroker Ace]

I dont like the idea of taking away MITB from Mania simply because it was an unpredictable match and it got the crowd pumped which was important. If the show wasnt that great you could always count on the MITB match to save it.

Even with that being said having a PPV dedicated to it does make WWE a lot of money and I can also see it as a good move because instead of just one MITB winner you now have two. So not only is there a chance to see more than one new champion, more than one star has a chance to get a big push into the ME.

Fans may not like the move, but it's a smart one. Also there's a good chance it wont last long and we'll be seeing it at Mania again in the future so dont get too upset about it.

 

[ultimatekrang]

3 MITB matches in 3 months destroys it. Just like HIAC, EC, TLC, etc. don't mean shit anymore.

Am I the only one that understands this?

2 is still alot.

1 a year is absaloutely enough.

 

[soxfan93]

2 is still alot.

1 a year is absaloutely enough.

2 makes sense, since it's one per brand.

 

[SarcasmoBlaster]

Even two is too many imo. Just have one per year. One guy is Mr. MITB and he gets the rub. One for each brand is already overkill. Three a year is just ridiculous.

WWE has to take their foot off the gas with MITB or they are going to ruin it just like they ruined HIAC and TLC (if they haven't already.)

 

[YunisTaker]

I do not think WWE can create 2 full-time main eventers in one year/from the same concept, so I think there should be an established winner (like Kane last year) and a new guy/midcarder (like Miz last year).

 

[The Ultimate Puke]

2 makes sense, since it's one per brand.

Makes sense, but doesn't mean it's a good idea. It's too much and takes away from the unpredictability of when the winner is gonna cash in AND who he cashes it in on. It was better when people had the option of switching brands to cash in on the other shows title.

 

[Prospekt's March]

Snooki got WWE more publicity than a MITB match would have.

Yeah i think that's the main reason, besides, the MITB already has its own PPV, as already said three MITB matches in a year would be overkill.

I don't mind seeing two MITB matches actually, i'm a sucker for MITB ladder matches because they are hella entertaining, the MITB PPV was one of my favorite PPVs from last year. As for who should win the briefcases, yeah they could do the same format like last year, one MITB contract is for established main eventer or maybe a "thank you" gift for someone like Christian who probably then can cash it in on Edge some time later this year, then the other briefcase could be reserved for young, up, and coming star like John Morrison or Cody Rhodes, so yeah it's win-win situation here.

 

[J-Rod]

I love the Money in the Bank concept, but I thought it was nice to not see it this year. We saw a lot of up-and-coming wrestlers get involved in fueds and get built up going into Wrestlemania. People like Cody Rhodes, John Morrison, Dolph Ziggler, and Jack Swagger got more attention than they would have if they had simply been thrown into a match with seven people besides themselves. Daniel Bryan and Sheamus even got good buildups even though they didn't make it onto the card. This will help them establish credibility, and prepare them better for the main event in the long run.

 

[Cynic]

2 makes sense, since it's one per brand.

I don't like it. Aside from the fact brand lines have been so blurred, you also lose the unpredictability of a Raw guy cashing in on SmackDown's champion or vice versa. Not to mention that with MITB, just like with titles, it gets more watered down the more you add.

But in any event, if they were going to keep the dumbass MITB gimmick PPV, they were right to take it off WrestleMania, because we sure don't need another Jack Swagger 3-day push from jobber to champion followed by a month long title reign just to get the briefcase off him.