It's been ten years since the first Money in the Bank match took place at WrestleMania 21. Since then it has become WWE's top stunt match and a reliable star-making tool. It's also broken away from WrestleMania to get its own annual show, which is routinely one of the most exciting and eventful pay-per-views of the year.
What's nice about the Money in the Bank show is that it's
far enough removed from WrestleMania for the writing team to have moved beyond
reruns and be offering something new, generally making the card feel fresh and
vibrant. It can usually be taken as an attempt to do something new and get
things in place for SummerSlam. Free of the pressures of building towards a
fast-approaching 'Mania, or paying it off, Money in the Bank is perfectly
placed to be experimental and interesting.
That said there are numerous rematches this year but the big
two, Owens v Cena and Ambrose v Rollins, are only rematches because of the last
minute addition of Elimination Chamber to the special event line-up. Had that
not happened both of those matches would be much fresher. Brand new in the case
of Owens v Cena.
The Money in the Bank ladder match itself helps too, of
course. It's a match so busy that it almost always features something memorable
as everyone tries to cram in some new, death-defying spot or insane bump. As it
generally features many of WWE's top names, and is a key part of the show's
appeal, the layout of the match and it's bigger spots get a lot of attention.
Those same big names get people invested. As does the prize: a WWE world title
shot anytime, anywhere during the following year. The briefcase has been built
up so well over the last decade that winning it means something. People know
that and react as though winning the briefcase means something. Because it does.
This year's show will feature two ladder matches, one for
the title match-bestowing briefcase and one for the WWE world heavyweight
championship. The latter will feature Seth Rollins defending against Dean
Ambrose. It's come about because just over a week ago Ambrose pinned Rollins to
win the WWE championship at the Elimination Chamber show, only to have the
title cruelly snatched away from him after the match's original referee altered
the decision and disqualified Rollins for assaulting him. Ambrose kept the win
but lost the prize.
'The Lunatic Fringe' earned another shot at Rollins via
some Steve Austin lite jiggery pokery the next evening on RAW. The match was
given the ladder stip because Rollins and Ambrose haven't done one yet and it's
the traditional WWE method of sorting out title disputes of above average
complexity. Ambrose being in possession of the title belt while Rolins is recognised
as champ qualifies as above average complexity by wrestling standards.
I'll say the same thing about this match as I do about
every Rollins v Ambrose match: it will be really good because Ambrose and Rollins
don't have bad matches against one another. I imagine they'll do some
interesting stuff with the ladder gimmick, even though we've seen it so many
times before that being genuinely innovative is nigh on impossible. I'll be
very surprised if Rollins doesn't leave with the title. He has a rematch with
Brock Lesnar waiting for him some time in the next few months. It could be a
non-title match but I don't think it will be. We've also yet to see him defend
the gold against Roman Reigns.
There's also the fact that nobody seems to know what to
do with Dean Ambrose. He's immensely popular, despite being given little to do
for months on end, but nobody seems to know where to slot him on the card in
the long run. I can sympathise with this: I love a bit of fantasy booking but I
haven't got a clue what to suggest for Ambrose beyond having him be the vaguely
rebellious character he already is. The thing is that I'm not paid to come up
with things for wrestlers to do and the writing team is. Right now I think the
best we can hope for regarding Ambrose is a commitment to properly building
towards either a Rollins v Reigns v Ambrose triple threat or a Shield reunion.
Both will happen at some point but I don't think Ambrose will do anything
meaningful beforehand.
In other title matches the Prime Time Players will challenge
New Day for the tag team championship, Big Show will change Ryback for the
Intercontinental championship, and Paige will challenge Nikki Bella for the
Divas championship. Darren Young and Titus O'Neil were booked very strongly in
the tag team Chamber match last month, designed to set them up as credible
challengers here. I don't think they'll win but I do like the fact that WWE are
finally doing something with them and offering a division that doesn't just
consist of two teams feuding over the titles and a bunch of others having
meaningless matches. This should be enjoyable (I'm particularly interested in a
Big E v Titus stretch) with the PTPs losing following New Day shenanigans. It's
the Lucha Dragons we should be looking at as the men who'll relieve Big E and
co of the gold.
I have little interest in Big Show versus Ryback. Extreme
Rules demonstrated that Show can participate in worthwhile matches when enough
planning goes into them, but his opponent there was Reigns and I think there
was a sense of urgency to elevate him that isn't felt with 'The Big Guy'. I
expect Ryback to win but I don't think this match will do him the favours
Reigns' match with 'The Giant' did.
The Divas title match is a peculiarity. Last month both
women were faces. The night after Elimination Chamber Nikki and Brie switched
places during Nikki's title defence against Paige, allowing the fresh Brie to
get the win on her not-really-identical-anymore sister's behalf. That was a distinctly
heelish move, odd considering Nikki had only officially become a face less than
two months earlier. It's an example of how little thought goes into the main
roster's women's division, as is the fact that we're getting the fourth Nikki
and Paige meeting at a special event in the last six months.
I think we could be due a title change. That Michael Cole
has been harping on about the length of her reign recently makes it seem as
though they're positioning her (or trying to) as a dominant champion, the
implication being that whoever defeats her for the title will have really achieved something. I could be
wrong though. It could just as easily be a new trend that's going to continue
throughout Nikki's record-setting title reign.
Speaking of big achievements, Money in the Bank will play
host to a Cena v Owens rematch. They stole the show at Elimination Chamber.
With two ladders matches on the this show it'll be harder for them to do that
here. They'll also be hampered by raised expectations. As long as they hit the
same blend of punch exchanges, big moves, and kick outs I'll be happy. It's not
to everyone's tastes but it satisfies mine.
The right outcome (and it most certainly would be the right
outcome) would be an Owens victory. It would make it clear that the newcomer
has the veteran's number and that the outcome of their first meeting wasn't a
fluke. Nothing about it would weaken Cena. It would take something far more drastic
to lower his standing after his decade on top of the company than simply losing
back-to-back matches to a (well-introduced) newcomer. It would boost Owens'
standing. As he's the NXT champion it would probably do NXT some good too.
Sadly every Cena rivalry of the past tells us that Owens
will lose. Just look at what happened with Rusev. Cena lost the first match in
the series then went on to defeat 'The Bulgarian Brute' three shows in a row.
Rusev, previously unpinned and unsubmitted, had his momentum crushed with his
prolonged interaction with Cena. Owens has less momentum to lose, but a loss
would still harm him. He'd become just another guy who lost to Cena after
getting lucky one time. There's something to be said for feuds where one guy
always wins. Cena desperately needs a feud like that like that. Handled right
it could stretch for years, on and off, without ever becoming boring.
Finally there's the Money in the Bank ladder match. The
official entrants right now are Randy Orton, Dolph Ziggler, Adrian Neville,
Sheamus, Kane, Kofi Kingston and so-called 'Big Dog' Roman Reigns. Kane aside
this is a nice blend of talent, mixing established names with guys who can make
this sort of match work and guys who could make convincing winners. Orton can
never be completely written off in a situation like this. Sheamus and Ziggler
are both in a position where they could get a surprise win. Roman Reigns is the
obvious favourite. That's half the guys in the match that could theoretically
win. Two of the other three should do something memorable in the match.
I can't pick against Roman Reigns with this match. He's
been getting The Push since the start of the year. The company held off on
crowning him world champion at WrestleMania for fear of a harmful backlash from
the hardcore crowd. Undeterred they continued building Reigns up with a better
than it had any right to be match opposite Big Show at Extreme Rules and a
strong showing in a four-way at Payback (in which it was Randy Orton who was
booked to take the pin). It was too early for Reigns at 'Mania because WWE
hadn't been making him look like a credible singles guy for long enough. That's
no longer the case. Reigns is ready and the Money in the Bank briefcase is his
route to the top.
Money in the Bank looks like an above average show, as
usual. It should easily better the majority of WWE shows this year although it
will have to be something special to be more enjoyable than the Elimination
Chamber Network special. It has the potential to do it though, and I hope it
does. Because done right Money in the Bank is one of the best wrestling
concepts out there.
***
Predictions
summary:
Seth Rollins to defeat Dean AmbroseRoman Reigns to win Money in the Bank
Kevin Owens to defeat John Cena
New Day to defeat the Prime Time Players
Ryback to defeat Big Show
Paige to defeat Nikki Bella for the Divas championship
No comments:
Post a Comment