Write an Article

SK Exclusive: Massive confusion over future of Money in the Bank PPV

What lies ahead for Money in the Bank, after Vince McMahon booked the future of the Universal Title, over-looking MITB?

Roman Reigns has never won the Money in the Bank

What's the story?

As we mentioned on our podcast, The “Dirty Sheets,” sources have indicated to us that there is mass confusion this year over what to do with the “Money in the Bank” PPV.

We were told that Vince McMahon was so keen to insert the WWE Universal Title into the Goldberg vs. Lesnar match at WrestleMania, with the future plan being that someone from the main roster would dethrone Lesnar SummerSlam, that he completely overlooked the fact that the “Money in the Bank” PPV is currently slated to be a Raw PPV.

You can hear the full details below by listening to the audio from our “DS Breaking News” show:

In case you didn’t know...

Since the WWE Brand Extension, PPVs such as TLC, Hell in the Cell and Elimination Chamber have all been allocated to specific brands. Money in the Bank is currently meant to be a Raw-only PPV, meaning SmackDown would not have a Money in the Bank winner.

However, during the last Brand Extension, both brands got to have separate Money in the Bank holders, as Raw and Smackdown only PPVs were scrapped in 2007, way before Money in the Bank left WrestleMania and became it’s own PPV in 2010.

The heart of the matter

Vince McMahon did not think Money in the Bank was a Smackdown brand show or cross-branded show. The story here is that he completely overlooked the PPV, whilst planning out the future of the WWE Universal Title. SmackDown writer Ryan Ward is said to be keen to have the Money in the Bank on Smackdown.

As it stands, Raw is looking into adding an extra PPV to their schedule on June 4th, in order to give Smackdown the PPV. However, Raw writers were also told to come up with ideas, in case the company decide not to go ahead with an extra PPV.

Vince McMahon is said to be opposed to making Money in the Bank a cross-brand PPV, as he strongly believes the original “BIG 4” should remain as such, continuing on with the concept of making those four shows about the entire weekend, rather than just a one night PPV (NXT, PPV, Raw and Smackdown, all in the same City).

So to summarise, the options are as follows:

  • Book a Raw PPV for June 4th and give Money in the Bank to Smackdown, as Ryan Ward would like the blue brand to have it.
  • Come up with ideas for a Raw Money in the Bank winner. I assume failing to cash-in, simply isn’t viable.
  • Bite the bullet and make Money in the Bank a cross-branded PPV and add weekend events to schedule, essentially making it a Big 5.
  • What's next?
  • The WWE will move ahead with its planned title matches at WrestleMania. The situation of Brock Lesnar as WWE Universal Champion will probably be looked at afterwards. It’s worth noting, that last time Brock was Champion, his dates were far more restricted.
  • During this run, he’s likely to defend at five to six major house shows, appear every two to three weeks on Raw and work every Raw PPV until SummerSlam. It certainly won’t be like 2014, where we didn’t see Brock Lesnar on TV for the entire NFL Season, which is from September to January. 
  • Sportskeeda’s take

It’s quite amazing how the owner of the WWE can overlook one of his own PPVs. However, it is often said by WWE talents and Dave Meltzer, that not much is planned out too far in advance and even things that are planned out can change.

It’s easy to believe that WWE has been fully engrossed in laying out their WrestleMania card, which itself has changed multiple times in the last three to four months. Most people seem to solely focus on Vince McMahon scrapping the match between The Undertaker and John Cena.

However, Shane McMahon vs. Brock Lesnar, Finn Balor vs. Kevin Owens and Ronda Rousey vs Charlotte Flair, are also all off the table, because of various factors. They include Jericho and Owens’ amazing chemistry, Goldberg being super-over and Ronda Rousey being knocked out. WWE did not bank on any of those occurrences.

The only matches that remain on the table from early November are, Shaq vs. Big Show and Seth Rollins vs. Triple H, with doubts now cast over the latter due to Seth Rollins’ injury on Raw last week.

I believe the WWE should make Money in the Bank a cross-branded PPV and make room for a Big 5. It will only generate more money, should WWE add more weekend events to make the event more special.

I understand the tradition of having a ‘BIG 4” and those being your oldest 4 PPVs, that originated from the 1980s, however, as Nick mentioned on the podcast, Survivor Series was overlooked for many years. Occasionally the WWE would present something relevant on the show, such as, The Rock and Cena vs Miz and R-Truth in 2012.

However, more often than not, it has rarely felt like a “BIG 4” and more like a Big 3. I don’t think it does the WWE any harm to go in the direction of a Big 5. I think it does more harm to the brand who end up going without a Money in the Bank holder.


Send us news tips at fightclub@sportskeeda.com  

Fetching more content...