Money In The Bank has become one of WWE’s better shows. A lousy ladder match is still an improvement on most things and even in the confusing storylines of WWE the briefcases add an element of enjoyable chaos. Will it be the show to help them break their recent run of mediocrity? I bloody hope so.
Money In The Bank has become one of WWE’s better PPVs. In the last few years, it’s tended to be notable and not just because of the briefcase that’s on the line. However, with the brand split era meaning these Network Specials are becoming less and less unique, it’s tough to build up enthusiasm for events you don’t care about, and WWE’s booking sometimes suggests that they agree. Don’t let that put you off too much, though, as here are ten observations that we made about Money In the Bank.
There is an argument to be made for Money in the Bank having replaced Survivor Series as one of WWE’s big four shows. The last few years have had important events take place at this ladder heavy spectacle and this year is no different. Perhaps unsurprisingly, spoilers do follow.
It’s that time of year again. The time when multiple wrestlers climb into a ring and nearly kill each other for a cheap looking briefcase. I always feel split about these multi-man ladder matches. There is no denying that they are entertaining; but are they worth it? Does Damien Sandow feel like the risks he took in Money In The Bank matches were worth his time?
Money in the Bank always manages to be one of the better WWE events. The Money in the Bank matches tend to deliver and in the past we’ve had iconic moments, like CM Punk walking out with the WWE title. However, this year we came into the event just two weeks after Elimination Chamber and such a short build meant that outside of a select few feuds, mainly Cena and Owens, a lot of the build was lacking and felt rushed. However, WWE was still able to scrape a decent show out of it.