While thinking about doing away with the Elimination Chamber and Hell in a Cell events—but keeping the matches—Extreme Rules presented something of a problem.
See, the Extreme Rules match is basically a street fight so the importance of that match is different from those two as we’ll see street fights throughout the year in WWE.
What to Do with WWE Extreme Rules?
Some main events might even degrade into an Extreme Rules match since there’s still that referee discretion element. A referee might be more lenient to ensure a definite fall ends the match. Others will be more by the book.
So, Extreme Rules can…stay I suppose. If anything, it should be presented as kind of an Attitude Era throwback night. The one night of the year where WWE gets wild and gets an attitude. It’s like their Halloween Havoc.
Triple H doesn’t have a magic wand to just change things instantly. Changes have to be accommodating enough not to ruin something else that’s already in place. In the case of doing away with Elimination Chamber and Hell in a Cell as annual events, that would’ve presented more of a branding issue than a scheduling issue.
Should Money in the Bank Remain Its Own Event?
Since the two matches would be able to appear any time of the year per brand—SmackDown could run Hell in a Cell at SummerSlam and RAW might drop their Hell in a Cell at Royal Rumble for instance—the events themselves could be rebranded.
WWE’s got perfectly unused, closely associated No Mercy and Unforgiven brands right there.
Then we have Money in the Bank. I always thought it was weird that it became its own event from humble beginnings as a more flexible title opportunity in the year. It was the one that would make for an interesting side story throughout the year before becoming one of the main characters.
That’s different from the Royal Rumble match which pretty much put the winner of the match on the Road to WrestleMania. Sure, that WM opportunity can be put into jeopardy along the way. Hell, someone’s shine by get ruined by a third wheel in the match.
The Money in the Bank match just made the title picture more hectic. This guy is treated as kind of a floating number one contender or contender zero.
What’s also weird about this match is that there is nothing that says that the MitB briefcase holder can’t get a title opportunity without having to use the briefcase.
Technically, the holder could be put into a favorable position without needing to cash it in. WWE is good at making sure this doesn’t happen by keeping the holder busy enough to not pursue the title while holding the briefcase.
It’s a juggling act, for sure. Overall, I don’t see a problem with it being its own event. However, I feel as though it was better served as a feature match on WrestleMania.
As its own event, it just seems as though it should always end the event—similar to how the Royal Rumble match did in the past.
What are you thoughts? Is the Money in the Bank fine as it is? Should it be a feature match on WrestleMania? Or should it at least close the show?
CHECK IT OUT: To get The Overtimer’s Hottest Stories, Breaking News and Special Features in your email, CLICK HERE!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJVH9BTiRLE
