Can we agree MITB is the 4th biggest WWE show?

[MenacingMonk]

Struggle Series ain't been relevant since, shyt, I can't even remember.

 

[GunRanger]

do they even still do 4man teams?

 

[Here Comes the Pain]

Yep the mitb ppv took that spot a while ago. Survivors series is a former shell of itself.

The wwe didn't even put any effort into building up a survivor series match.

 

[Mastamimd]

Yeah because it actually...matters.

They were on to something with the Authority leaving angle last year, only to have the dude that got over the Authority slowly dwindle in importance as well as bringing them back. They kinda put the nail in the coffin in SS after that.

 

[HollywoodP]

last years survivor series was the shyt...it was booked like it was actually important. MITB has been a big PPV since Punk Vs Cena. This past years one sucked though. Even though this years survivor series sucked...the lead up tournament was good.

That big 4 shyt is really a bunch of bullshyt...the only PPVs that WWE really cares about is Wrestlemania and Summerslam. If another PPV ends up classic its really due to timing. Royal Rumble has been despicable the past 2 years.

 

[CBoz]

Survivor Series has been crap for decades.

 

[Stack Money]

No the Elimination Chamber is 4th (but that could change if they don't go back to 2 Chamber matches and keep it in February) wit TLC bein 5th, only reason Survivor Series ain't in the top 4 is cause they don't have traditional Survivor Series matches anymore. They only had 1 on the show not includin the kickoff and wasted the other ones on Raw/Smackdown shows before the PPV, they didn't even have the Brothers Of Destruction and Wyatt Family in a Survivor Series match they coulda had 2 people join Undertaker/Kane and made it another elimination match.

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

last years survivor series was the shyt...it was booked like it was actually important. MITB has been a big PPV since Punk Vs Cena. This past years one sucked though. Even though this years survivor series sucked...the lead up tournament was good.

That big 4 shyt is really a bunch of bullshyt...the only PPVs that WWE really cares about is Wrestlemania and Summerslam. If another PPV ends up classic its really due to timing. Royal Rumble has been despicable the past 2 years.

rumble has sucked since 2011. ADR, Sheamus, cena, batista, and rome. that's 5 straight years of awful choices for the winner

 

[Kill Dat Noize]

MITB fu*ked up the game, and not for the better. it has produced the worst championship reigns in history.

 

[Golayitdown]

MITB fu*ked up the game, and not for the better. it has produced the worst championship reigns in history.

It definitely has more bad cash ins and reigns than good ones. IMO, hasn't really been used right many times since Edge's cash in. It's should be for somebody who actually has a long term main event plan rather than for somebody whose cash in will be a short term (e.g. one night) surprise. Who wants to see somebody who has no buildup, no direction, no crowd support, (most of the time) on a losing streak, get the biggest title in the company out of the blue?

 

[Kill Dat Noize]

It definitely has more bad cash ins and reigns than good ones. IMO, hasn't really been used right many times since Edge's cash in. It's should be for somebody who actually has a long term main event plan rather than for somebody whose cash in will be a short term (e.g. one night surprise)

i hate the concept all around, i really do... but if they must keep it then at least change the stipulation. it worked with edge because he exploited the rules and it got him over as a heel, but you would think in storyline that they would have learned from that so that no one else could do the same thing.

the winner of MITB can still challenge for the title anytime they want, but it should still have to be an actual MATCH.

 

[ExodusNirvana]

MITB and the rules of it are fine IMO...the MITB match should always be the last match of that PPV in order to add importance to it, if not the 2nd to last so that if the belt is defended later that night, the MITB winner can come out and let whoever has the strap know to keep their head up.

I love MITB...the idea of that Wild Card adds to the credibility of the champion especially if he defends and beats the MITB winner

 

[Golayitdown]

i hate the concept all around, i really do... but if they must keep it then at least change the stipulation. it worked with edge because he exploited the rules and it got him over as a heel, but you would think in storyline that they whould have learned from that so that no one else could do the same thing.

the winner of MITB can still challenge for the title anytime they want, but it should still have to be an actual MATCH.

I don't mind the randomness to an extent, but if they don't keep the person holding it as a credible threat, it gets nothing long term.

I am 100% against MITB getting cashed in on guys who win their first title though.

 

[Kill Dat Noize]

MITB and the rules of it are fine IMO...the MITB match should always be the last match of that PPV in order to add importance to it, if not the 2nd to last so that if the belt is defended later that night, the MITB winner can come out and let whoever has the strap know to keep their head up.

I love MITB...the idea of that Wild Card adds to the credibility of the champion especially if he defends and beats the MITB winner

ADDS to the credibility of the champion?

what does it mean to be champion if some midcarder can steal it from under you without repurcussion?

all MITB has done is put the belt on guys who could have never won it without it.

 

[ExodusNirvana]

ADDS to the credibility of the champion?

what does it mean to be champion if some midcarder can steal it from under you without repurcussion?

all MITB has done is put the belt on guys who could have never won it without it.

It adds to the credibility because if you're the WWE Champ you are the best, you shouldn't have an issue beating a mid-carder

If the champ loses to a mid carder than clearly he was'nt the champ