WWE Money in the Bank 2013: One or Two Ladder Matches?
On tonight's episode of Raw, Stephanie McMahon announced the seven men that would take part in a Money in the Bank ladder match for a title opportunity at the WWE Championship—but no reference was made to the World Heavyweight Championship having a briefcase of its own this year.
Was this a slip up, wherein McMahon should have announced that the winner of this singular ladder match would get a shot at either title like it used to be, or was this an omission done simply because WWE has yet to figure out which people will be placed in this other match?
Judging by the competitors involved in the announced match, it definitely feels as though this is the one and only Money in the Bank ladder match that will be on the card.
While the Money in the Bank concept originally was one match with one briefcase used as a contract for either world champion, it has become tradition since the onset of the pay-per-view event's creation to have two: a red case for the WWE title and a blue case for the World Heavyweight title.
However, WWE has put so many stars in this one match that there are very few left to legitimize having a second one.
CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, Sheamus, Randy Orton, Christian, Kane and Rob Van Dam are the announced competitors so far. Each one of them is a former world champion and oddly enough, currently more on the babyface playground than the heel one. These men are also some of the only main-eventers left on the roster.
Who is left to participate in a second ladder match?
Injuries have taken away Rey Mysterio, Kofi Kingston, Jack Swagger, Big Show and even Fandango.
While Dean Ambrose does not appear to be set to defend his United States Championship against anyone in particular, the other two members of The Shield—Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins—have just entered a new program with The Usos, rendering the likelihood of their involvement in this match almost completely gone.
The Miz and Curtis Axel have teased a continuation of their feud, so an Intercontinental Championship match could potentially to take these two men out of the running to compete in this as well.
Big E Langston could very easily just be left to do nothing but accompany Dolph Ziggler to the ring in his title match against Alberto Del Rio.
This leaves virtually nobody left of value. Outside of Wade Barrett, Damien Sandow and Cody Rhodes, everyone else on the roster is virtually nonexistent. If they can even find time to get on television, they are made to look like a complete joke. A match as important as this, with a shot on the line at what is supposed to be the company's second-biggest title, cannot exist on the strengths of Khali, Zack Ryder, R-Truth, Antonio Cesaro, Sin Cara or tag teams like Tons of Funk, 3MB and The Prime Time Players.
If WWE intends to have a second match dedicated to a shot at the World Heavyweight Championship, bigger names need to be involved for it to be worth anything. With a group consisting of the people above, it would have such little credibility that there would be almost no point to it.
On the other hand, if WWE is planning on having just the one solitary ladder match, it appears that the likes of Barrett, Sandow and Rhodes are being completely ignored on this card. Despite being talented and young, those three would be deprived of their right at a future championship simply because they have not won a championship before.
Also, if WWE does indeed go with just one match, a clarification needs to be made in regards to the title shot. Is this just going to be for the WWE Championship, as implied so far, or will this sole briefcase also be eligible for a World Heavyweight title shot?
Nothing has been directly stated so far, but it would appear that we will be only seeing one ladder match this year.
I personally disagree with this choice, as I feel that having one for each title helps legitimize the World Heavyweight Championship more and provide more flexibility in programming throughout the year.
Should there be two Money in the Bank ladder matches?
However, a case could be made in favor of dropping the dual concept. While I would argue that Barrett, Sandow and Rhodes deserve better treatment than this, in the eyes of the powers-that-be in WWE, those three may not be held in the highest regard. To WWE Creative, the others may be the only ones worthy of this position. If there are only plans for one cash-in throughout the year, why bother creating a second one and splitting your roster just for the sake of having another person hold a briefcase for a title shot that you don't want him to have?
Hopefully, more details will come soon as to whether or not there will be a second Money in the Bank contract for the World Heavyweight Championship or if the singular one will allow for a shot at this title as well.
Until then, what are your thoughts on the issue? Do you think WWE will have two ladder matches or just one? Would you prefer the split with two winners or do you think having one briefcase is the better way to go? Which people do you think are being overlooked if there's only one match?
Tell us what's on your mind in the comments below!
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?