As always, here are some bonus questions for my readers. The questions are in bold and my answers are in regular text:
Which superstar left off the card should have gotten a spot on the show?
This time, it's a tie between Tyson Kidd and Zack Ryder. Kidd should've been in the SmackDown MiTB match while Ryder should've been in the RAW one. Kidd deserves it based on his in-ring work and based on the fact that his style would probably be perfect for the match.
Ryder deserves it because he has a bigger following than most of the guys in the match. There are eight spots open so I don't see why he couldn't gotten one of them. It's not like anybody's going to buy the PPV just to see Jack Swagger.
How do you think this pay-per-view will do in terms of buyrates?
It should do great. We have four matches that have potential to be in the ***1/2+ range, they did a fantastic job building up the main event, and none of the matches have a clear-cut winner. Should get the second highest buyrate of the year so far, behind WrestleMania.
Which match will steal the show?
Definitely John Cena vs. CM Punk. There's just too much anticipation going in. It might not be a technical classic, but I'd expect them to tell a great story.
Should WWE keep doing a "Money in the Bank" PPV or should there be one Money in the Bank match at WrestleMania?
It should stay as a pay-per-view. I love it. It's unpredictable. It's my third favorite PPV concept of the year, behind WrestleMania and Royal Rumble.
Will you be watching this PPV?
Of course. I'll even buy it. Don't remember the last time I was this excited for a wrestling show.
Will you be writing about this PPV?
I might write something after the event ends. However, on Sunday night, I'll just be chillaxing and enjoying the show.
And that shall conclude my official Money in the Bank pay-per-view preview. Until next time, I'm out!
If you enjoyed this article, make sure to add me on Facebook.