Is the MitB Briefcase the big career starter you'd think it is?

Out of all the MitB winners, who has it actually benefited?

I'd argue only Edge and CM Punk have become full time main eventers because of their win.

Compared to the Royal Rumble, it's not turned out to be the rocket to the main event that it was originally set out to be. Why do you think this is? Is it because it's seen as a cheap way to win the title, therefore the win isn't as respected as it should be? Or do you think it's more down to creative's choices as winners?

I'd say Daniel Bryan has certainly benefited from it. It kick-started his heel run which lead to the anger management stuff and Team Hell-No and the rest is history.

I loved the MitB concept at first, but when you look at it objectively you're right, its rarely benefiting anyone, and has led to many a number of meaningless champions. I dont think its entirely the fault of the concept though, but the fault of the WWE for failing to book these guys well.

I dont agree with the notion that its a cheap win, you earned that right when you beat 5/6/7 other guys in a grueling ladder match. Winning the match proves a guy is championship material. Cheap cash-ins dont devalue it for me but the poor booking afterwards certainly does.

Naming Miz, Swagger and Ziggler off the top of my head as three failed runs. Ziggler was injured which isnt his fault, but both Swagger and Miz were booked horribly after winning the belt. Its a great way to help a guy step up to that level, but they never follow it up with decent booking.

What it gives you is two massive moments. First the win, and then, if the crowd really want you, then the cash in. That might be the biggest moment of Ziggler's career. Everyone went nuts for it.

In many ways you could say its the same with the Rumble nowadays. It's because winning the title doesnt make you main event any more. Its all about the follow up.

Can I just point out Samo that I personally don't think the cash in is cheap but I've seen plenty of people on the internet say that they think it is.

It should be, the main problem is the booking before they win the briefcase which often makes them look very weak meaning when they win the briefcase it's hard to take them seriously as world title challengers. Secondly, when they do have the briefcase they are often buried, I assume the logic here is that WWE wants their cash in to be a surprise but what it actually does is make them look ridiculous when they do win the title. Finally often Money in the Bank winners win their first world title with their cash in and are then immeadiately booked as weak which devalues them further. Money in the Bank as a concept is fantastcic, it's just the winners are booked so poorly.

Crimey has it right. It's all down to WWE booking the winners terribly.

Is it a career definer? No, it used to be when it was fresh, same with the Rumble, I think the last time the Rumble truly made someone was in 2005 when coincidently enough was the year MitB was formed

I personally think that turning it into a PPV was where it went wrong. Don't get me wrong, this years MITB PPV was actually better than I expected, but I mostly think that was down to the Briefcase match participants.