Hi Scott, the talk the other day about potential MITB winners got me thinking about Sandow. Was there ever a plan for him with the briefcase as far as you know?
I remember the match itself and the crowd was hot for Cody Rhodes, so the post MITB angle was right there. I was fine with Sandow winning as it should have elevated him and Rhodes but they blew it immediately. All the build up to MITB was them both saying the best man will win and Sandow won it fair and square. But the announcers called it as if Sandow had screwed over Rhodes. She he clearly hadn't. So Rhodes came across as a whiny sore loser who kept cheap shotting Sandow but we're supposed to be booing Sandow?
That killed his MITB reign dead in the water for me, and he never looked like a remote threat to the champ at any point in time. Plus we never even saw anything from him after becoming the second cash in loser. No reaction, no attempt to rebuild, nothing. Just back to being the go to jobber.
So what was the point of giving him the briefcase? It's not as though he didn't run with the ball and fail, because he never really got given the ball. Is it literally just another case of Vince deciding something on a whim then losing interest a week later?
Breakydafunk
Yup, pretty much. The idea seemed to be giving it to Sandow so that Cody could beat him for it at Summerslam, but they got sidetracked with the Rhodes Brothers stuff and plans changed. And then they were left with Sandow and a briefcase that they didn't want him to cash in. Ironically, they killed off Cody as well, so everyone's a winner!
One day, someone is going to write an entire book dedicated to all the stuff Vince McMahon decided to go with, then lost interest in the next day or two.
ReplyDeleteCody Rhodes getting fired by Triple H then reuniting with his brother to get revenge on the Corporation was a much more successful face turn storyline for Cody. So of course they are turning Cody heel again.
ReplyDeleteBook? That would be an epic that would make Harry Potter look like Dr. Seuss.
ReplyDeleteI think it just goes back to what has always been said about Vince: He cares about the top two or maybe three matches on any given card, and everything else just kinda happens. That isn't necessarily the wrong way to do things, but it obviously hurts stuff underneath the top.
ReplyDeleteProbably, but I'm not going to lie: I would so buy it.
ReplyDeleteIt also inhibits the ability to create new stars but then again we all already know that.
ReplyDeleteTechnically the first cash in loser. Cena won his cash in match, he just won it by DQ so no title.
ReplyDeleteI can't understand how Sandow didn't shoot to the greatest heights after he merely managed to hold his own for a few minutes before losing cleanly to a guy who was literally fighting with only one arm and had just gotten beaten down before the cash in.
Oh, of course it does. Unfortunately, Vince is only concerned about what's going on at the top at that particular moment, so we get stuff like this.
ReplyDeleteVince McMahon has just signed a heroic dog that saved the life of a kid. Sorry, Frank Grimes, you'll be tagging with Homer Ryback.
ReplyDeleteAh, that Simpsons episode was a classic.
ReplyDeleteWow quick response thanks Scott.
ReplyDeleteThe weird thing is we all know Vince loses interest in the mid card pretty quickly, but the MITB briefcases have generally been one of the most high profile things to hold. Even more so than the secondary titles.
So for Sandow to win it and be treated shabbily is just odd. Even worse was they had a ready made angle with the Rhodes Scholars that the fans were actually into and they went totally the wrong route.
I had no problem with a lower midcarder winning the briefcase and losing. Makes things more unpredictable, showing that it's not always an AUTOMATIC title win. So I'm fine with that part...
ReplyDeleteBut indeed, Sandow won the damn thing fair and square, so Cody whining about Sandow not letting him win it was all sorts of moronic.
That's one of the issues with the briefcase, to me. If a guy comes out and challenges a guy immediately after he defended/won the title, the guy with the briefcase has to win. If he doesn't, he looks like a loser for not beating a guy who just wrestled. If he challenges a guy to a future match, he looks like an idiot for not cashing in his briefcase at an opportune time.
ReplyDeleteYou can make a case that it makes sense for a face to issue a future challenge, since that's the sort of thing a face would do. That's why I think it works better if a heel wins the MITB.
Eh, higher profile but still shitty booking for awhile now. Bryan and Ziggs went on losing streak angles nearly immediately after winning the briefcase.
ReplyDeleteMy issue wasn't Sandow losing the cash in, that's fine. My issue was they set everything up wayyyy in his favor (one armed Cena! Pre match beatdown!), and then not only did he lose anyway, but they then did absolutely nothing with it.
ReplyDeleteSandow's probably a case of them giving him the MITB for the hell of it without any long term plan for him.
ReplyDeleteYep, but at least it was a close match I guess. and Sandow's moveset just isn't that good. He hit 2 of his "finishers", and... one was a neckbreaker, and I don't even recall what the other one was. Almost impossible to take him as a legit threat unless he amps up the moveset.
ReplyDeleteI thought a way out of it would have been to start a feud with whoever the I.C. title holder was at the time. Have the IC title holder. (I don't remember who it was. Say it was Christian.) Start talking trash backstage about Sandow. Have Sandow return the favor. Eventually you could have the two start interfering in matches and start getting really heated. Enough that Sandow makes a deal with HHH to use the briefcase for the IC title.
ReplyDeleteA. It might elevate the title by showing that someone wants it.
B. Sandow can sort of get out of looking like a loser by saying not only that he wanted the lesser title, but more importantly, wanted to take it from Christian.
C. You don't have Sandow anywhere near the top titles.
One of Swartzwelder's best.
ReplyDeleteIn one of the DVD commentaries, someone joked that Swartzwelder wrote more lines of Itchy and Scratchy than he did for Lisa. I always thought that was pretty funny.
ReplyDeleteThere's actually a pretty good logic for that. If you go into the match KNOWING that win or lose, you're still the #1 contender whenever you want... Will you really kill yourself to win? While your opponent DOES need the win to go up the ranks, so when it comes to crunch time, your opponent will simply want it more badly.
ReplyDeleteSort of like the final week of a football season, an 11-4 team with a locked up playoff spot vs a 8-7 team desperately trying to make the playoffs. Who's more likely to win? the team that needs it more.
But the close match meant nothing.
ReplyDeleteIf Sandow had come off it saying he wasn't good enough to beat a beaten down Cena so he was going to work harder and become better with a view to eventually beating Cena I could have got behind that.
Instead he barely seemed bothered at losing.
If you ever get the chance, I'd highly recommend the Frank Burly books. They're bizarre but hilarious.
ReplyDeleteWWE should totally steal the "Burly Shove" as a move for someone.
Hmm, not familiar with them. I may have to check them out.
ReplyDelete