Rob Van Dam, Damien Sandow and the Money in the Bank Karma Theory

[This originally started as a comment on the Del Rio/RVD Battleground preview thread, but got a bit long. I decided to do a full blown fan post - Author. And we're glad you did - Editor.]

With another pay-per-view (PPV), another round of speculation came as to whether we'd see the cash-in of the remaining Money in the Bank contract still at-large. Like usual, it surrounded the World Heavyweight Championship (WHC), which Alberto Del Rio defended against Rob Van Dam last night at Battleground. The current briefcase holder, Damien Sandow, was active on the pre-show agaist Dolph Ziggler, but not the PPV itself.

Both Alberto Del Rio and Rob Van Dam are previous winners of the Money in the Bank ladder match, with RVD famously cashing in at One Night Stand against John Cena and Alberto Del Rio picking up the scraps of Kevin Nash's pointless attack on CM Punk. Only one man, however, has lost a belt by way of a cashed in contract, which would be Del Rio losing to Dolph Ziggler the night after Wrestlemania 29.

This all leads me to my slightly convoluted point: if you've won a title by means of MITB cash-in, at some point, you will likely lose a title in the same fashion. Call it the MITB Karma Rule. There are some obvious exceptions to this rule, but the connections can be made concerning many of the booking decisions for the contract.

Completed Circuits:

These are the individuals who have both won and lost via briefcase cash-in:

  • Edge, the inaugural winner in 2005, would see CM Punk defeat him on Raw in 2008 to win his first WHC. This does not apply to the briefcase that was won by Ken Kennedy, but lost to Edge after the fact.
  • John Cena was the first person to lose a title via briefcase cash-in, losing to Edge at New Years Revolution 2007 following an Elimination Chamber match.
  • Cena was also the person Rob Van Dam defeated to win his first and only WWE Championship at One Night Stand 2006. Cena would win a MITB match in 2012, but lost to CM Punk at Raw 1000, making him the only wrestler to lose his contract match.
  • As previously stated, 2008 and 2009 winner CM Punk was defeated by Alberto Del Rio for the WWE Championship at SummerSlam 2011.
  • Alberto Del Rio would close his circuit by losing to Dolph Ziggler earlier this year on Raw after WrestleMania 29.
  • Daniel Bryan, who fell victim to Randy Orton a few months ago at SummerSlam, would first cash-in on a prone Big Show at TLC 2011.
  • Perhaps my favorite of these examples was the one that became so obvious after the fact. Randy Orton, who had the distinct pleasure of starting The Miz's reign as WWE Champion on Raw in 2010, was the winner of the most recent WWE Championship MITB briefcase, which he quickly used to defeat Daniel Bryan a few weeks later.

Open Circuits:

These are winners who have not fulfilled the losing portion of a MITB briefcase:

  • The Miz – Cashed in on Randy Orton, to set up his match with Cena at Wrestlemania 27. Has not lost title to cash-in, but has not held either world title since then.
  • Jack Swagger – This is similar to Miz, in that giving him the WHC was more of a misfire creatively, in that one must hold the title again in order to lose it. Cashed in on a prone Jericho on an episode of Smackdown.
  • Kane – Cashed in against Rey Mysterio the same night he won the briefcase, becoming the only winner to do so. Has not held a world title since, though arguably more likely than Miz or Swagger to do so again.
  • Dolph Ziggler – His cash-in on Del Rio the night after WM29 was a huge moment, but he lost the belt back to ADR a few months later after battling a nagging concussion. Did successfully defend the briefcase against John Cena in a ladder match.
  • Mr. Kennedy – Really only being included due to technically winning the MITB match, he would lose the briefcase a few weeks later to Edge in the midst of his way out of the company.

Likely future winners based on this theory:

With Orton's recent win, it seems like there is some validity to this theory, given that his win seemed to come completely out of left field. Here are some possibilities for future contract holders should they find themselves booked at MITB:

  • The Big Show – Lost to Daniel Bryan and is the type of guy who you could insert in any title picture to be considered a relative threat, even on short notice.
  • Rey Mysterio – Was the wrestler who Kane defeated at the MITB PPV in 2010. Always a hit with the kids, if finally healthy or in shape, could have one last T-shirt sales run as champ.
  • Jeff Hardy – Was CM Punk's second victim. Maybe he'll win a King of the Mountain match in TNA to make up for it?
  • Chris Jericho – Poor Jericho. This is who Jack Swagger beat for the WHC. That sentence makes me feel dirty. Would be a viable WHC, but part time schedule would make this unlikely.
  • The Undertaker – Edge's second victim. I doubt he will ever be featured in a MITB match again, but if they wanted to put Taker into a title program, they'd just do it.

So what does this all have to do with anything? Well, if Rob Van Dam had won the WHC last night against Del Rio, an opportunistic Damien Sandow might have suddenly appeared to challenge for the title. The ADR/RVD match being a hardcore rules match certainly lent credence to the idea that RVD could win the world title and be in no shape to defend it minutes later. It would have closed an open MITB circuit that's been open since 2006, and open another for Damien Sandow to one day lose a title via similarly sneaky means.

Of course, that didn't happen, but it doesn't disprove a pretty fun theory. RVD is rumored to be back (if he leaves at all), and the holders of the WHC contract have held onto that briefcase for much longer than those who've held onto the WWE championship case.

Perhaps RVD will still be Sandow's victim later this year or early next? Or maybe Miz, Kane, Swagger or Ziggler regains the Big Gold Belt to get cashed in on and complete their circuit?

What do you Cagesiders make of Andee's Money in the Bank Karma theory?

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Cageside Seats readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cageside Seats editors or staff.

Log In Sign Up

Log In Sign Up

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

I already have a Vox Media account!

Verify Vox Media account

Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Cageside Seats

You must be a member of Cageside Seats to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Cageside Seats. You should read them.

Join Cageside Seats

You must be a member of Cageside Seats to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Cageside Seats. You should read them.




Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.