wrestling / Columns

Ask 411 Wrestling: What Did Anyone See in Jim Duggan?

January 6, 2018 | Posted by Jed Shaffer
Jim Duggan

Hello, all.

So, I’m not Mathew Sforcina. Which you kinda knew already, given his farewell announcement two weeks ago, and his finale last week. Who I am is Jed Shaffer. If you’ve been a reader of Wrestlecrap, I wrote over there for a decade. Before that, the column I wrote (Rewriting The Book) bounced through a couple homes, originating here at 411 back in 2003. So, this is a homecoming for yours truly. A way to cap off my amateur career writing about wrestling. I’m holding down the fort for a little while … few months for sure, maybe more. Sforcina is the Tom Baker of Ask 411 Wrestling. I’m not aiming for anything as such. If I can manage to be a Matt Smith or a Peter Davidson, I’ll be satisfied. At least more than Paul McGann.

Also, a huge thanks to the bossman himself, Larry Csonka, for extending the offer to come back to 411 and pick up Sforcina’s mantle. It never ceases to astound me when someone else – especially other writers – are impressed by my scribblings. Thanks for the vote of confidence!

Anyway, before we get into the meat and potatoes, let’s do a little housekeeping, eh? I don’t plan on making many changes to the column. I like the established format, and you seem to as well. The only changes I plan on making at this time are discontinuing the trivia question (I just SUCK at them, both answering and creating) and adding in a short little rhetorical question piece of my own at the end. And maybe change some headers, just to add my own flair. Other than that, I think everything’s gonna run the same … although my skills at the research questions are nowhere near Sforcina’s, so … just a heads-up on that front. My best is probably his half-assing.

And don’t forget, when you want to ask me a question, the email is [email protected].

One more piece of business before the matters at hand … BANNER~!

Huggy Bears!

Me on Twitter!
Check out Mat’s Drabble blog, 1/10 of a Picture!
Mat On Twitter~!
WWE Turn Alerts on Twitter~~!!
http://www.twitter.com/411mania
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma

Feedback Loop

It was all fond farewells and hopes that Sforcina’s replacement wouldn’t again be the last person who replaced him. The Colin Baker of Ask 411 hosts, to beat that metaphor into the ground.

You Q, I A

Okay, let’s get this party started. What did Sforcina leave me to start with? Hopefully it’s a nice, soft, gentle kick-off. Nothing too complex. Rahil Rajani, hit me, dawg.

Which superstars gimmicks have been taken from media (e.g Sting-The Crow, Glacier-Sub Zero*Mortal Kombat) ?????

* deadpan *

You couldn’t ease the new guy in, could you? Just had to start off with SO MUCH RESEARCH? Sigh.

Well, Rahil, you nailed two pretty obvious ones. Sting also has another one to his credit; during his tenure in TNA, he morphed his Crow persona into a Heath Ledger’s Joker-inspired gimmick, complete with his face paint now jagged, colorful and twisted, adopting a maniacal laugh, and being rather unpredictable.

Brad Armstrong, for a very short period of time in WCW, was packaged as Arachnaman, which was totally not a ripoff of Spider-man, with yellow replacing the red in the outfit in an attempt to dodge a lawsuit from Marvel. This did not work, and the gimmick had to be dropped. Sticking with early 90’s WCW, there’s also Kevin Nash’s memorable turn as Oz, based on the classic movie and book The Wizard Of Oz, which came about as a cross-promotion because Turner had the broadcast rights to the movie. I mean, what better way to get wrestling fans to tune into a movie than to adapt an elderly con man character into a seven foot tall pseudo-sultan with a dollar store Halloween mask and a dyed-white buzzcut? And The Road Warriors … well, it doesn’t take a lot of deductive reasoning to see where that came from, yeah?

Over in WWE, after Chris Jericho turned heel during his second run, he patterned his gimmick – slower talking, using larger words, arrogant, self-righteous and ruthless – after Anton Chigurh, the mercenary sociopath played by Javier Bardem in No Country For Old Men. Minus the murdering-everyone-in-sight, naturally. Likewise, Razor Ramon’s cocky, Cuban, slow-talking, oozing-machismo man is basically Tony Montana from Scarface. And Paul Burchill’s short-lived pirate gimmick was lifted right from Pirates Of The Caribbean.

In their original ECW incarnation, before Joel Gertner and massive profanity and breaking Beulah’s neck, The Dudleys were an homage to the Hansons from the Paul Newman hockey movie Slap Shot. No, not the annoying pop band from the 90’s. That would be 3 Count.

Then there was the TNA runs of Rob Eckos and Becky Bayless – Robbie E and Cookie, respectively – who were obviously drawn from MTV’s loathsome “reality” show Jersey Shore.

Corporal Kirchner and Karl Moffat both extended their careers by portraying slasher movie villains Leatherface and Jason Voorhees, respectively. However, Moffat’s gimmick would be called Jason The Terrible, and his hockey mask was totally different, so as not to visually mimic Paramount Pictures’ lucrative purveyor of dead, naked teenager movies, to avoid pesky copyright infringement issues. One has to assume that Kirchner didn’t have the same issues, since his run as Leatherface was exclusive to Japan, while Moffat/Jason happened in here in North America. Both of these gimmicks – as well as a Freddy Krueger (or Crueger, sometimes) gimmick – have been portrayed by multiple wrestlers, similar to Doink The Clown.

I’m sure there’s more, but this isn’t the kind of thing one can find a list of online, so I’m going off memory. And some might seem inspired, but the connection is debatable. For instance, one could make the case that The Beautiful People parallels the domineering cliques from the movie Mean Girls or Heathers. And you might say that, in the original heel run, the aforementioned Doink was inspired by Pennywise from IT. I’m sure I’m missing some obvious ones. Readers?

Moving on, Michael J. Klein, BA, VHA LHC YB, who seemingly included a license plate with his question, asks …

I apologize in advance if this is a lot of work and feel free to tell me to go piss off if it is. But in reading your answer to the HBK pre-post hiatus number of matches it made me wonder – which wrestler has had the most matches all time? And which wrestler has had the most matches in a single calendar year? Is this something easily determined by those databases you use? Thanks for the column every week. If only we could get back to having it posted at a regular time every week….

OH COME ON SFORCINA YOU SON OF A [email protected]#$~!

So, I did some digging. Tried out my Google-fu skills. From what I can tell, the best place to go for this kind of statistical question would be Profightdb.com. Except there’s a problem.

Like Wikipedia, Profightdb is owned and operated by official employees of a promotion in the same way that, say, the NFL’s website is. It’s independent, and thus, dependent wholly upon the information made available to them. Nowadays, finding the cards and results of [insert wrestling promotion here] is as easy as you please. As soon as AEFN69+[L?CW out of Frogballs, Arkansas runs its card, the results are posted within days. And if it’s a promotion with any kind of televised/streaming presence, there’s probably a live recap to be found somewhere. Somewhere like this very website, in fact!

But finding a recap of a show from Paul Boesch’s promotion in January 1968, or a May 1960 St. Louis Wrestling Club card? Those records aren’t as easy to come by. Some newspapers reported on the events and published the results alongside scores from baseball games in the sports section. But finding those newspapers is whole different trick. And while many are preserved on microfiche in libraries or even digitally, few people are dedicated enough to comb through it all to find and document territory-era pro wrestling results.

All of this is a way to say that, because many of these old, pre-80’s boom events are poorly documented and/or not readily available if they were documented, Profighdb’s results are not a complete snapshot of wrestling’s history. They work with what they got. The best evidence I could find of is this: I assumed a good candidate for the first question would be Lou Thesz, given the longevity of his career. You know how many matches Profightdb says he had in his career?

Three. Not thirty-three, not three hundred. THREE. And while Schoolhouse Rock might believe that three, oh three, is a magic number, it is not representative of Thesz’s career. Hell, I’m sure there’s a weekend somewhere where he did three matches over two days.

So, I can tell you what Profightdb says, but its accuracy exists in a state somewhere between “dubious” and “an Onion article”. Per said website, Jushin Thunder Liger would be your most prolific wrestler, with 2423 matches under his belt. In fact, if we’re treating their results with any veracity, the top 13 are all Japanese. You have to get to #14 to find a wrestler in an American promotion – Kane!!! – and there’s still only two more in the top 20 (Big Show at 18, and Cesaro at 20).

Sadly, I can’t answer your second question at all. PFDB doesn’t allow custom aggregation, and doesn’t have “most matches in one calendar year” as a set search option that I could find. But I can tell you which card has the highest number of dead wrestlers by percentage! The answer is Summerslam 1990, with 11 out of 26, or 42%. Isn’t that enlightening and depressing?

Sigh.

Next on the docket, Connor Watson asks a more subjective question, saints be praised.

What did anybody ever see in Hacksaw Jim Duggan?

Here’s the thing about a wrestling promotion you have to keep in mind. While history has proven that the biggest superstars can come from the most unlikely places (see Austin, Steve, or Foley, Mick, or Berg, Gold), not everyone is going to get a shot at doing that. In fact, sometimes, you have to have wrestlers on the roster to be warm bodies. Fill in the holes in the card. To put it another way, yes, you want your child to believe he or she can grow up to become anything, but somebody’s gotta make my Baconator at Wendy’s. Could be your kid. There’s no shame in that. Sometimes, you have a ceiling in life, and in wrestling, that’s just as true. Duggan, in his own way, made Baconators. He was never hired by Vince to be THE GUY. He was hired to be a fun, midcard comedy face for the kids, nothing more, nothing less. Same as Koko B. Ware or Junkyard Dog. Or, if you prefer, a face version of Honky Tonk Man. Someone with more credibility (read: any) than a jobber so that midcard heels could have someone to work with, and, if disaster struck, maybe could be elevated to upper-mid.

Now, before and after the Fed? He was a strong heel for Mid-South/UWF, and eventually a top-level babyface when he turned. His brutish look and clubberin’ style fit the territory well. After the Fed, when he went to WCW? Okay, that was Hogan looking out for a buddy and getting him a payday. Bischoff was in “make Hogan happy” mode, so what WCW saw in Duggan was a necessary evil, no more, no less.

Jeremiah wants to know about the biggest what-if year in wrestling history, 2001, and what might have been.

I know the plan during the Two-Man Power Trip angle was to turn Hunter babyface and feud him with Austin (which was already starting with Stone Cold costing Trips the IC belt at Judgment Day, then Hunter’s error losing the tag straps in the match he was injured in) but how would this have fit in with the Invasion and the Alliance? Would everything still have gone the same with Austin defecting, only you’d have Triple H as the leader of the WWF instead of The Rock? Or was the Invasion not originally planned and simply hotshotted because of Helmsley’s injury?

Good lord, is this a Gordian knot. I’ll do my best to cut through it, but man.

I’ll say, Trish.

So, let’s tackle the Invasion itself first. For those that haven’t read Sforcina mention it before, the original plan for the Invasion wouldn’t have had “defections” per se. Had the Nitro-on-Raw main event not shat the bed like an ebola patient, the plan was to legitimately rebuild WCW as a brand, with the WCW stars they had under contract thanks to the purchase of the company, or ones who accepted a buyout like Booker T and DDP. Linda McMahon would’ve sided with Shane, filed for divorce stemming from his affair with Trish Stratus, and in the divorce settlement, she’d “get” Raw, giving it to Shane to become Nitro, while Vince would “get” Smackdown. From there, the divorce decree would also have had a roster split provision, resulting in some WWE stars getting drafted to the newly reincarnated Nitro. I’ve read Rock and Triple H were likely candidates to go to Nitro, as it were, and Austin and Undertaker would be the top names for Smackdown.

While all that was going on, yes, the Two-Man Power Trip was indeed supposed to come apart. King Of The Ring was originally going to be Austin/Jericho and Trips/Benoit, and the break-up would’ve come soon after, I believe. Once broken up, Trips would’ve turned face (no, really), they’d feud a bit, and once the divorce happened, they’d be separated … until a huge WWE vs. WCW blowoff at Wrestlemania 18, as I’ve heard.

Until this happened:

There are still support groups you can visit if you suffered through all 9 minutes of that. They’re here to help. We’ve all been there.

Now, one other thing to note is the timelines here. Triple H’s quad injury happened on May 21, 2001, whereas Nitro-on-Raw happened July 2, 2001 (in Seattle, of all places). So, Trips’ injury didn’t derail the Invasion angle so much as it just forced the abrupt abandonment of the Austin/Trips rivalry, and, had all other plans held true, would’ve put Rock front and center of Nitro, alongside Booker and Page. The Alliance and Austin defecting to them didn’t come about until that Booker/Bagwell match turned out to be televised radiation poisoning. This gave TNN and WWE cold feet about rebranding the flagship show into WCW Nitro, what with the horrible reception the attempted one-night revival got, and the bad reputation WCW had earned in its last years. The Invasion angle mutated into what we know and endured because WWE bungled its launch in every way possible. Trips’ injury, in the long run, would’ve only had minimal, short-term impact on it, had the Invasion played out in the best case scenario. In fact, had original plans gone down, I’d wager his injury would’ve been helpful; it would’ve given Nitro time to build new stars without Triple H looming over them.

Mike from East Tennessee sets the wayback machine umm … way back … for a question about a tag team getting its due. Take it away!

In the era of tag team wrestling, the one wrestling team you don’t hear about is the Fantastics (Tommy Rogers and Bobby Fulton). They had great feuds with The Midnight Express, The Sheepherders, and The Rock N Roll RPMs. What are your thoughts on the Fantastics and why don’t you hear about them when talking about 80’s tag team wrestling?

I think your truly history-minded old school fans respect and honor The Fantastics. But I’ll admit that, yeah, there aren’t many fans singing their praises like other teams. I can’t speak for everyone, but I think I have two reasons why.

First is that they were true vagabonds of the industry. Their Wikipedia entry has FIFTEEN promotions they wrestled for. In 84, they were in Mid-South and the NWA. The next year, WCCW. In 86, they went to UWF. A year later, back in Texas, and the year after, JCP. That’s just a tiny snapshot. Yeah, they had a lot of solid feuds in that time, but they also didn’t stay in one spot and build up a reputation in front of the same audience for years on end, like many other teams did. I think that hurts their prominence a bit. Now, some might say plenty of other teams did the same thing, and right you are. But many of those teams also spent longer periods of time in one place, and dominated while they were there. The Fantastics had runs with titles, but they were just never the team, you know?

Second and more important, this goes back to my Duggan question and the Wendy’s analogy. Not everybody’s gonna be thought of as the best. Think back to the 80’s and how many legendary tag teams there were: the Rock ‘n’ Roll Express, The Midnight Express, The Road Warriors, The Freebirds, The Von Erichs, The Four Horsemen, The Hart Foundation, Demolition, The British Bulldogs, The Rockers … that’s ten iconic teams right there, and that’s just mid- to late-80’s, and only in North America. The Fantastics were a great tag team in an era of excellent tag team wrestling across all the promotions. They deserve praise and respect, no question. But there’s only so much room on Mount Rushmore, and the list of other teams from that time period to consider is just too long for them to get much shine.

Moving on to Brian now. He’s got two questions, the first calling out the E’s announcers on some questionable commentary.

I know hyperbole and continuity errors go hand in hand, but the (all face?) Smackdown announcing team called Neville’s first round tournament match vs. Wade Barrett the biggest of his career. Do they forget that he competed for the WWE Championship three months ago? There’s no objective way to say a first round tournament opportunity is bigger than a title match itself.

You have to remember, though, that WWE doesn’t want you to remember the past. Not unless it’s convenient to them. History – and specifically the acknowledgment of continuity – is WWE’s greatest nemesis right now. It is their job to sell, sell, sell every show and every match like THE GREATEST NIGHT IN THE HISTORY OF OUR SPORT (trademark Tony Schiavone). Now, objectively speaking, yes, a direct, one-on-one title shot against the reigning and defending WWE Champion is significantly better than an opening round tournament match. But they can’t very well sell you on the importance of today if you stubbornly remember yesterday. So, they bank on you forgetting, and Michael Cole’s omnipresent yelling to drown out any attempt at recall whilst selling you on what you see in front of you.

The second question from Brian isn’t as cut and dry, and it’s also a tad late.

We’re coming up on the two year anniversary of the belt unification. Can you please put together a list of performers that have most benefited from the title unification, and performers that have been most hurt by it? Please consider the trickle down on all divisions-for example, I feel the New Day have benefited, because they’ve been able to make being a tag team champion sound more important in the absence of there being two top champs.

Yeah, uhh, sorry about this taking two years to get answered. Blame the guy before me.

This is a purely subjective concept. I don’t know how one could definitively say that a wrestler benefited by the WWE/World Heavyweight unification. This isn’t like proving the effect of the designated hitter rule on pitchers and hitters, or the pluses and minuses of the fair catch. So, in my humble opinion?

It helped nobody. Not a single person. If it was so beneficial, why’d they reverse course a couple years later? When they have a large, bloated roster as they do, and their creative department is as adrift as it is, they can’t keep wrestlers on a treadmill chasing nothing, while the main event is bottlenecked by a select few. Hell, they can barely manage the divisions they have. How much worse would it look if there wasn’t two sets of belts to chase? You’d have a very tiny minority at the top and a huge glut of talent in the middle, unable to break through. Kind of like the American economy.

As for who it hurt? Every male wrestler on the roster with main event potential. For the two years it was unified, if you weren’t the chosen one, you weren’t getting a sniff. Look at who has gotten title reigns since the roster was re-split: Kevin Owens, Dean Ambrose, AJ Styles, Bray Wyatt, Finn Balor, Jinder Mahal. Regardless of whether they were good champions or not (Mahal, Ambrose) or if their run was cut short (Balor, Wyatt), you can’t argue that they wouldn’t have been considered for it if the main event artery was clogged up by the Orton/Cena/Lesnar/Reigns wad of cholesterol.

GarySparrow has something of a bummer of a question. Way to bring down the room, bro.

How do you think the WWE would be different in 2017 if Eddie Guerrero & Chris Benoit hadn’t of died? Does ECW on Sci-Fi survive? Does NXT happen? would Daniel Bryan man event Wrestlemania 30? Go back a few more years prehaps- what if Stone Cold & The Rock never retired- would Benoit & Guerrero ever made it to the top of the card? How about Batista & Orton, HHH & Cena?

Let’s start with WWECW. I don’t think the brand’s fate is affected one bit. The whole idea of ECW, by the time of Benoit’s death, had firmly become a proto-NXT; a proving ground for the up-and-comers without having them mingle with the main roster. Had that unfortunate weekend not happened, Benoit would’ve been there to be a player-coach, there to help the mold the youngsters and get them ready for The Show. His presence would not have stopped it from being shuttered and NXT becoming what it is now.

Likewise, I don’t see how either surviving has any material effect on Daniel Bryan and Wrestlemania 30. Both would’ve been 47 when WM30 came around. If either were still active on the main roster, I imagine it would’ve been as gatekeepers. And with Benoit’s neck injuries and history of concussions, I can’t see him lasting many more years past 2007 anyway. If the stories were true about being champ being too much pressure for Eddie, I have to believe he would’ve throttled back his schedule too and retired well before WM30.

Now, if Austin and Rock hadn’t retired? Let’s take this one at a time.

Austin’s act was wearing thin by the time he retired. Times had changed. The Attitude era was over. His heel turn in 2001 wasn’t well received, his re-upping as a heel for The Alliance was worse, and his face turn right after Survivor Series 2001 was poorly and hastily done. It led to a tired rehash of Austin v Authority Figure, first briefly with Vince and then with Ric Flair. It all felt old hat, and his brash aggressiveness felt somewhat anachronistic. So, if he’d not been forced into retirement (which means no Owen-driver, so we’re talking a lot of re-booking here), he would’ve need some severe character rehab. He was also becoming increasingly protective about his spot and disruptive backstage. Whatever side you take on what led to Austin’s 2002 walkout, the fact that he did walkout shows he could’ve been a liability long-term. He had a lot of personal issues at the time, so … maybe he gets those cleared up and goes on another run, but that still doesn’t fix the feeling of been-there-done-that.

The Rock … I think he remains so beloved because he went away. He didn’t allow his act to become old. Had he stuck around and stayed the same character he was (because Hollywood Rock wouldn’t exist in this timeline), I think he might’ve run into the problem Cena ran into: wearing out his welcome and become “divisive”. No character evolution can be a dangerous thing, something I’m not sure even The Rock’s monster charisma could tackle. He’d have to evolve. Now, if he could do that? Dude, I don’t know if he’d be retired yet. If ever there was a man born for the industry who could write their own ticket, it was him.

What would that have done to guys like Benoit, Guerrero, Angle, Orton, Cena and Batista … that’s a damned good question. Presuming the E still went through with the roster split (I refuse to use the ridiculous corporate buzz-speak term they used), there would’ve been two shows on which to grow talent, and some of these guys were going to hit no matter what. Angle, for instance, already had won two world titles by the end of 2001. There was no stopping his rise. The rest, I think would’ve followed similar career paths, especially the last three. Think about what got them famous:

Batista – got rescued from the Deacon gimmick and put into Evolution when Mark Jindrak flamed out.
Cena – the white rapper gimmick from a Halloween-themed Smackdown.
Orton – the shoulder injury that led to the RNN updates.

Maybe it’s me, but I just can’t see how The Rock or Steve Austin being there prevents any of that. Those are the kind of lightning-in-a-bottle success stories that you can’t plan for, but, if you’re a promoter, you sure as hell don’t ignore. As for Guerrero and Benoit, their rises to the top took so long to happen, I still don’t think it would’ve been hampered by the presence of Austin or The Rock.

Last question, and it comes from Stuart, who asks another subjective question about seconds.

Whenever wrestling fans wax lyrical about the best of a variety of catagories there is always one group that come up and that’s managers.

The list always comprises of the likes of Bobby Heenan, Jimmy Hart, Paul Heyman etc but I got wondering what exactly makes a good manager?

After all the likes of Heenan and co didn’t actually do much did they? Run the occasional interference, cut promos for those wrestlers who weren’t great talkers and the like but all of that was scripted for them to a certain extent (less so back in the day but still).

Heyman of course was a little different in his ECW days as he had his own carte blanche so to speak but what is it in your opinion that makes the difference between an average manager and a great one? Is it the material or talent they’re given or is it the performer themselves that sets them apart?

Being a great manager is a tricky thing to do, because the purpose of a manager is to do quite simple on paper, but complicated in execution. That is, get heat for someone else who isn’t so hot at getting their own heat. Yes, yes, I know there have been plenty of manager/client combos where the client was more than capable. Rick Rude, for instance, did not need Bobby Heenan to get him heel heat, as Rude was more than capable of winding up a crowd. But Heenan allowed Rude to not come into the Fed cold; by aligning him automatically with Heenan, you knew Rude was a slimy douchebag.

So, the first important trait for a great manager is that you can generate heat for your clients. Your mere presence has to underline the wrestler’s already natural awfulness and make it red hot. Heenan was a brash, braggadocios jerk with too much confidence and delusions of grandeur. Jimmy Hart was an obnoxious loudmouth who cheated so often, Eddie Guerrero would tell him to tone it down, and dressed in a way that caused permanent retinal damage. Slick was a seedy, slimy pimp. Larry Sweeney was every awful used car salesman cliché, wrapped up in John Travolta leisure suit. Paul Bearer was the mouthpiece for The Undertaker, adding a bit of over-the-top creepiness to the gimmick. Sunny was opportunistic and manipulative. All of these traits help their clients by saying “look who this wrestler associates with, is this who you want to cheer?”. Sherri Martel represented Macho Man’s was an avatar of Macho Man’s fall to the dark side, abandoning the regalness that was Elizabeth for madness and paranoia.

The other important trait is that you neither overshadow or disappear behind your clients. The managers I mentioned before, if I say their name, you associate them with clients; Heenan with King Kong Bundy or Rude or Andre. Hart with the Hart Foundation. Larry with The Kings Of Wrestling. But then you get managers Sonny Onoo, who did what exactly for Ultimo Dragon besides carry 11,573 belts and smile? Or “The Coach”, whose obnoxiousness and overuse of that damned whistle could somehow make you dread seeing Curt Hennig? Or Kim Chee, whose entire role was “lead monster to ring, unleash”? Or Harvey Whippleman, who is Harvey Whippleman? Or Momma Benjamin, which we’ve all tried to block out of our collective memory? Each of these represent managers either so overshadowing their clients or becoming so insignificant that they helped nobody.

So, it’s a fine balance. The best know how to do it, and the others are Oliver Humperdink.

And now, my addition to the column. It’s how we’ll close this out going forward, or until I run out of ideas.

A Question I Want Answered!
Why in the hell hasn’t anybody used a Money In The Bank cash-in during a championship ladder match?

The rules explicitly state “any time, anywhere”. And Seth Rollins has made it 100% canonical that the MITB briefcase can be cashed in during an ongoing match.

So, with all that said … there’s always a spot in a ladder match where two guys have beaten the living hell out of one another and are both struggling to get up, let alone climb the ladder. Since you don’t have to actually defeat anybody in the traditional sense in a ladder match, why not cash it in when both men are down, easily jaunt up the ladder, and claim the championship? With the MITB gimmick needing new and innovative ways to use it beyond “ambush”, this seems like such a lay-up, and yet, in the twelve years it’s existed, it hasn’t happened yet. I can’t be the only one to think of this.

Alright. That does it for the first edition of my run. Hope it wasn’t too painful.