In kayfabe, why hasn't anyone ever cashed in MITB during a Champion vs Champion match? It's two titles for the price of one and it's no DQ because it's a Triple Threat match.>Erm, you only get 1 title shot with MITBBullshit. Theory was allowed to cash in on Roman for both the WWE and Universal titles.
It wasn't until WM31 they even thought about the mid-match cash in concept. Most holders after that cashed in before Survivor Series. Its only very recently they have been doing champ vs champ again. Then you have to consider the follow up and booking of the guy who cashes in, how it affects the title's and the main event scenes.
>>19773912This is actually brilliant, OP. It's a great way to write an unsuccessful cash-in because it answers all the skeptical questions>Why would you cash in before the match ended, while nobody was incapacitated?>because I wanted 2 titles, not one>Why not cash in for (some match with world vs midcard title)?>because I wanted to win 2 world titlesLegit I wonder if they'll use this in the future
>>19773912I don't know, sorry.
>>19773912Roman was having double title matches. You can only cash in on what's already up for grabs in the match
>>19773912MitB contract is for a title match, singular.Meaning single title. Champ v champ usually isn't for a single title but champ of champs title. But sure, be the first guy to challenge for the giant Saudi belt. Go out there kid and make history.
>>19773912the match ends when one person is pinned so you couldn’t get two for one.
