WWE SmackDown 6/28/2024: 3 Things We Hated And 3 Things We Loved
Welcome to Wrestling Inc.'s weekly review of "WWE SmackDown," the show that sometimes only runs three matches on a two-hour wrestling program! Seriously, there were only three this week. And sure, "SmackDown" only having four matches in a two-hour wrestling program has become fairly standard, but three matches seems different somehow. Anyway, we're actually going to talk about that in this week's column — specifically some of the similarities between the three matches, which were all Money in the Bank triple threat qualifiers. And of course, we'll have to talk about the segments that basically stood in for extra matches Friday night: The opening brawl that led to "SmackDown's" top three babyfaces being driven out of the arena by the cops, and the main event segment that saw The New Bloodline crush the life out of Paul Heyman.
In fact, because of the way this episode was structured, we're pretty much going to cover the entire show here! Be sure you check out our "SmackDown" results page for all the details we might not mention here, but yeah, beyond that, let's talk about all two hours of this three-match show! Here are three things we hated and three things we loved about the 6/28/24 episode of "WWE SmackDown."
Loved: Chaos kicks things off
It's pretty normal for "Raw" and "SmackDown" to kick off with a promo of some sort that involves a minimum of two superstars to set up the main event. There's nothing wrong with that, and it can be an effective strategy to keep viewers on their toes and tuned into the show for multiple hours.
That being said, it was certainly a fun and welcome change to see WWE break away from that for the first 20 or so minutes of this edition of "SmackDown." Opening the show up with a massive brawl between The Bloodline and Cody Rhodes, Kevin Owens, and Randy Orton that took two waves of security and police officers to break up was both an interesting and effective way to generate interest for the six-man match at Money In The Bank, whilst simultaneously moving the storyline forward.
The Bloodline has been built up as a force to be reckoned with in WWE and has dominated "SmackDown," with a new member seemingly added to the stable every few weeks. With Rhodes, Owens, and Orton being three of the biggest names on the brand aside from the group, it was good to see them come out on top with a newfound fire lit under them following last week's attack and the debut of Jacob Fatu.
Written by Olivia Quinlan
Hated: Do you get deja vu?
Not to be confused with the Olivia Rodrigo hit, Friday's Money in the Bank qualifying matches employed deja vu in the most denotational sense. Three times in three matches (incidentally, the only three matches on the show) the same opening was employed: the heels ganged up on the babyface. It makes sense — it wouldn't be logical for the babyface and a heel to gang up on another heel — however, to see it three times in the same night just felt uninspired.
It's 2024. Professional wrestling has come such a long way, and there have been so many innovative ways to start matches outside of the classic lock-up. That's the beauty of professional wrestling: it is so experimental, and even if something doesn't work in the ring, there is a sense of invention that is constantly buzzing through the air. A performance medium doesn't survive for nearly 60 years without changing some things along the way, welcoming innovation within its steel cable ropes.
So when all three matches have very similar opens, it gets very disappointing. Some may argue that having all Money in the Bank participants qualify via these triple threats may be similarly trite and uninspiring — I think that it is entirely necessary in order to form a baseline to compare all participants. There is a difference between issuing the same qualifying conditions for all participants, and the participants themselves following the same playbook so faithfully that it's noticeable. There's a difference between everyone taking the same test, and three students copying off of each other's work.
It's even more confounding considering the range of competitors we are anticipating to see in the Money in the Bank match. LA Knight is not the most graceful high-flier — we can tell from the way he struggled to hook his feet on the middle ropes when he and Santos Escobar took it to the top — and Tiffany Stratton is one of the most athletic women in the business. Naomi is a wonderful all-around competitor, who is athletic in an entirely different manner than Stratton. This is not even counting the rest of the competitors who didn't advance to the Money in the Bank ladder match: Logan Paul, Blair Davenport, and Candice LeRae are all vastly different types of wrestlers. You're telling me that, with this plethora of diverse and extremely capable talent, the opening moments of the match were practically copy-pasted?
WWE doesn't need to reinvent the wheel on a Friday night, but it's disturbingly obvious when the same playbook is applied to the entire card. Olivia Rodrigo doesn't know about deja vu until she's watched every use the same open on a two-hour show.
Written by Angeline Phu
Loved: One step closer to Tiffy in the Bank
I had a hunch going in to Friday night's first women's Money in the Bank qualifying match that Tiffany Stratton would come out victorious, and for once, when it comes to WWE booking, I was actually right! And thank goodness for it, because I think Stratton is an absolute star, from her moves in the ring to her phenomenal look and character. She's so well-suited for the main roster, and we've seen how crowds absolutely love her, but following Backlash France, I think WWE did the right thing to kind of cool her down a bit so crowds wouldn't cheer as much for her. I don't think that will last long, however, because even when she's playing a heel, she's just so darn good in everything that she does.
Stratton with the Money in the Bank briefcase is just a perfect thing, in my opinion, when it comes to her privileged, bratty character. WWE also has the extremely nasty habit of having their women's ladder match winners cash in their title contract the night of the event, if not shortly after, and I think Stratton could go on a Carmella-like run with the briefcase, possibly even surpassing Carmella's 280-something days. I might be getting ahead of myself here, but I think Stratton would be a smart, smarmy heel when it comes to her contract and her cash-in, and it's an exciting story I'd be excited to see. I'm tired of all the women's winners cashing in so quickly without a good story behind it. I want the next winner to have a big moment in the same vein as Seth Rollins at WrestleMania 31.
The match on "SmackDown" was also pretty darn good. I'm personally a big proponent of triple threat matches, due to the lack of rules and interference, and I suppose I'm just an agent of chaos when it comes to these things. Outside of Stratton winning, I liked the fact that Jade Cargill was protected with Indi Hartwell interfering to attempt to help tag partner Candice LaRae by throwing Cargill face-first into the ring post. Bianca Belair still had Cargill's back, and chased Hartwell away. During Hartwell's own match against Naomi and Blair Davenport, Cargill got her back, sending Hartwell crashing into the ring post as payback. I know this is a loved portion of our article for Stratton, but I had to get the mention of protecting Cargill in there somewhere. As much as I love her, the messy match at Clash at the Castle had me worried she'd be in the ladder match and set up for failure. There's always next year for Cargill, and I really think this is Stratton's time to shine.
When it comes to Stratton, it's not her first ladder match. She competed in one in "WWE NXT" in 2022 at Stand & Deliver for the NXT Women's Championship, but she didn't come out with the gold. This time, I think she's destined to win and secure her place in WWE's history books as not only a Money in the Bank winner, but a future main roster champion, as well.
Written by Daisy Ruth
Hated: Bianca Belair and Jade Cargill off the MITB card
On the one hand, I understand what WWE is doing in terms of having people like Nia Jax and Indi Hartwell cost Bianca Belair and Jade Cargill spots in the women's Money in the Bank ladder match. We're building feuds by having the heels cost the babyfaces things they want; obviously, that makes sense. On the other hand, Belair and Cargill are now wrestling Hartwell and Candice LeRae on next week's episode of "SmackDown" — this despite the fact that Belair and Cargill beat Hartwell and LeRae on "SmackDown" three weeks ago, and the fact that Belair and Cargill successfully defended the women's tag titles against Hartwell and LeRae a month ago on the King and Queen of the Ring pre-show. Not only is this extremely repetitive booking of the sort Vince McMahon was notorious for by the end of his WWE career, it also means that Belair and Cargill are apparently not competing at Money in the Bank.
That's disappointing, because MITB is already a card with only one women's division match announced so far, and neither WWE Women's Champion Bayley nor Women's World Champion Liv Morgan are apparently defending their titles in Toronto; Bayley has been sort-of-but-not-really feuding with Blair Davenport, while Morgan is busy seducing Dominik Mysterio. As a result, it's a card that could really use another women's match, and could really use the star power of Belair and Cargill, in particular. If you don't want them in the ladder match, fine (I would at least want Belair in there to base for some crazy ladder spots, but you do you, Paul) but this tag with Hartwell and LeRae could easily be a short MITB undercard match, if for some reason WWE wasn't absurdly married to this five-match card structure.
Unless something else is booked for her next week, this will be the first PLE Belair has missed in nine months. It'll be the first PLE Cargill has missed since February. These are two of your no-doubt, can't-miss superstars, who already feel a bit deflated as an act due to their surprise tag title loss at Clash at the Castle, ending their reign after just 42 days, and your response is to leave them off the MITB card entirely? I really hope we're building toward Belair vs. Cargill at SummerSlam, because that's the only thing that feels big enough to justify this kind of lull.
Written by Miles Schneiderman
Hated: The US Championship feud is taking a long-cut
After some shenanigans from the NBA side of New York City, LA Knight walked out of Madison Square Garden victorious over Logan Paul, with a ticket to Toronto and the men's Money in the Bank ladder match. Yet there was still a sense of un-accomplishment. Sure, Knight's job wasn't done — he still has to win the Money in the Bank briefcase, after all — but as Knight's music played and Paul cowered alongside Tyrese Haliburton of Indiana Pacers fame, there was something even larger looming over what should have been a momentous occasion for "The Megastar."
Why are they even competing for a spot in the Money in the Bank match, when a United States Championship feud is sitting right in front of their faces?
Knight has made his intentions very clear for Paul: he wants the United States Championship. Knight has been making his case for a title opportunity for the better part of a month, and fans have been clamoring for WWE to put the title on Knight for even longer. So what's the hold-up? Why are we getting derailed with Money in the Bank qualifiers, and why did we get derailed from the very obvious, very easy-to-book money match for the better part of 237 days?
Some may credit the hesitancy to book a Knight and Paul single's program to a desire to have the match at SummerSlam. This makes sense — it is a far bigger stage than Money in the Bank, and "Logan Paul vs. LA Knight" seems like a marquee mid-card match. It is absolutely something that would draw numbers to the biggest party of the summer. But as much sense as that makes, it doesn't excuse the overly drawn-out booking. If Paul and Knight at SummerSlam is truly the endgame, then why begin their feud two whole months before the event? Why throw them in a Money in the Bank qualifying match (furthermore, why have Knight advance)? The cards are stacked against Paul and Knight's feud; there are already so many moving parts — Escobar, the Money in the Bank match and briefcase, if Knight walks out of Toronto with the contract — that they would have to at least try to tie up all these loose ends before Paul and Knight can single-mindedly focus on each other. There is also the ever-present risk of Knight and Paul's feud becoming trite and uninspiring; the longer they spend trying to even out the rocky stage for their feud, the higher chance the WWE Universe abandons it. The pay-off is greater the longer the feud is, sure, but so is the risk of creative burnout. If WWE wanted to maximize their chances of a successful Knight and Paul feud at SummerSlam, then why would they risk what could possibly be one of their biggest midcard matches by booking it two months in advance? Why prolong the feud by putting Knight in the Money in the Bank match? Could they not have started this feud after Money in the Bank?
There may be some who believe that this is all a set-up for a "Yeah!" in the Bank situation, where Knight cashes in on Paul. This idea is ludicrous and, frankly, a waste of the Money in the Bank contract. However, given Austin Theory's unfortunate history with the contract, it is an idea that could go through, all technicalities considered. This is possibly the least likely response as to why this feud has outlived some groceries in my fridge, but it bears mentioning. Regardless of the reason, there is little benefit in dragging out this feud through Money in the Bank, especially when Money in the Bank is typically not used for midcard championships (and, as established previously, would be wasteful if it was). The Paul/Knight feud has a finite shelf life, and WWE is risking spoilage with this bold move to detour on their path to the United States Championship clash.
Do we think that Haliburton and Jalen Brunson will somehow derail this feud even further? They might, the way that this mess is going.
Written by Angeline Phu
Loved: Paul Heyman's loyalty to Roman Reigns, and what it cost him
After Jacob Fatu debuted in the closing minutes of last Friday's "SmackDown," another Bloodline Acknowledgment Ceremony was scheduled. Before introducing Fatu, Solo Sikoa referred to him as "my enforcer." "The Samoan Werewolf" was also given an incredible entrance that is befitting of the big deal that he is.
All night, the fans had been chanting "We Want Roman!" and it only grew louder every time Sikoa spoke. He then had the audacity to ask the MSG crowd to acknowledge him, which clearly shocked Paul Heyman. In an amazing display of ego, Sikoa went down the line and asked each member of the New Bloodline to acknowledge him. His "Right Hand Man" Tama Tonga responded in his native Tongan language before acknowledging him in English. "The Infamous" Tanga Loa told Sikoa that it was "all love, always. I acknowledge you." Fatu also said he loved and acknowledged Sikoa.
As Sikoa got further down the line, the anticipation of what "The Wiseman" would do was building to a crescendo that played perfectly. Heyman looked like he hadn't slept in days. Last Friday, he begged his old friend CM Punk to "take me with you," but Punk was taken out by Drew McIntyre before that could happen. Heyman was presented with the coveted lei and even took in its aroma. The dramatic pause before saying he didn't acknowledge Sikoa as his tribal chief sent the crowd into a frenzy.
Heyman;s loyalty to Reigns earned him a Samoan Spike, a triple powerbomb through the announce table, and a splash from Fatu off the top rope. The brutal attacks suffered by a man who almost never gets physical added a freh layer of drama to a story that had been boring and losing steam in the absence of Reigns, but it also added a new edge to Sikoa and his new stablemates. After all, if the New Bloodline will put one of their (former) allies through this kind of punishment, what will they do to those that are against them?
As WWE Hall of Famer Jim Ross likes to say, business is about to pick up.
Written by Samantha Schipman