Sounds like you dont understand the basis of the feud at all
There is no basis to WWE feuds ever. They can literally go the way I layed out, or the lay you layed out, and both work. I just would like to see my way more.
Miz type heels don’t fit that archetype. Kurt angle circa 2000-01 fits that mold. 1999-2000 Triple H fits that mold. You don’t want an edge or miz type heel to win clean. Their entire pathology as a heel is that they’ll do anything it takes to win and their willingness to break the rules gives them an edge (don’t ask me how) that their opponent does not. Once they stop cheating, there’s little reason to boo them. A loudmouth heel has to break the rules for him to stay heel. Otherwise the crowd ends up turning them face like they did Austin.
Triple H is actually a perfect example. He was a chicken shyt heel, would cheat and use the sledge all the time, but every now and then he would get legit wins over top guys. And that is why you are citing him as someone who wasn't a chickenshyt, when he was.
I think if they want to push Miz to the next level, DB is the perfect guy to get one legit win in a feud with. Doesn't have to win the feud, but still show out.