Bret and Owen

[Disturbed]

I was reading over Crock's Owen thread and it got me thinking. Would these two guys be as legendary if it wasn't for all the controversey? Now don't get me wrong, both brothers are excellent performers but would the typical kayfabe wrestling fan in today's age know who Owen Hart was if it wasn't for his death. And then Bret, your newer fan of today's age, might think that he was just an older wrestler and not know as much about the guy if it wasn't for the Montreal ScrewJob and the 2010 return. I'll start by looking back at Bret's career.

Bret "The Hitman" Hart began his professional wrestling career in the year of 1978 and didn't officailly retire untill the new millenium 2000. He was trained by his father Stew Hart in the legendary Hart Dungeon and began his career in his father's promotion, Stampede Championship wrestling. Throughout his career, he has defeated many legendary superstars with his finisher, the Sharp Shooter. He was superstar of the year in 1993 and 94. He has won so many titles during his illustrious career including, Intercontinental championship (2 times), WWE tag championship (2 times), WWE Champion (5 times), WCW United States Championship (4 times), WCW World Tag Team Championship (1 time), WCW WOrld Heavyweight Championship (2 times) and many more titles that I won't name one by one. He was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2006 and is one of the greatest in ring performers of all time. So the question is, If it wasn't for the montreal screwjob incident would Bret be as legendary?

I have to say yes and no. He was a hall of famer either way. He won all those titles and is one of the best of all time. However, I don't think he would be as recognized. Your typical kayfabe fan of this day might not know as much about Bret if it wasn't for Montreal and he might not be as noticed in the world of pro wrestling. WHen people think of Bret Hart, they think of the Montreal Screwjob, plain and simple.

Now we move on to the younger brother who has also accomplished a lot. He was also trained in the dungeon by his father and he to began his career in Stampede Wrestling. He debuted in 1986 and retired when he passed away in 1999. Owen won the rookie of the year in 1987 and has also one his fair share of titles including, the European title, WWE tag titles ( 4 times), and the Intercontinental championship (2 times.) The one thing he never accomplished was winning the World Heavyweight championship. The second question in this thread is, if Owen didn't pass away in 1999, would his legacy be as memorable.

I know it isn't the popular thing to say but I say no, he wouldn't be as remembered. He never won the one thing that his brother did 5 times and that was the WWE Championship. Some say he would have won it but I highly doubt it when he died playing a character like the Blue Blazer. So if, Owen wouldn't have died, he wouldn't be as remembered by your typical wrestling fan.


Debate....

 

[The Brain]

I think Bret would be better remembered if not for the screwjob. He wasn’t nearly the draw Hogan was but he kept the WWF going after Hulk left. He had so many great matches in the 90s. Montreal hurt Bret’s reputation. He was always one of the most respected wrestlers and he came off as selfish with the way he left the WWF. He may not be as well known by younger fans if not for Montreal but I think he would be more respected.

As for Owen, I believe he is more fondly remembered because of his early death. I was always a fan of Owen long before he died but I feel not everyone respected the way he deserved while he was alive. After he died he became a bit overrated. Owen was an excellent mid card wrestler who could occasionally main event. It’s unlikely he would have ever become world champion like so many suggest. Owen was so smooth in the ring and could really get a crowd to hate him but I’m afraid a world title reign was never in the cards.

 

[S.J. Maximus]

Bret Hart was the face of the company for years, the fact that you even brought up this idea is completely disrespectful to his legacy. If it wasn't for the Screwjob, WWE and Bret wouldve been on good terms so he wouldnt have just disappeared from history the way Savage, Warrior, and Benoit have. A matter of fact, he most likely would've been revered for his service much like how Hogan is despite all of Hogan's disloyalty. So in this case, the screwjob really hurt Bret's legacy instead of enhancing it as you claim.

As for Owen, his death definitely spiked the interest and knowledge about him in 1999, but in 2010 i think anyone who thinks about him in this year is thinking about his contributions. they reminisce about his feud with Bret and his king of the ring win and his feud with HBK instead of just mourn over his death. Rumor had it that Owen was supposed to be the Game instead of Triple H

 

[wrestler36]

Actually, if anything, their legacy would be even bigger than it is today. If you look at that time, there was nothing stopping Austin from being the face of the company. With that being said, with Bret's fan base and his resiliency to face any type of wrestler, he would have been main eventing or upper midcard for at least another 5 years. He would have been one of the main go to guys for the Attitude Era. I think he would've been the throwback 'wrestler' that the fans would (already had) turned against because he wasn't the antihero, big personality type. He would've had the 'I'm better than you' persona, kind of like what CM Punk is doing now. He would have been booed in the US and cheered like crazy anywhere else. Owen would be somewhere in the mix, probably IC or tag titles, and would not have been doing dangerous stunts with Bret around.

 

[Imbtr10u]

The screw job was the best think to happen to beets career. It's like Pete Rose and baseball hall of fame. More people know who he is because he is one guy they won't let in. You have to keep in mind Bret was going to WCW before the screw job took place. Where he basicly had no impact due to bad booking but also because there were so many other names down there that his true rank in the world of professionaThe screw job was the best think to happen to Brets career. It's like Pete Rose and baseball hall of fame. More people know who he is because he is one guy they won't let in. You have to keep in mind Bret was going to WCW before the screw job took place. Where he basicly had no impact due to bad booking but also because there were so many other names down there that his true rank in the world of professional wrestling was exposed. If it wasn't for the Scew job or the tragic loss of his brother, he would have nothing to bad mouth for past 12 years. That was the only way he kept himself relevant bitching and complaining. When he returned to Raw last year after the initial night he returned, he quickly became old news. With out the scree job Bret Hart would have been remembered as a great technical wrestler who headlined for a very short period of time and who drew very little for the WWE. But after the screw job he became Internet fan boy phenomenon. Nothing more, nothing less.*l wrestling was exposed. If it wasn't for the Scew job or the traffic loss of his brother, he would have nothing to bad mouth for past 12 years. That was the only way he kept himself relevant bitching and complaining. When he returned to Raw last year after the initial night he returned he quickly became old news. Bret Hart would have been remembered as a great technical wrestler who head lined for a very short period of time and who drew very little for the WWE. But after the screw job he became Internet fan boy phonominon. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Dyno Kid]

I agree with the notion that sadly Owen does get overrrated because of his death. He was a terrific worker but he wasn't really anything special to me and would just be remembered as a solid mid-carder, nothing more if not for his death !

Bret would be in the same boat as Owen to me if not for the Screwjob. It made him bigger than he really was. It's the first thing that I and I'm sure lots of people think of when his name comes up.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

Bret Hart was the face of the company for years, the fact that you even brought up this idea is completely disrespectful to his legacy. If it wasn't for the Screwjob, WWE and Bret wouldve been on good terms so he wouldnt have just disappeared from history the way Savage, Warrior, and Benoit have. A matter of fact, he most likely would've been revered for his service much like how Hogan is despite all of Hogan's disloyalty. So in this case, the screwjob really hurt Bret's legacy instead of enhancing it as you claim.

I don't agree that bringing this topic up is a swipe at Bret's legacy. The OP just posed a thought to us all. That's all. For all we know and despite how big of a Bret Hart fan I am, I still have my reason to believe Montreal was more of a worked shoot. I'm not saying that there weren't egos at work colliding over how to end this event, but at the end of the day, I feel that Bret Hart and Vince McMahon both agreed on pursuing this finish to the event, and here's why. For one thing, that documentary Wrestling With Shadows was on its way to being released several months after Survivor Series. Both Bret and Vince knew this, and Vince being who he is as a promoter could see the dollar signs in selling what would be the seeds to the Mr. McMahon character being planted as he showed that he was willing to stab one of his top stars in the back. Bret on the other hand was getting ready to go to WCW and what better way to promote his character than by showing him being victimized and betrayed by his boss. The only thing is that for one reason or another Bret Hart didn't benefit the same way like Vince did. The Mr. McMahon character without saying became the evil and corrupt authority figure that the Montreal Screwjob storyline helped him become. Bret Hart's WCW push and climb towards the World Title didn't get realized until the end of his career and we all know how his unfortunate retirement at the hands of a botched move from Goldberg did not help matters. Now we can speculate about how badly WCW screwed Bret but again none of us were there to see how Bret acted backstage or what was really going on. He still had a presence in the US and World Title divisions and he was getting paid millions of dollars. If you're a true fan like I was, you'd appreciate seeing Bret on TV period. But again, that is another story for another day. Although, you can argue that these incidents did hurt his legacy, who really knows, after all he only did come back at the beginning of the year to a successful storyline with Mr. McMahon which culminated in a match at WrestleMania XXVI, despite how ill-coceived I felt this angle was, I can't and won't argue its success.

I still think that even if the Screwjob never happened, Bret would still be a legendary figure in this business. His performances at SummerSlam 91, 92, and 94 were classics just seeing him in both those IC title matches against Mr. Perfect and the Bulldog were epic. Then of course his steel cage match with Owen which followed off their classic at WrestleMania X was amazing. The King Of The Ring tournament win was another legendary happening where he took on Razor, Bam Bam and Perfect all in one night. Just great stuff again. The WrestleMania contests were intriguing too, some people today might not remember them with the same fondness, but as a kid I was glued to the TV for these matches. His emotional IC Title match with Roddy Piper at Mania 8 (where you wondered if Piper was going to go heel again on Bret by using the ring bell), the back to back encounters with Yokozuna at Mania 9 and 10, the Iron Man Match at Mania 12 and then of course the double turn with Steve Austin at Mania 13 was another memorable viewing. Hell, another classic encounter you could talk about which some people might not bring up is the Survivor Series 1995 match where he beat Diesel for the World Title, now that was awesome! In ring psychology was one of my favorite traits from Bret and how he cut down Big Daddy Cool was just a great story.

That just says legend right there, however one other argument I had to make with you Maximus was your statement about Hogan's disloyalty. Where in this business or any other walk of life do you have to be "loyal" to just anyone? Think about that every time a superstar gets future endeavored by WWE. At least in Hogan's case from everything I've understood, Hogan has fulfilled contractual obligations where they have applied. WCW might be a grey area, but considering that I think the Russo incident with Hogan was another work like Montreal, I'll reserve to elaborate on that because I don't know what really happened in that case. But with Hogan's case, I fault no one for ever being in business for themselves. After all, whether Montreal was work, shoot or a little bit of both. One can argue and I say this despite Bret being one of my favorites ever, that Bret himself might not have been the most professional in his matters regarding how to handle his title loss, something which I know the IWC seems to accuse Hogan of all the time. But anyway, that loyalty argument is something I have to challenge, because plain and simply put, the wrestling business is just that a business. One can counter what you say by seeing the number of people Vince has let go over the years and what not. As far as people like Hogan and even Randy Savage go, they were offered better deals and rightfully so, if you put your all into an endeavor and you've paid your dues and someone wants to offer you more money and control of your character because of your status, then why not take it? After all that move led to the nWo being formed which in many cases helped the wrestling business overall. Loyalty in any endeavor most of the time is a fallacy and I can't imagine wrestling being any different.

As for Owen, his death definitely spiked the interest and knowledge about him in 1999, but in 2010 i think anyone who thinks about him in this year is thinking about his contributions. they reminisce about his feud with Bret and his king of the ring win and his feud with HBK instead of just mourn over his death. Rumor had it that Owen was supposed to be the Game instead of Triple H

Owen is a tough call, there are many fans who are of the age today that I was (teens) when Owen died, that if not for the sensationalism that followed his death might not have remembered who he was. Meaning that if Owen died in a car accident or from a disease it's debatable how many people would really remember him. No offense to those who have passed away over the years in this business, but I've talked to kids in their teens that watch wrestling and several of them can't tell me a single thing about guys like Kerry Von Erich, Brian Pillman or Stan Stasiak. But considering that Owen's death happened in the ring, you're not going to forget that anytime soon. As cynical as it sounds, there are some people that will only remember Owen for dying in the ring and not performing in it. Depending on what age group you are in or how ravenous an appetite you have for professional wrestling history, I am not sure how many people could tell you about his European Title match with the Bulldog who was also his tag team partner at the time, which added a degree of dissension to their match. For those that remember this was the genesis of the New Hart Foundation. There was also his feud with Bret like you mentioned and his King Of The Ring which chimed in the return of the Anvil which added more tension to the Bret-Owen feud which I thought was great.

And even towards the end there were some great moments, his "I'm not a nugget" spiel and his alliance with Jeff Jarrett was some great tag team wrestling. Which is something we see very little of in today's WWE. If Owen hadn't died, I think that a World Title reign would have been very possible. Considering how we have the RAW and SmackDown divisions in the roster, Owen could very well have made the best of an opportunity like JBL did when Brock Lesnar left and they needed a spot to fill for a departing main eventer. Also you look how Kane got himself a five month run just recently with the strap. After all the OP mentioned that the Blue Blazer would have hurt Owen's chances, well the Katie Vick angle didn't end Kane's credibility nor did the Justin Hawk Bradshaw character doom JBL to the same fate as guys like Mantaur and Duke Droese. If that stupid stunt never happened with Owen repelling from the rafters, I think he could have survived the Blue Blazer redux. A World Title could have been possible if Owen had never passed away.

 

[jacdnwarrior]

If we're going to talk about things, like the Screwjob we should get our facts straight. WWE had a huge moneymaker in Hulk Hogan. Thanks to Andre the Giant passing the torch to him, he was solidified as the star of WWF. When it was Hogan's time, the person who WWF had chosen to take the company's top spot, was Bret Hart (this is long after the Ultimate Warrior thing). Hogan said, 'No, I'll give the shot to Yokozuna.' This hurt the company's attempt to solidify Bret as their star to replace Hogan.

Bret didn't bring in the numbers that Hogan did. Almost no one has. He had to work with horrible storylines silly characters. WWF wanted to do more risque adult fare. Bret wasn't for it, he felt it should be more family oriented. Add to that HBK and his friends were gaining more political clout backstage and rubbing a number of people the wrong way. Hall and Nash had left WWF to go to WCW and HBK wished to join them. Vince didn't want that so he decided to give up Bret rather than HBK. Bret never wanted to leave, he wanted to remain with WWF. He was told to go by the owner of the company. He felt he still had a lot to contribute and the company he was loyal to for a very long time, Vince said we don't need you, take the offer from WCW. So he left. Which was the right thing for him to do. He said he wanted to put over some one other than HBK. Why is he wrong ? Hogan didn't get to choose who he wanted to put over ? You better believe it. HBK put every one that was suggested to him ? Of course not. Vince says sure whatever you want and then does the opposite.

Had Bret stayed he would have been a remarkable asset to the company. He would've put over Austin at WM instead of HBK, which would have been a great way to end the Austin Bret rivalry that they had. He also could've worked with the Rock, Angle etc in matches that would've added more to his greatness. So no, I don't think the Screwjob makes him more memorable. I think people look at as something that they hate that it happened but are glad that it is a chapter both sides have decided to close the book on.

Owen was a very good performer. If he hadn't died, he would've been champion only after HBK and Austin left. They both had issues with him and used political stroke to deny him any shot at the title. Triple H might have stopped Owen as well, but with SD he'd probably get his shot or on Raw, if Triple H were injured.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

If we're going to talk about things, like the Screwjob we should get our facts straight. WWE had a huge moneymaker in Hulk Hogan. Thanks to Andre the Giant passing the torch to him, he was solidified as the star of WWF. When it was Hogan's time, the person who WWF had chosen to take the company's top spot, was Bret Hart (this is long after the Ultimate Warrior thing). Hogan said, 'No, I'll give the shot to Yokozuna.'
This hurt the company's attempt to solidify Bret as their star to replace Hogan.

I think you can thank Lex Luger's existence for Bret not getting a shot at Hogan or a rematch with Yokozuna right away. Think about it for a second, if Vince wanted to truly distance himself from the Hulk Hogan archetype, why would he have invested all that time in Lex Luger? Say what you want about what you've heard Bret say in regards to this as well as what the IWC says, but Lex Luger's All-American Hero push shows me that it was Vince who didn't want to continue Bret's push for the time being. For all we know, Vince might have very well played Bret and Hogan against one another in what his plans were for both of them. Hogan was coming up at the end of a contract and considering that Yokozuna was a very over heel, what better way to solidify his villainy than by having him destroy Hulkamania? It makes a lot more story sense than having Bret involved to be honest. However, I thought that the whole idea of Hogan intervening at WrestleMania IX was a little shotty, but that was Vince's call and not ours. But again, I always pose the whole "Hogan didn't want to put over Bret" theory with the fact that Lex Luger was around and ready to take the mantle of the WWF's All-American good guy, which shows more that Vince couldn't depart that abruptly from this image than Hogan being unwilling to put Bret Hart over.

After all in the end things still worked out incredibly well for Bret, sure he had to wait a year before being Champion again but along the way he won the King Of The Ring, had an amusing feud with Jerry Lawler that off and on lasted a couple years, and helped elevate his brother Owen as a singles star. Had Bret not briefly stepped out of the title picture, who's to know what would have become of Owen's standing in the company? In the 90's Owen's time in the WWF could have probably resembled his very first WWF stint in the late 80s as The Blue Blazer where he would have quietly vanished from the roster.

Bret never wanted to leave, he wanted to remain with WWF. He was told to go by the owner of the company. He felt he still had a lot to contribute and the company he was loyal to for a very long time, said we don't need you. So he left. Which was the right He said he wanted to put over some one other than HBK. Why is he wrong ? Hogan didn't get to choose who he wanted to put over ? You better believe it. HBK put every one that was suggested to him ? Of course not. Had he stayed he would have been a remarkable asset to the company. He would've put over Austin at WM instead of HBK, which would have been a great way to end the Austin Bret rivalry that they had. He also could've worked with the Rock, Angle etc in matches that

That may be true, but again, don't believe all the hype that we've heard over the years with this, I would leave the possibility of Wrestling With Shadows to be a very well played kayfabe piece. As far as putting Austin over, well in many ways Bret did, although he did it without losing. At WM 13 that double turn in that submission match was a great plot device to continue Austin's sudden connection with the fans and to solidify Bret's in-kayfabe frustration at the changing landscape of pro wrestling. While I may agree with you and wish that Bret didn't leave WWF, the fact is that it happened, and he got big money to do it, I'm no business expert but I think the biggest factor was Bret's contract being 20 years, and Vince having financial difficulties, well look at it this way, I am sure that if things were that bad, Bret could have always renegotiated a shorter contract. Again, I am no expert on the situation since I was never involved much like all us other fans aren't, but the fact is that discussing what we are discussing in regards to who wanted to put who over and who wanted to stay or go just oversimplifies everything in this discussion. Bottom line, don't buy everything that the WWE (or any other company for that matter) hype machine wants to sell you.

 

[JJ15776]

I'm thinking anybody who says no to this is too young to have seen them originally. Because, to be honest, it's a ridiculous question. Both of their legacies would be much greater if the Screwjob and untimely death had not happened. And the reason it is so ridiculous(and let's just be blunt here and call it what it is, it's ignorant and foolish) is because you're acting like they both would've just up and left the WWE for no reason if neither had happend. That's just a very silly way of looking at it.

If Bret had left the WWE on good terms (which he would have if not for the Screwjob), he would've come back during the Invasion. He would've continued to be a huge part of the WWE throughout the last decade, and would still have a role in the WWE today. (remember the only reason he doesn't is because of a lawsuit stemming from Owen's death, which wouldn't have happened either in this scenario, you can't have one without the other)

Same with Owen. If he doesn't die, why would he leave the WWE? That'd just be weird. Of course he would've stuck around with his brother. He always would've been a valuable midcarder. He would've stuck around through the invasion, always been on the verge of main eventing...and eventually he would've broke through. At worst, it would've been around the time guys like Eddie and Benoit were pushed to the main event. But probably much sooner. And, unlike Bret, he'd still be active today. He'd probably be playing a role similiar to what HBK has done for the last several years...helping elevate midcarders up. IMO he would definitely be more remembered, and better remembered, if he hadn't died.

Basically, look at HBK. Do you think he would've been remembered more if he never returned from his back injury? Of course not.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

I would say that Bret would have been remembered just as fondly had the screwjob not happened. Like most others have stated Bret was the face of the company for years and was a much loved guy. He would have gone over to WCW at the expiration of his contract and the smarks would have bitched on about how WCW were underutilizing him just like they did. Plus his career would have ended at the hands of Goldberg thus rendering him a tragic figure. I think the Montreal Screwjob was more detrimental for WCW and the legacy of HBK and WWF than it was beneficial for Bret. Bret would have been a hall of famer and a much loved figure regardless of it. The thing is perhaps without the screwjob people might have actually talked a lot more about how good a wrestler he was than bringing up the screwjob every time his name was mentioned.

Owen would have certainly not been that famous though. I think the casual fan might have forgotten about him. Of course the smarks would remember him as a talented wrestler who deserved to win a title but was not given a chance due to lacking in size. But he might not have mattered much to the casual fans. I think he would have been remembered much like Kane in the sense that he was a guy who could only work well in a storyline involving his much famous brother.

 

[S.J. Maximus]

That just says legend right there, however one other argument I had to make with you Maximus was your statement about Hogan's disloyalty. Where in this business or any other walk of life do you have to be "loyal" to just anyone? Think about that every time a superstar gets future endeavored by WWE. At least in Hogan's case from everything I've understood, Hogan has fulfilled contractual obligations where they have applied. WCW might be a grey area, but considering that I think the Russo incident with Hogan was another work like Montreal, I'll reserve to elaborate on that because I don't know what really happened in that case. But with Hogan's case, I fault no one for ever being in business for themselves. After all, whether Montreal was work, shoot or a little bit of both. One can argue and I say this despite Bret being one of my favorites ever, that Bret himself might not have been the most professional in his matters regarding how to handle his title loss, something which I know the IWC seems to accuse Hogan of all the time. But anyway, that loyalty argument is something I have to challenge, because plain and simply put, the wrestling business is just that a business. One can counter what you say by seeing the number of people Vince has let go over the years and what not. As far as people like Hogan and even Randy Savage go, they were offered better deals and rightfully so, if you put your all into an endeavor and you've paid your dues and someone wants to offer you more money and control of your character because of your status, then why not take it? After all that move led to the nWo being formed which in many cases helped the wrestling business overall. Loyalty in any endeavor most of the time is a fallacy and I can't imagine wrestling being any different.

I'm not attacking Hogan for his actions, rather I'm acknowledging the fact that Vince does admire 'loyalty' to his company. Did you see his "50 Greatest Superstars" DVD? The Top 5 guys were all guys that he took from lower card status and made the faces of his company at one point or another. I agree that going into business for yourself isn't a bad thing, but leaving the WWE for a rival isn't the best thing to stay in Vince's good graces. Now add Hogan's public bashing of the WWE and you got the perfect recipe for Vince to hate him, yet Vince still puts him over sometimes

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

I'm not attacking Hogan for his actions, rather I'm acknowledging the fact that Vince does admire 'loyalty' to his company. Did you see his "50 Greatest Superstars" DVD? The Top 5 guys were all guys that he took from lower card status and made the faces of his company at one point or another. I agree that going into business for yourself isn't a bad thing, but leaving the WWE for a rival isn't the best thing to stay in Vince's good graces. Now add Hogan's public bashing of the WWE and you got the perfect recipe for Vince to hate him, yet Vince still puts him over sometimes

Those are good points too, no doubt about it bossman. You also make a good point about Hogan's actions, but I only said what I said because I'd imagine Vince has given a reason to some of his workers to do what they have done over the years in their choice to leave WWF/E. But you are indeed right that Vince does reward that loyalty, I remember him citing Shawn Michaels and Undertaker as two of his most loyal stars once in a WWE magazine. I just had slight issue towards your statement initially, but I see what you mean by that now that you've followed up on my reply to you.

And you are right Hogan has definitely said more than his fair share about the company on several occasions, lol. But I don't see those two acting any other way considering how sensational and ego driven both he and Vince are.

Good call though man and good posting!

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

What if...

...the screw job hadn't happened? Would Goldberg have superkicked Bret out of wrestling? Would Owen have been 'punished'? Would WCW have went under? Would Bret have returned to WWe as an in ring performer? Would Bret have a Ric Flair attitude to retirement?

...Owen hadn't fallen to his death? Would he have worked the Blue Blazer storyline to his advantage? Would he have joined the SCSA, Rock, Trip, Undertaker headliners? Would he have joined up with returning Bulldog/ Bret?

The problem with 'What if...' is where do we stop?

With Bret - he was 40 when he left and starting to accumulate injuries, chances are his WWF stint would be his legacy although without the animosity, I could have seen Bret back in the WWF a lot sooner than he has.

Owen? Different kettle of fish, Owen was only 34 at the time of his death. I don't think it would be unfair to assume he had about a decade in front of him. Facts are that Angle, Benoit, Guerrero, Mysterio et al came along and won titles - it's no stretch to believe that Owen couldn't have joined them.

 

[WWE.IS.AWESOME]

Okay well I have to say yes and no to both of these guys. I will start with Bret.

Bret Hart:

Why he would have been remembered more if the Screwjob hadn't happened-

Bret Hart was obviously going to WCW either way, but if the Screwjob hadn't occured, he would have left the WWE/F on good terms. If he left on good terms, it is very likely he would have returned and won more championships and gotten over with newer fans. If he stayed around untill later, he would have been more reconized by the fans of today. Bret was going to have a HOF spot either way, though. I'm just saying that without the Screwjob, Bret would probably had returned and became more popular than ever. Either way Bret Hart's career was legendary so not having the Screwjob wouldn't have made him any less popular.

Why he wouldn't have been remembered more if the Screwjob hadn't happened-

The Screwjob is one of the most memorable moments of Bret Hart's career. Of course, there were MANY more, but the Screwjob was a huge one. If the Screwjob hadn't happened, plenty of people might not even reconize Bret Hart. A good amount of today's fans would probably have had no idea who Bret Hart was if it wasn't for him returning to have that angle with Vince. That angle would have never happened if it wasn't for the Montreal Screwjob.

Time for Owen...

Owen Hart:

Why he would have been remembered more if his death hadn't happened there-

Without his death happening the unfortunate way that it did, Owen would definately have stuck around a while longer. He might still be here today. He could have dominated the midcard and won the IC title along with the Tag Team titles plenty of times. One day, it could've been possible for him to break through to the ME. Now we will never know. Without his death, he would've been here longer and plenty more people would have gotten a chance to see him wrestle. He could have become way more popular.

Why he wouldn't have been remembered more if his death hadn't happened there-

His death is probably the most reconized moment of his career. It's sad to think about Owen dying. Some people only know who he is because of the accident. It's possible that he would never have gotten pushed to his full potential. He could have left the WWE/F early and slowly become forgotten. Some of today's fans would have no idea who Owen Hart was if it wasn't for the way he died. He was a great wrestler, but he mostly known (by today's fans) because of his death.

This is just my opinion.

 

[jacdnwarrior]

Hogan was coming up at the end of a contract and considering that Yokozuna was a very over heel, what better way to solidify his villainy than by having him destroy Hulkamania? It makes a lot more story sense than having Bret involved to be honest. However, I thought that the whole idea of Hogan intervening at WrestleMania IX was a little shotty, but that was Vince's call and not ours. But again, I always pose the whole "Hogan didn't want to put over Bret" theory with the fact that Lex Luger was around and ready to take the mantle of the WWF's All-American good guy, which shows more that Vince couldn't depart that abruptly from this image than Hogan being unwilling to put Bret Hart over.


You can believe whatever you want I'm not here to change your mind but state what I think on this topic. The truth is the wrestling world is very political and very cutthroat. Hogan has said himself he had to protect his spot. Flair was political. HBK and Triple H are political. Austin was political. As great as Luger was, he was a liability in the ring. He was very good on the mike but not stellar in the ring. Yokozuna as good as he was, never spoke, wasn't the first giant in the business didn't have as memorable a title match with Hogan, as a Bret vs. Hogan match would have. It would have been a great match for the fans and Bret's career alike and would've helped WWF.


After all in the end things still worked out incredibly well for Bret, sure he had to wait a year before being Champion again but along the way he won the King Of The Ring, had an amusing feud with Jerry Lawler that off and on lasted a couple years, and helped elevate his brother Owen as a singles star.

If he had gotten the match with Hogan and won the belt, that would've helped him a lot more and any person who worked with him in the ring.


That may be true, but again, don't believe all the hype that we've heard over the years with this, I would leave the possibility of Wrestling With Shadows to be a very well played kayfabe piece. As far as putting Austin over, well in many ways Bret did, although he did it without losing. At WM 13 that double turn in that submission match was a great plot device to continue Austin's sudden connection with the fans and to solidify Bret's in-kayfabe frustration at the changing landscape of pro wrestling. While I may agree with you and wish that Bret didn't leave WWF, the fact is that it happened, and he got big money to do it, I'm no business expert but I think the biggest factor was Bret's contract being 20 years, and Vince having financial difficulties, well look at it this way, I am sure that if things were that bad, Bret could have always renegotiated a shorter contract. Again, I am no expert on the situation since I was never involved much like all us other fans aren't, but the fact is that discussing what we are discussing in regards to who wanted to put who over and who wanted to stay or go just oversimplifies everything in this discussion. Bottom line, don't buy everything that the WWE (or any other company for that matter) hype machine wants to sell you.[/QUOTE]

Bret turned down a previous offer from WCW to stay with WWE. He was told to take an offer from WCW after Vince decided to back out of the promised deal he had with Bret. Vince says this is true. Vince refuses to pay a deal with Bret but pays Mike Tyson 3 million to appear at WM and do promotional work for WM13. That amount was a lot more than what Bret would've made with deal he had agreed to with Vince. The company went on to make a fortune after Bret left, so Vince crying poor just doesn't hold any water with me. The fact is there was no need for the screwjob. Bret had no history of betraying the WWE, never wanted to leave and would've never done to WWE anything that was done by some one else. If he wants to leave on his terms, that's the least he should get after being there for so long. An entire lockerroom was totally disgusted with McMahon for what he did and two performers wouldn't show up at the Raw program that happened afterwards. That's according to Mick Foley. The WWE and Vince protrayed this as a situation that they had no choice in their actions and that, I'll never believe.

As far as Austin vs. Bret, there is no question that their rivlary would have been more memorable if Bret came into WM as champ and villain and put over Austin instead of HBK. Unlike HBK, Bret wouldn't have to be threatened to put Austin over, by the Taker (something both Taker and Austin have stated in interviews to be true), it would have been the perfect payoff to a hard fought feud between the two.

As far as the IWC, more people side with Vince over this incident than anything else. They distort the facts, they call Bret selfish and bitter as though they know anything about him, the situation, or what a performer like Bret sacrifices for the good of a promotion. I don't have all the answers or pretend to. If I have to make a choice of who to believe, it won't be a promoter- that's Vince- who admits that he'll say and do anything for his company and has screwed over more performers than you can shake a stick at.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

You can believe whatever you want I'm not here to change your mind but state what I think on this topic. The truth is the wrestling world is very political and very cutthroat. Hogan has said himself he had to protect his spot. Flair was political. HBK and Triple H are political. Austin was political. As great as Luger was, he was a liability in the ring. He was very good on the mike but not stellar in the ring. Yokozuna as good as he was, never spoke, wasn't the first giant in the business didn't have as memorable a title match with Hogan, as a Bret vs. Hogan match would have. It would have been a great match for the fans and Bret's career alike and would've helped WWF.

I never said Hogan wasn't political, but explain to me what Lex Luger's reason for being involved in this whole scenario was? And I think you're forgetting that outside of Hogan vs Warrior, the idea of face vs face matches still wasn't Vince's bread and butter. The traditional face vs heel concept still ruled that era in the WWF and it's possible to say that after what happened with Hogan vs Warrior, Vince might have been a little wary to go down that road again. As far as what you said about Luger that's irrelevant to what I asked you, for some brief amount of time, Vince at least must have thought Luger could provide him the role that Hogan vacated, or else he'd have never been in the title picture in the first place. Why spend all that time and money on Luger, if there weren't at least some plans to see if he could run with the title, obviously something changed that. Again in a fashion that's similar to Hogan and Hart never wrestling at SummerSlam 1993, in where we know something happened, but let's not kid ourselves, neither you or I were there to see it, we can only speculate. However, you're trying to pass your speculation off as fact while I am merely countering and challenging that because I don't know what went on backstage in wrestling, but I'm merely posing some questions due to the holes that many of these backstage stories have and say what you want, but the whole Hogan-Vince-Bret title booking scenario has plenty of holes. Plain and simple.

I'm not saying that I wouldn't have wanted to see Bret Vs Hogan, I would have been all for it, but something tells me it was something Vince didn't want or else it would have absolutely happened no matter how badly Hogan would have tried to stop it, that's just my theory at least, I was never there to witness the backstage occurrences that led up to King Of The Ring.

Not that I want to start an argument here but despite how much of a liability you thought Luger was, he was still given the spot that Bret Hart arguably should have had. I'm never saying I disagreed with anything you said, I'm just trying to step out of my bias towards Bret and realize that there was more to this scenario than Hogan just saying that he didn't want to put Hart over, plain and simple man, plain and simple. One thing that would be appreciated is if you would bother divulging your age on this forum, considering I was around to live through this era of wrestling and remember how popular these characters were, I can tell you first hand what it was like when Yokozuna walked out of Dayton that summer night defeating the biggest star of the WWF and taking his title.

It seems that you've bought every bit of scuttlebutt you've heard in regards to this situation and by doing that you're also in a way without probably even realizing it are making an implication that Vince lets people make his big business decisions for him.

If he had gotten the match with Hogan and won the belt, that would've helped him a lot more and any person who worked with him in the ring.

Again, you've seen to not really give anything I said any true thought since you glazed over this point I made. Think about it for a second, if Bret had been right back in the title hunt, it's possible that Owen never would have gotten a match with him. I think with Bret Hart as champion again, Bret and Owen would have never had their tag title match with the Quebecers where Owen infamously attacked Bret. Remember I am just thinking this and not knowing it, I'm merely presenting a theory and posing you a question to think outside the box of internet rumor and speculation. My thought remains that Bret's time away from the title scene did not hurt his credibility all that badly and he helped put Owen along over the way and eventually got his revenge in the storyline sense over the man who beat him for the World Title, Yokozuna by beating him in a rematch at WrestleMania X. Again, if there was such an urgency to make Bret champion again he would have been there at SummerSlam to challenge Yoko in a rematch and Lex Luger would have probably still been stuck as the Narcissist, but the fact that Luger got that big face turn and repackaging should tell you that some of these rumors you're trying to say are fact, have a lack of true weight behind them. Seriously.

Bret turned down a previous offer from WCW to stay with WWE. He was told to take an offer from WCW after Vince decided to back out of the promised deal he had with Bret. Vince says this is true. Vince refuses to pay a deal with Bret but pays Mike Tyson 3 million to appear at WM and do promotional work for WM13. That amount was a lot more than what Bret would've made with deal he had agreed to with Vince. The company went on to make a fortune after Bret left, so Vince crying poor just doesn't hold any water with me. The fact is there was no need for the screwjob. Bret had no history of betraying the WWE, never wanted to leave and would've never done to WWE anything that was done by some one else. If he wants to leave on his terms, that's the least he should get after being there for so long. An entire lockerroom was totally disgusted with McMahon for what he did and two performers wouldn't show up at the Raw program that happened afterwards. That's according to Mick Foley. The WWE and Vince protrayed this as a situation that they had no choice in their actions and that, I'll never believe.

What you saw in that Wrestling With Shadows Documentary (which by the way I enjoyed, no doubt about it), I still maintain I am not going to buy all that hype, and this is in the pre-publicly traded era of the WWF where their business was 100 per cent confidential as a private company. Therefore there's even less reason to truly believe everything you hear about Vince and Bret's dealings. Think about it, the idea of perpetuating this story as being contentious and tumultuous sells a lot better than Bret merely being offered a deal by WCW and outright accepting it in favor of staying with WWF. And by the way it was WrestleMania 14 that Mike Tyson had participated in and not WrestleMania 13. WrestleMania 13 was where Austin and Hart had their match. Bottom line is this, think about the timing with everything, Wrestling With Shadows was coming out at a time where Vince was morphing into Mr. McMahon...it seems a little too convenient that the WWF would just allow the cameras of an outsider document all these backstage incidents. I don't care what you say about the Screwjob being this or that, everything just seems fishy to me. I stand by the possibility that while it's not conclusive, that the Screwjob could have indeed been a work.

Fact is, I know that Bret said he turned this down and he turned that down, but the fact is a lot of stuff I think was played off for the camera, and it would have made no sense to present things in a mundane fashion, these folks (being Bret and Vince) were trying to sell a story.

As far as Austin vs. Bret, there is no question that their rivlary would have been more memorable if Bret came into WM as champ and villain and put over Austin instead of HBK. Unlike HBK, Bret wouldn't have to be threatened to put Austin over, by the Taker (something both Taker and Austin have stated in interviews to be true), it would have been the perfect payoff to a hard fought feud between the two.

So you're willing to tell me that despite Austin losing, WM 13 still wasn't in some ways beneficial for Austin even without winning the match? Again, I myself would have thoroughly enjoyed seeing Austin and Hart have a rematch a year later at WrestleMania 14, but the fact is it just didn't happen. But don't dare forget how HUGE that moment in WWF history was when Austin passed out with his face donning the "proverbial" crimson mask. That image became part of Monday Night RAW's opening for some time and graced t-shirts and so forth. Austin was solidified from that point on and he made his climb towards the top of the business and took the spot of icon in the WWF that guys like Hulk Hogan had had before him. Sure the optimal idea did not get executed with Austin beating Bret for the title, but Austin's career did not suffer at all after WM 13, you're making it sound like beating Bret would have made him a bigger star than he was, and I just can't agree with that seeing as how he still flourished after that moment.

As far as the IWC, more people side with Vince over this incident than anything else. They distort the facts, they call Bret selfish and bitter as though they know anything about him, the situation, or what a performer like Bret sacrifices for the good of a promotion. I don't have all the answers or pretend to. If I have to make a choice of who to believe, it won't be a promoter- that's Vince- who admits that he'll say and do anything for his company and has screwed over more performers than you can shake a stick at.

I side with no one boss. I merely presented a theory over But be honest with yourself, you know nothing outside of what you read and see from these people, unless you were there backstage to see everything go down than you are no more accurate than the rest of the IWC in what you think happened. However, I am interested in the point that you just brought up about Vince screwing over his talent, if that is the case then you really should give the theory I presented some more thought in how past situations involving Bret were handled.

As great as Bret is and despite him being one of my top ten favorites of all time, I'm not going to believe everything I hear about in the world of wrestling. I watch the product to be entertained first and foremost, and not put too much stock into what happens backstage. Sure, it gets disappointing to hear about certain booking decisions not always going through but how many of those rumored decisions being true is beyond me, since I'm not someone that's in a position to be privy to what goes on in the world of wrestling. I would recommend that you consider that when stating your thoughts on things as well.

 

[jacdnwarrior]

This is my last response to it, I don't want to go on forever.

I have no idea why Luger didn't get the nod. I've heard speculation but let's not go with it. For all the hype, he didn't get the chance which may have been a good thing, considering WWF was facing issues with steroid use and so forth Luger might not have been the right choice. It's odd he never got that chance, it was his to win so, I'm thinking (just speculation no facts here) he screwed up somehow. If Bret had been in the title hunt we wouldn't have had the whole Owen storyline, that's true.

Hogan and Bret did speak of a match they were supposed to have on interviews with Mike Landsberg on Off the Record. The only difference is Hogan says it was a non-title, while Bret said it was for the belt. Now I can believe any one I choose, as can any one else can make that choice. Looking at it from a certain point of view, it's was to be Hogan's last match before he left the company, they need to give the title to some one, why would it be a non title match ? So Bret is out, Yoko is put in, he wins the belt.

It seems that you've bought every bit of scuttlebutt you've heard in regards to this situation and by doing that you're also in a way without probably even realizing it are making an implication that Vince lets people make his big business decisions for him.

If you look at the crap that Vince allows on his program today, it's easy to question his wisdom at times. Promoters no matter how powerful from time to time have to deal with difficult talent. Most they can control, a few they can't. Power struggles between stars and promoters has happened a lot. Buddy Rogers was difficult backstage. Hogan had issues with AWA owner Gagne, issues with Russo in WCW. Rick Flair had issues with head booker Dusty and others. Where do I get this info ? Read their books, look at shoot interviews with bookers and/or former promoters and talent. Many promoters will look at their top talent, look at the money this talent brings in and say I'll give in to these demands others will fight them tooth and nail. Vince will look at what's best for business and will give in or not. With Hogan and Austin, I believe he gave in a little bit to keep them happy.


I don't care what you say about the Screwjob being this or that, everything just seems fishy to me. I stand by the possibility that while it's not conclusive, that the Screwjob could have indeed been a work.

Fact is, I know that Bret said he turned this down and he turned that down, but the fact is a lot of stuff I think was played off for the camera, and it would have made no sense to present things in a mundane fashion, these folks (being Bret and Vince) were trying to sell a story.

Vince said in an interview with OTR Michael Landsberg, he told Bret to go. He also said he lied to Bret about the ending to do what he felt he needed to do. Maybe he's lying. Maybe he's not. Some things I believe him on others I don't. When he says he knew nothing about wrestlers using steroids, I think that's bullshit he says to make himself look good. When he says no one is using steroids today in his company because of his wellness program, I say that's bullshit. He'll say anything to make himself look good when it suits him, and will be the bad guy when that suits him.


So you're willing to tell me that despite Austin losing, WM 13 still wasn't in some ways beneficial for Austin even without winning the match? Again, I myself would have thoroughly enjoyed seeing Austin and Hart have a rematch a year later at WrestleMania 14, but the fact is it just didn't happen. But don't dare forget how HUGE that moment in WWF history was when Austin passed out with his face donning the "proverbial" crimson mask. That image became part of Monday Night RAW's opening for some time and graced t-shirts and so forth. Austin was solidified from that point on and he made his climb towards the top of the business and took the spot of icon in the WWF that guys like Hulk Hogan had had before him. Sure the optimal idea did not get executed with Austin beating Bret for the title, but Austin's career did not suffer at all after WM 13, you're making it sound like beating Bret would have made him a bigger star than he was, and I just can't agree with that seeing as how he still flourished after that moment.

You're correct that it was WM 14 Tyson was at, not 13. WM 13 was beneficial for Austin. I'm saying Austin winning his title from Bret would've been better storyline wise than Austin winning it from HBK. Bret and Austin had a remarkable feud but it was never for the belt. No feud was more instrumental to Austin's WWE career (with the exception of Austin vs McMahon and maybe Austin vs Rock) than his feud with Bret. With that match at WM 13, he became over as a face in a losing effort and Bret became the hated heel. All I'm saying is the fans would've been more emotionally invested in the Bret Austin feud ending with a title match (with Bret putting over Austin) between them at WM14 than the 6 month or so feud that was between HBK and Austin. Austin's career was great either way I'm just saying it would've been a better way to end their feud. If they would be willing to watch Austin vs. Rock a few times, I think they would've loved to see Austin vs. Bret two WM in a row. That's all I'm saying.

However, I am interested in the point that you just brought up about Vince screwing over his talent, if that is the case then you really should give the theory I presented some more thought in how past situations involving Bret were handled.

Wendi Richter gave an interview. She commented that when she asked about royalties from the 80's rock and wrestling cartoon and the action figures and such, she was stripped of the match in a similar fashion to Bret, which ended her career with WWE. Moolah wrestling under a mask pinned Richter with a fast count by the ref. What he did to Bret alone would lead me to believe he has screwed over more people than just these two.
Who knows how loyal Vince is. At times it seems he cares nothing about the people who worked for him at other times he shows tremendous loyalty, he can surprise you.

I would recommend that you consider that when stating your thoughts on things as well.[/QUOTE]

Do I work backstage at the company ? No. However, many contributors on this site have spoken about the politics, several authors who've written about wrestling have talked about the backstage politics, are they all to be ignored ? Former wrestlers have spoken about it. Are they all wrong ? Kurt Angle, Hogan, Flair, among others have spoken about the politics backstage. We know it exists. They can't all be bitter or dishonest can they ? And those politics are affecting the product that we see on the screen. That leads to some performers getting promoted to champ after being with WWE for a year and others being stopped from going above midcard level.
Some performers are looking at a push in the company one minute, and after one mistake against a certain performeer, they're dropped to the bottom of the barrel. I think there are some true things being said about the politics, it's up to each person to decide what they are willing to accept as truth or not.