Does anyone think Bret Hart was better than Shawn Michaels, and why?

[Kidpolean]

I'm not talking about his post-2002 run, so I won't comment on his matches with Undertaker at WrestleMania, because I agree they are great. The Hell In A Cell match at Badd Blood was great for it's innovative concept, Shawn's bump, and Kane's debut. Sure, I'll give this match to Shawn because you're right, I did forget about it.

I disagree that Shawn vs Diesel at WM11 is MOTY, and not because I'm some Shawn hater/Bret fanboy. Maybe PWI gave it MOTY because 1995 was BAD in general. Nash himself has said his match with Bret at Survivor Series 95 was better, and I'd agree. Personally, I'd give Shawn vs Razor Ladder Match II (which I did mention in my post) MOTY over his WM match with Diesel.

Anyways, the entire point of my post isn't to bash Shawn Michaels. I've said Shawn Michaels had some great matches and if his head was screwed on even close to straight, who knows what he could have done in his prime. The potential was always there, and sometimes he delivered on it, but many times it went wasted. Shawn was very inconsistent during this period, and for every great match he had, he would have a "lose my smile" moment, hand a title away and be out of the ring for 3-4 months.

I'm happy for him that he had the chance to comeback, put on some incredible matches with Triple H, Chris Jericho and The Undertaker, and basically re-write his legacy. I wish Bret had a similar opportunity to work with the great workers of a new generation like Angle, Jericho or The Rock .. who knows how many more great matches we could be talking about.

Dude come on...Bret was going downhill before he left wwf and was terrible in wcw. He didn't fit in with the direction the business was going in. So HBK is looked over because Bret didn't make a similar comeback? Your post seems like a bunch of HBK hate. Shawn was the best in the business in the mid 90's and everybody knows it. You are downplaying HBK's accomplishments and skills to fit your argument. Bret was amazing but Shawn was more of a well rounded wrestler and that should be obvious to anyone with eyes. Bret imo is second to none inside of the ring but Shawn is second only to Hart and better than Hart at everything else.

QUESTION...would you rather have hbk skill set or Bret's? Bret is slightly better in the ring but there isn't anything else he does better than Shawn. If there is something please let me know!!

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

Dude come on...Bret was going downhill before he left wwf and was terrible in wcw. He didn't fit in with the direction the business was going in. So HBK is looked over because Bret didn't make a similar comeback? Your post seems like a bunch of HBK hate. Shawn was the best in the business in the mid 90's and everybody knows it. You are downplaying HBK's accomplishments and skills to fit your argument. Bret was amazing but Shawn was more of a well rounded wrestler and that should be obvious to anyone with eyes. Bret imo is second to none inside of the ring but Shawn is second only to Hart and better than Hart at everything else.

QUESTION...would you rather have hbk skill set or Bret's? Bret is slightly better in the ring but there isn't anything else he does better than Shawn. If there is something please let me know!!

Bret wasn't going downhill, he was on top of his game in 1997.

One of his best matches EVER, one of the best 'Mania matches EVER happened in 1997. He had great matches vs The Undertaker and even The Patriot in 1997. The 10 man tag match at Canadian Stampede IYH 16 was given "Best Major Show of 1997" by Meltzer and WON. Many people think Bret/Shawn at Survivor Series 97 (prior to the finish) was an even better in-ring match than WM12. Bret was delivering some of his best matches in 1997, and as a heel was one of the best characters of his career.

Yes, the business was going in a different direction, that's fine. Austin needed both Bret and Shawn out of the picture in order for him to properly shine as #1, which he got, I'm not disputing that at all. Shawn himself missed out on the majority of the attitude era as well.

I'm not downplaying HBK's contributions at all... I'm giving him well deserved credit. And no, Bret's lack of comeback doesn't hurt HBK, I never said that. Shawn's comeback was great. But when you say Shawn was the best in the business in the mid 90's, that's just not correct, that belongs to Bret. You said in an earlier post you personally prefer Shawn and that's fine, we all have our opinions. In my opinion, Bret had better matches and more great matches in the 90s.

 

[Kidpolean]

Bret wasn't going downhill, he was on top of his game in 1997.

One of his best matches EVER, one of the best 'Mania matches EVER happened in 1997. He had great matches vs The Undertaker and even The Patriot in 1997. The 10 man tag match at Canadian Stampede IYH 16 was given "Best Major Show of 1997" by Meltzer and WON. Many people think Bret/Shawn at Survivor Series 97 (prior to the finish) was an even better in-ring match than WM12. Bret was delivering some of his best matches in 1997, and as a heel was one of the best characters of his career.

Yes, the business was going in a different direction, that's fine. Austin needed both Bret and Shawn out of the picture in order for him to properly shine as #1, which he got, I'm not disputing that at all. Shawn himself missed out on the majority of the attitude era as well.

I'm not downplaying HBK's contributions at all... I'm giving him well deserved credit. And no, Bret's lack of comeback doesn't hurt HBK, I never said that. Shawn's comeback was great. But when you say Shawn was the best in the business in the mid 90's, that's just not correct, that belongs to Bret. You said in an earlier post you personally prefer Shawn and that's fine, we all have our opinions. In my opinion, Bret had better matches and more great matches in the 90s.

You keep saying better matches...we already established who was better in the ring. Why is it so hard to say that Shawn was the better overall package? Which is the question that was asked in the first place.

Its ridiculously obvious that there have been many more well rounded wrestlers than Bret.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

You keep saying better matches...we already established who was better in the ring. Why is it so hard to say that Shawn was the better overall package? Which is the question that was asked in the first place.

Its ridiculously obvious that there have been many more well rounded wrestlers than Bret.

Where has this been established? No where. Definitely not in this thread.
(EDIT: If you meant we already established Bret as better in the ring, I agree.. But I misunderstood your comment/point)

Overall package/more well rounded..? Shawn maybe, but only after DX happened. And even that is debatable.

 

[LBGetBack]

You keep saying better matches...we already established who was better in the ring. Why is it so hard to say that Shawn was the better overall package? Which is the question that was asked in the first place.

Its ridiculously obvious that there have been many more well rounded wrestlers than Bret.

Well rounded as in they make dick and poop jokes and dry hump flags? Cool.

The problem with you HBK fanboys is you don't really seem to know what the terms you spout off about even mean. "Charisma, mic skills, well rounded", etc. Like Bret was just a dull, boring, technician who only the truest nerd fans could even possibly understand the appeal of. LOL.

Bret was as well rounded as anyone.

 

[The Brain]

HBK was better at just about everything than Bret. This shouldn't even be a question.

This shouldn't even be a question? Considering Bret has nearly twice as many votes as Shawn and has gotten plenty of support in this thread maybe it's not as obvious as you think.

I loved both guys. That is ok, right? It seems that when these kinds of threads pop up people have to bash one guy in order to show more support to the other. Since the thread and poll ask to pick one as better I will do that but I think both were great and both deserve plenty of praise.

Personally I preferred Bret Hart. I hate it when people say he didn't have charisma. I think a lot of people think in order to be considered charismatic one has to be a comedian. Bret was often serious but he was always cool. In fact during the early/mid 90s Bret was the epitome of cool. He had a great look with the hair, the shades, the jacket, and looked like a million bucks with a gold championship belt around his waist. He was always confident in his ability and truly believed he was the best which made him very believable as a champion. Bret had the ability to take something that everyone knows is ridiculously fake and make it seem real.

People blame Bret for a decrease in the popularity of wrestling in the mid 90s which I always thought was unfair. There were major changes in the WWF in 1993. No more Hogan, no more Savage, no more Warrior. No more Saturday Night's Main Event. The steroid scandal and sex scandals had taken their toll. Of course the product started to suffer and the audience started to shrink. It wasn't because Bret was on top. I think it may be the opposite. During a time when the WWF should have probably collapsed Bret helped keep it alive. No, it wasn't as popular as it was under Hogan (by the way HBK didn't help maintain that audience either) but I think it's actually pretty amazing the WWF survived at all and Bret is part of the reason why it did.

I've said many times that Bret and Shawn were my two favorite wrestlers to watch. Both have a laundry list of great matches. If someone told me I could watch the matches of only one of these guys I would pick Bret.

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

I'm not talking about his post-2002 run, so I won't comment on his matches with Undertaker at WrestleMania, because I agree they are great. The Hell In A Cell match at Badd Blood was great for it's innovative concept, Shawn's bump, and Kane's debut. Sure, I'll give this match to Shawn because you're right, I did forget about it.

I disagree that Shawn vs Diesel at WM11 is MOTY, and not because I'm some Shawn hater/Bret fanboy. Maybe PWI gave it MOTY because 1995 was BAD in general. Nash himself has said his match with Bret at Survivor Series 95 was better, and I'd agree. Personally, I'd give Shawn vs Razor Ladder Match II (which I did mention in my post) MOTY over his WM match with Diesel.

Well you can disagree all you want but it happened, and secondly you still ignored HBK vs Mankind at Mind Games. Which was an entirely new match and different type of match for HBK and he was still unbelievable in it.

Anyways, the entire point of my post isn't to bash Shawn Michaels. I've said Shawn Michaels had some great matches and if his head was screwed on even close to straight, who knows what he could have done in his prime. The potential was always there, and sometimes he delivered on it, but many times it went wasted. Shawn was very inconsistent during this period, and for every great match he had, he would have a "lose my smile" moment, hand a title away and be out of the ring for 3-4 months.

I'm happy for him that he had the chance to comeback, put on some incredible matches with Triple H, Chris Jericho and The Undertaker, and basically re-write his legacy. I wish Bret had a similar opportunity to work with the great workers of a new generation like Angle, Jericho or The Rock .. who knows how many more great matches we could be talking about.

But Bret got to work with guys like Dynamite Kid, piper, and Tiger mask, people Shawn didn't have the chance to go one on one with. For everyone Bret missed out on, he hit on another. Bret worked through multiple generations of wrestling. He wrestled with Andre the Giant, Randy Savage, and Bill Goldberg, and Chris Benoit. It's not like Bret was in the game for a short time. Or in the limelight for a short period.

 

[pipebomber]

This is pretty interesting conversation but I have to say HBK...

Brett was probably better in the ring but it is still close. Shawn I definantly think was more charismatic but that is also debatable as charisma can't be measured. What can definantly be said is that Shawn was a better speaker. He stumbled over his words less. Brett was great in pre-taped segments, which they used a lot more frequently in those days, but get him live and he would mess up what he was trying to say.

One thing that can't be denied is that while Brett picked up the torch from Hogan and was arguably the most popular superstar during that time period he didn't take the business anywhere. WWE was just kind of treading water. It didn't grow, but it didn't really suffer either. Much like John Cena's run.

When Shawn Michaels became the guy and formed DX the business changed. It grew to heights it had never reached before, and likely will never reach again.

Who was better will ALWAYS be up for debate, but who was more important to the growth of the business IS 100% Shawn Michaels

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

This shouldn't even be a question? Considering Bret has nearly twice as many votes as Shawn and has gotten plenty of support in this thread maybe it's not as obvious as you think.

I loved both guys. That is ok, right? It seems that when these kinds of threads pop up people have to bash one guy in order to show more support to the other. Since the thread and poll ask to pick one as better I will do that but I think both were great and both deserve plenty of praise.

Personally I preferred Bret Hart. I hate it when people say he didn't have charisma. I think a lot of people think in order to be considered charismatic one has to be a comedian. Bret was often serious but he was always cool. In fact during the early/mid 90s Bret was the epitome of cool. He had a great look with the hair, the shades, the jacket, and looked like a million bucks with a gold championship belt around his waist. He was always confident in his ability and truly believed he was the best which made him very believable as a champion. Bret had the ability to take something that everyone knows is ridiculously fake and make it seem real.

People blame Bret for a decrease in the popularity of wrestling in the mid 90s which I always thought was unfair. There were major changes in the WWF in 1993. No more Hogan, no more Savage, no more Warrior. No more Saturday Night's Main Event. The steroid scandal and sex scandals had taken their toll. Of course the product started to suffer and the audience started to shrink. It wasn't because Bret was on top. I think it may be the opposite. During a time when the WWF should have probably collapsed Bret helped keep it alive. No, it wasn't as popular as it was under Hogan (by the way HBK didn't help maintain that audience either) but I think it's actually pretty amazing the WWF survived at all and Bret is part of the reason why it did.

I've said many times that Bret and Shawn were my two favorite wrestlers to watch. Both have a laundry list of great matches. If someone told me I could watch the matches of only one of these guys I would pick Bret.

100% this.

Thank you for summarizing what I feel was my last 5 or 6 posts in this thread, in one succinct to the point post. I couldn't have said it better myself.

I like both guys. I like Shawn, but many I prefer Bret. I don't know why they seem to have to be mutually exclusive. Everything in your post above I feel like I've pointed out over my last few comments in this thread, but perhaps less well said.

 

[Kidpolean]

Bret wasn't going downhill, he was on top of his game in 1997.

One of his best matches EVER, one of the best 'Mania matches EVER happened in 1997. He had great matches vs The Undertaker and even The Patriot in 1997. The 10 man tag match at Canadian Stampede IYH 16 was given "Best Major Show of 1997" by Meltzer and WON. Many people think Bret/Shawn at Survivor Series 97 (prior to the finish) was an even better in-ring match than WM12. Bret was delivering some of his best matches in 1997, and as a heel was one of the best characters of his career.

Yes, the business was going in a different direction, that's fine. Austin needed both Bret and Shawn out of the picture in order for him to properly shine as #1, which he got, I'm not disputing that at all. Shawn himself missed out on the majority of the attitude era as well.

I'm not downplaying HBK's contributions at all... I'm giving him well deserved credit. And no, Bret's lack of comeback doesn't hurt HBK, I never said that. Shawn's comeback was great. But when you say Shawn was the best in the business in the mid 90's, that's just not correct, that belongs to Bret. You said in an earlier post you personally prefer Shawn and that's fine, we all have our opinions. In my opinion, Bret had better matches and more great matches in the 90s.

This shouldn't even be a question? Considering Bret has nearly twice as many votes as Shawn and has gotten plenty of support in this thread maybe it's not as obvious as you think.

I loved both guys. That is ok, right? It seems that when these kinds of threads pop up people have to bash one guy in order to show more support to the other. Since the thread and poll ask to pick one as better I will do that but I think both were great and both deserve plenty of praise.

Personally I preferred Bret Hart. I hate it when people say he didn't have charisma. I think a lot of people think in order to be considered charismatic one has to be a comedian. Bret was often serious but he was always cool. In fact during the early/mid 90s Bret was the epitome of cool. He had a great look with the hair, the shades, the jacket, and looked like a million bucks with a gold championship belt around his waist. He was always confident in his ability and truly believed he was the best which made him very believable as a champion. Bret had the ability to take something that everyone knows is ridiculously fake and make it seem real.

People blame Bret for a decrease in the popularity of wrestling in the mid 90s which I always thought was unfair. There were major changes in the WWF in 1993. No more Hogan, no more Savage, no more Warrior. No more Saturday Night's Main Event. The steroid scandal and sex scandals had taken their toll. Of course the product started to suffer and the audience started to shrink. It wasn't because Bret was on top. I think it may be the opposite. During a time when the WWF should have probably collapsed Bret helped keep it alive. No, it wasn't as popular as it was under Hogan (by the way HBK didn't help maintain that audience either) but I think it's actually pretty amazing the WWF survived at all and Bret is part of the reason why it did.

I've said many times that Bret and Shawn were my two favorite wrestlers to watch. Both have a laundry list of great matches. If someone told me I could watch the matches of only one of these guys I would pick Bret.

Once again you guys bring up matches...im not trying to bash Bret. It seems that people are saying Bret I better BUT nobody has answered my question....what, besides in ring ability, did Bret do better than Shawn? Simple freakin question that has been avoided like 20 times in this thread already.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

Well you can disagree all you want but it happened, and secondly you still ignored HBK vs Mankind at Mind Games. Which was an entirely new match and different type of match for HBK and he was still unbelievable in it.

But Bret got to work with guys like Dynamite Kid, piper, and Tiger mask, people Shawn didn't have the chance to go one on one with. For everyone Bret missed out on, he hit on another. Bret worked through multiple generations of wrestling. He wrestled with Andre the Giant, Randy Savage, and Bill Goldberg, and Chris Benoit. It's not like Bret was in the game for a short time. Or in the limelight for a short period.

If I could take 1994 Bret Hart and place him vs 1986 Andre The Giant or 1988 Randy Savage, I 100% would love to see those dream matches. Prime vs prime is what you're referring to, and yea I'd love to see Bret 97 vs Angle 2000. But a young Bret vs these 1980s stars doesn't = a vet Shawn vs the Jerichos, Angles or Triple H's. Unfortunately these things can never be compared because we will never know.

This is pretty interesting conversation but I have to say HBK...

Brett was probably better in the ring but it is still close. Shawn I definantly think was more charismatic but that is also debatable as charisma can't be measured. What can definantly be said is that Shawn was a better speaker. He stumbled over his words less. Brett was great in pre-taped segments, which they used a lot more frequently in those days, but get him live and he would mess up what he was trying to say.

One thing that can't be denied is that while Brett picked up the torch from Hogan and was arguably the most popular superstar during that time period he didn't take the business anywhere. WWE was just kind of treading water. It didn't grow, but it didn't really suffer either. Much like John Cena's run.

When Shawn Michaels became the guy and formed DX the business changed. It grew to heights it had never reached before, and likely will never reach again.

Who was better will ALWAYS be up for debate, but who was more important to the growth of the business IS 100% Shawn Michaels

Bret took the ball from Hogan, and sure he didn't take the business anywhere. But let's not look at this in a vacuum. Hogan took himself to WCW and didn't take the business anywhere either. Hogan didn't draw 1980's numbers in WCW while poor Bret was struggling in WWF. In 1994/1995 Bret and Shawn were drawing the same numbers in WWF as Hogan, Savage, Flair in WCW. So let's stop acting like if it was Hogan or Savage main eventing WM 10 or 11 it would have been any different... it wouldn't.

 

[The Brain]

Once again you guys bring up matches...im not trying to bash Bret. It seems that people are saying Bret I better BUT nobody has answered my question....what, besides in ring ability, did Bret do better than Shawn? Simple freakin question that has been avoided like 20 times in this thread already.

Bret had a better look and was more believable as a main eventer and a champion.

You admit Bret is better in the ring so now tell me what did Shawn do better than Bret.

 

[Sweettre15]

Once again you guys bring up matches...im not trying to bash Bret. It seems that people are saying Bret I better BUT nobody has answered my question....what, besides in ring ability, did Bret do better than Shawn? Simple freakin question that has been avoided like 20 times in this thread already.

Bret was better at simply being believable and relatable. In the 90s Shawn worked as a midcard heel but when he was a midcard face he wasn't believable or relatable. He was trying to be the white meat babyface but acting "Chip n Dale", when Bret was a top babyface he sold the "Fighting Champion" role to a tee because not only was he playing a character that fit him but he carried himself in a believable fashion. Bret knew how to make himself emanate "champion"...Shawn, not necessarily. He was more flamboyant sure but not more charismatic.

Then there was Bret's heel run in 1997 while Bret was selling his nationalistic, bitter, traditional values character in the most believable way that made him the perfect foil for Austin and even Shawn, Shawn was acting like a frat boy one day and trying to carry himself realistically the next. Shawn's best character work was when he carried himself like a badass but he preferred acting like a frat boy.

So in the 90s, Bret was actually better at being a face and heel than Shawn was because he was consistent with his character and carried himself like he was championship material, which helped make his title reigns feel more prestigious than Shawn's.

 

[pipebomber]

Bret took the ball from Hogan, and sure he didn't take the business anywhere. But let's not look at this in a vacuum. Hogan took himself to WCW and didn't take the business anywhere either. Hogan didn't draw 1980's numbers in WCW while poor Bret was struggling in WWF. In 1994/1995 Bret and Shawn were drawing the same numbers in WWF as Hogan, Savage, Flair in WCW. So let's stop acting like if it was Hogan or Savage main eventing WM 10 or 11 it would have been any different... it wouldn't.

I never said it would have.... Im not comparing Brett to Hogan Savage or Flair so I don't know what your point is... When Brett was the top guy the business didn't go Anywhere. When Shawn was the top guy it did. Simple as that. based on that Shawn was more important to the growth of the business.

You bring up Hogan Savage and Flair, but when they were top guys the business was growing. was WCW growing with Hogan as their top guy when brett was the top WWE guy? no but they had already changed the business so I don't know what your point is. They had already proven to be innovators. Bret never was a major innovator. Shawn was.

EDIT: AND Hogan wasn't done innovating so even a past his prime Hogan was more relevant to the growth of the business than Brett Hart. If anything you are proving my point not disproving it.

 

[Kidpolean]

Bret had a better look and was more believable as a main eventer and a champion.

You admit Bret is better in the ring so now tell me what did Shawn do better than Bret.

Shawn had a better character, more charisma (Bret had some), was and still is better on the mic, more entertaining imo, far more athletic. I disagree with the better look thing, girls freakin loved Shawn. Shawn had a far better physique than Bret before the comeback.

More believable as a main eventer? Based on what...size? Honestly if wrestling was real, neither one would be believable. I just dont really understand that one. HBK story was similar to DB. Just a guy that fought hard and overcame the odds. I dont see the problem.

shawn carried the belt like he didnt care that he was champion but so did Austin

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

Well rounded as in they make dick and poop jokes and dry hump flags? Cool.

Well no, but HBK could do that if that's what his role called for, he could also be the spunky underdog, the heartbroken guy who had to give up his belt. Basically, why I think Shawn is better than Bret and more entertaining is simple. Shawn Michaels took a gay stripper gimmick (say what you want but that's pretty much what the WWE gave him) and he made himself one of the greatest of all time with that. The man difference I see between Bret and Shawn is this, I think Shawn would've made the Doink the Clown gimmick work, and become a top guy with it. Bret had to be in the role he was given. It had little change in it. And Shawn showed that he could've played Bret role easy when he returned.

So, yeah I think Shawn was more well rounded, a better promo (which anyone that debates that is ugh worthy), and had more charisma than bret.

The problem with you HBK fanboys is you don't really seem to know what the terms you spout off about even mean. "Charisma, mic skills, well rounded", etc. Like Bret was just a dull, boring, technician who only the truest nerd fans could even possibly understand the appeal of. LOL.

Bret was as well rounded as anyone.

Well Bret was Dull for a good portion of his career, but I don't blame him for all of that. But I've never heard anyone in the wrestling world say that bret hart is one of the most charismatic superstars of all time. But I know for a fact many have said that HBK is the one of IF NOT the most charismatic wrestlers of all time. Unless all those wrestlers have NO CLUE what well rounded or charisma, and mic skill means I'll go with them. Not once (and maybe I'm missing something here) have I heard any wrestler like ever, described Bret Hart as having great Charisma. I think those guys, the ones who do that for a living, would know.

That said I think it's Bret Hart marks who have this attitude of how the hitman should be viewed. Bret can do no wrong, no one ever brings up that he was an ass to his wife, or the fact if anyone else got hurt in one of his matches it was always their fault, or his having to have it reported that he had some ridiculous fever when he lost the IC title. HBK fans own that he was a jackass, Bret Hart fans will tell you he's got great charisma, perfect matches, and he was the greatest hero ever!!!!

Hart was good at being a one dimensional character. HBK played many roles, and made one of the worst gimmicks ever given out work.

 

[The Brain]

Shawn had a better character, more charisma (Bret had some), was and still is better on the mic, more entertaining imo, far more athletic. I disagree with the better look thing, girls freakin loved Shawn. Shawn had a far better physique than Bret before the comeback.

I don't know that Shawn was far more athletic. He did more aerial moves but does that automatically mean more athletic? I preferred Bret's ground attack to Shawn's air attack. Girls may have loved Shawn but a lot of guys didn't care for the character at all. The WWF lost a lot of its audience to WCW while Shawn was on top and Bret was on hiatus.

More believable as a main eventer? Based on what...size? Honestly if wrestling was real, neither one would be believable. I just dont really understand that one.

More believable as a main eventer based on how he carried himself as champion. Bret's life was wrestling. He was a fighting champion that took tremendous pride in being the best and being champion was the most important thing in his world. Shawn took pride in being champion too but at times he seemed to prefer dancing around and doing a striptease in the ring. I guess I took Bret more seriously as champion because he took his role as champion more serious than Shawn did.

HBK story was similar to DB. Just a guy that fought hard and overcame the odds. I dont see the problem.

No problem. I said I liked both guys. I just think Bret was better. That's not a knock on Shawn. If Bret is 1 Shawn is 1A but when asked to pick one as better I pick Bret.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

I never said it would have.... Im not comparing Brett to Hogan Savage or Flair so I don't know what your point is... When Brett was the top guy the business didn't go Anywhere. When Shawn was the top guy it did. Simple as that. based on that Shawn was more important to the growth of the business.

You bring up Hogan Savage and Flair, but when they were top guys the business was growing. was WCW growing with Hogan as their top guy when brett was the top WWE guy? no but they had already changed the business so I don't know what your point is. They had already proven to be innovators. Bret never was a major innovator. Shawn was.

I bring it up because when Shawn was on top the business didn't go anywhere either. In fact, in 1996 WWF business actually went down. But I've been on record earlier in this thread saying that this is irrelevant because whether it was Shawn or Bret or even hogan on top of the WWF at the time, it wouldn't have mattered.

You say the business changed when Shawn was on top, how? He drew some of the lowest numbers in WWF history. I don't blame Shawn or Bret for this. I blame the industry in general, because pre-NWO Hogan Savage and Flair were drawing THE EXACT same numbers,. That's why I bring it up. Did Bret take the industry anywhere in 1993-4? No. Did Hogan? No. Did Savage? No. Did Shawn? No.

It took 1) Nitro going up vs Raw 2) Nash and Hall jumping ship and "invading" the competition 3) Hogan turning heel and 4) a general shift in the industry for realism vs bullshit campy kayfabe. As much as we would all like to sit here and think we were so smart that we could pinpoint it on one thing, we can't. It was a combination of many things which turned the industry in general around, not just WCW but WWF as well. As a result, D-X and Austin were born...

But thats besides the point of whether Bret vs Shawn could draw because they both had proven already that they could draw equally as well as Hogan, Savage and Flair during this time period.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

That said I think it's Bret Hart marks who have this attitude of how the hitman should be viewed. Bret can do no wrong, no one ever brings up that he was an ass to his wife, or the fact if anyone else got hurt in one of his matches it was always their fault, or his having to have it reported that he had some ridiculous fever when he lost the IC title. HBK fans own that he was a jackass, Bret Hart fans will tell you he's got great charisma, perfect matches, and he was the greatest hero ever!!!!

Hart was good at being a one dimensional character. HBK played many roles, and made one of the worst gimmicks ever given out work.

Bret cheated on his wife. Austin BEAT his wife. You want to talk about personal lives in pro wrestling you will quickly find that a lot of them are fucking assholes. Way worse than Bret. Bret wasn't perfect, but it's hard to find anyone at the top of the wrestling world who is. Even Cena cheated.

Can you name one person ever who claimed that Bret Hart injured them? I challenge you to find 1 or 2 people of any credibility to say that they were injured in a Bret Hart match. It's already been argued earlier in this thread that Bret is far more than one-dimensional. If you want to attack either of these two guys I suggest you aim higher than these personal attacks considering the industry and lifestyle ALL of these guys lead.

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

Bret cheated on his wife. Austin BEAT his wife. You want to talk about personal lives in pro wrestling you will quickly find that a lot of them are fucking assholes. Way worse than Bret. Bret wasn't perfect, but it's hard to find anyone at the top of the wrestling world who is. Even Cena cheated.

Can you name one person ever who claimed that Bret Hart injured them? I challenge you to find 1 or 2 people of any credibility to say that they were injured in a Bret Hart match. It's already been argued earlier in this thread that Bret is far more than one-dimensional. If you want to attack either of these two guys I suggest you aim higher than these personal attacks considering the industry and lifestyle ALL of these guys lead.

And argued wrongly, Bret was pretty much one denominational his whole career. Canadian hero, blah blah blah, Fighting champion, blah blah blah. As I said I'm not challenging bret personally I just find it annoying as hell that Bret fans act like he never did anything wrong. And the pure bias and unrealistic bs spread on this forum about him has been enough to make me vomit. Between the Hart Foundation making the finals, and Bret Hart SUDDENLY having charisma, and again I don't remember ANY wrestler saying that bret hart was charismatic. When WWE wrestlers talk charisma they talk Shawn Michaels not Bret Hart.

Bret isn't even close to what people on here are trying to make him out to be.

 

[The Boss]

Both men reached levels of all time great for different reasons. But neither really reached a higher level then say, Pedro Moralas. The legendary status reached by men like HOLLYWOOD HULK HOGAN, Bruno Sammartino, Lou Thesz, and Ric Flair eluded both of them thus neither reached the status of legend.

 

[Mark Henrys Sandwich]

Did you really just say Flair is on another level over HBK and Bret Hart... ROFLCOPTER.

I can also bet you have never seen Lou Thesz or Bruno wrestle, throwing their names out for the sake of it.

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

Where has this been established? No where. Definitely not in this thread.
(EDIT: If you meant we already established Bret as better in the ring, I agree.. But I misunderstood your comment/point)

Overall package/more well rounded..? Shawn maybe, but only after DX happened. And even that is debatable.

I'm sorry but I think it's laughable that people are saying Bret was better in ring than shawn. And I know people are going to be all (OMG if you think Shawn is better in ring than Bret you're crazy!!! AHHHHHH) Yeah sorry if I disagree who had more moty's? Let us take a look here.

In the wrestling observer, HBK won 4 match of the year awards, Bret had 1. PWI, Bret has 3, HBK has 11. Who's had better matches at mania? Shawn. You MIGHT say Bret was more consistent but he also didn't have the range HBK did. NO where near it.

And since were not just talking "wrestling" which btw Shawn was clearly better than bret. Let's dive deeper, Most popular wrestler award given by WON, Shawn won it in 1995 and 1996. Bret won it exactly zero times. Apparently he was believable enough then.

Wrestling Observer also has a most charismatic award? Guess who won multiple times? HBK Shawn Michaels, guess who's name never shows up? Bret Hart. Why? Well I'm thinking because Shawn had charisma and Bret wasn't as charismatic and he wasn't even close.

Shawn was better in every possible way. Better in ring, better on the mic, better overall. More charismatic, in pretty much every way Shawn was better.

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

Did you really just say Flair is on another level over HBK and Bret Hart... ROFLCOPTER.

I can also bet you have never seen Lou Thesz or Bruno wrestle, throwing their names out for the sake of it.

Okay can I just say how stupid the "You never saw him wrestle" argument is? Seriously, I never saw Babe Ruth play baseball but I know he was damn good, Never saw Jim Brown run the ball, but I understand he's one of the best ever, I never once saw Wilt Chamberlain score two points, but I'm guessing the fact I know his name means he's pretty freaking important. So saying he never saw them wrestle, but is just name dropping, actually is more impressive than if he's some wrestling historian.

Shows you the real impact that those guys had, just sayin.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

I'm sorry but I think it's laughable that people are saying Bret was better in ring than shawn. And I know people are going to be all (OMG if you think Shawn is better in ring than Bret you're crazy!!! AHHHHHH) Yeah sorry if I disagree who had more moty's? Let us take a look here.

In the wrestling observer, HBK won 4 match of the year awards, Bret had 1. PWI, Bret has 3, HBK has 11. Who's had better matches at mania? Shawn. You MIGHT say Bret was more consistent but he also didn't have the range HBK did. NO where near it.

And since were not just talking "wrestling" which btw Shawn was clearly better than bret. Let's dive deeper, Most popular wrestler award given by WON, Shawn won it in 1995 and 1996. Bret won it exactly zero times. Apparently he was believable enough then.

Wrestling Observer also has a most charismatic award? Guess who won multiple times? HBK Shawn Michaels, guess who's name never shows up? Bret Hart. Why? Well I'm thinking because Shawn had charisma and Bret wasn't as charismatic and he wasn't even close.

Shawn was better in every possible way. Better in ring, better on the mic, better overall. More charismatic, in pretty much every way Shawn was better.

The Wrestling Observer also thinks Dean Malenko is a better wrestler than Bret Hart. So stop your appeals to authority. PWI picked The Giant, Vader, Diesel and Hogan as Wrestler of the Year over both Shawn and Bret from 93-96. Shows how much credibility they have.

But if you really want to get into their "fake" awards, don't act like Bret didn't win anything. He was more than adequate in his share of fake industry awards:

WON:
1993 feud of the year: Bret Hart vs Jerry Lawler
1997 feud of the year: Hart Foundation vs Steve Austin
1997 MOTY: Bret Hart vs Steve Austin WM13
1997 Major Show of the Year: IYH 16 Canadian Stampede
PWI:
1992 MOTY: Bret Hart vs British Bulldog SummerSlam 92
1993 Feud of the Year: Bret Hart vs Jerry Lawler
1994 Feud of the Year: Bret Hart vs Owen Hart
1994 Most Inspirational Wrestler of the Year: Bret Hart
1996 MOTY: Bret Hart vs Shawn Michaels WrestleMania 12
1997 Comeback of the Year: Bret Hart
1997 MOTY: Bret Hart vs Steve Austin WrestleMania 13
1997 Most Hated Wrestler of the Year: Bret Hart

Does it mean anything that a magazine gave away some awards? No. Does it prove anything at all? Stop appealing to a false authority.

I never said Shawn wasn't good, I simply said it took him until 2002 before he truly became great. Bret was better in the 90s. Bret's classics vs Demolition, Nasty Boys, Mr Perfect, Roddy Piper, British Bulldog, Owen Hart, 123 Kid, Jerry Lawler, Kevin Nash, Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin, etc far outweigh what Shawn did pre-2002.