Also, X already pointed out the fact that Bret Hart was a horrible draw but I want to add to what he stated. Bret was arguably at the peak of his career as a cemented main-eventer from 1995-1997. However during the time he was at his peak the WWF was at their lowest. I’m not going to get into the buys of pay per views did during his time as a main-eventer because I don’t have that information from those years. I do however have the ratings of both Monday Night Raw and WCW Nitro. So let’s see how bad of a draw he really was.
In 1995 Raw had an average rating of 2.4 while Nitro had an average rating of 2.4 as well. Now, may I remind you that in 1995 the New World Order “takeover” angle hadn’t started yet so it’s not like Hart and the WWF were up against huge competition yet.
Now in 1996 everything changed. Raw received an average rating of 2.65, so they had a rise in ratings but it wasn’t an incredible gain in ratings. While Raw had an average of 2.65, Nitro had an average rating of 3.16 in ratings. When Bret was needed to get high ratings he just couldn’t do it.
In 1997 during his final year in the WWF, Raw had an average rating of 2.67. This was in 1997 and they increased their rating by very, very little from the previous rating. Nitro had an average rating of 3.67. So not only did Nitro see their ratings increase by big numbers, they also defeated the WWF in the ratings war with Hart leading the company.
You can blame creative all you want but the fact of the matter is that people were more interested in seeing WCW than WWF with Bret Hart leading them. Bret was supposed to be a ratings draw in America for the WWF but he proved he just wasn’t a good draw for them. People didn’t want to see Hart, it’s plain and simple. Notice how I didn’t say anything about the buys, but with low numbers in ratings I simply cannot imagine them doing high numbers in pay per view buys with Hart headlining. It’s proven that Hart was never a good draw when he was main-eventing for the WWF.
Why the hell are you people blaming the low ratings from 95-97 of Bret? Last time I checked, Kevin "Diesel" Nash was the WWE Champion from Nov. 94 to Nov 95. While Nash was in the main event, Bret was pushed back to the mid-card, being forced to feud with the likes of Jerry Lawler, Hakushi, and Dr. Issac Yankem, even having to fight twice at the first In Your House. Meanwhile, even though this was before the nWo, WCW still had Ric Flair, Sting, Hulk Hogan, Macho Man Randy Savage, and Lex Luger. The also started signing other former WWE mid-card people during this time such as Big Boss Man, Brutus Beefcake, Mike Rotunda, Road Warriors, and Stiener Brothers. WCW
So then Bret won the title back from Nash, but really they were just using him as a transitional champion and the show was focused on HBK Shawn Michaels. Then Bret wasnt even around for the majority of 96. He took a break after WM12 and didnt come back until around Survivor Series 96 while he was renegotiating his contract with McMahon. And when he came back, he was still in the upper-mid card feuding (and making) Stone Cold Steve Austin. With the exception of a 1-day title reign in Feb. 97, it wasnt until mid-97 with the reformation of the Hart Foundation when Bret really kind of took back the main event, until his departure at the end of the year.
And yet despite not really being in the main event and even being on hiatus for 8 months. the mid 90's are thought of as the Bret Hart years why? Because even in the mid-card, that is who everyone still wanted to see. He was the locker-room leader of the time. He was the main established guy during that period, the guy who was responsible for making the new stars. He was put in various feuds with people to make new stars because the WWE was incredibly short on star power at the time with everyone jumping ship to WCW. The reason the WWE was almost bankrupt at the time is because with so many people laving for WCW, it forced McMahon to start giving bigger, guaranteed contracts that he couldnt really afford.
So in my opinion, if it wasnt for Bret then Vince would have probably gone out of business during this period. It was Harts work and abilities that kept McMahon afloat during this time. Not to mention The Hitman is the one who made Stone Cold Steve Austin, and without the rub he got of Hart, and I dont mean to take away from Austin has he was a really good talent with a lot of ability, but I dont think he would have reached the levels of success he did.
And to get back to the original theme of this post, reasons like that are why Owen would have never been a bigger star than Bret. Owen was in the WWE for about a year and a half without Bret, and while I think he did grow a lot without Bret being around, I just could never picture Owen as being the guy to lead the company. Especially since they had people like Austin, HHH, and the Rock around during that time period who were so much more charismatic than Owen.