Pick Your Poison: Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart

[X]

For Any One Out There Who Wants To Pull The "what's Best For Business" Line With Regards To Shawn Michaels , You Need To Rember One Thing...this Is The Same Guy Who Was Asked To Go To The Smackdown Brand Last Year And Refused...he'd Rather Stay With His Little Buddy Triple H Than Do What's Best For Business...well, We're All Going To Get A Chance To See If He Knows About Doing Business Properly, Because With Undertaker Potentially Gone For The Next 6-8 Months, (if His Injury Is As Serious As They Are Reporting) The Best Move For The Company Would Be To Move Hbk To Smackdown...he Is The Biggest Star In The Wwe Next To 'taker And They Need His Presence On The Program...batista, Kennedy And Finlay Cannot Carry The Brand...raw Has Cena, Orton And Edge AND THE McMahons...i'm Sure That This Thought Has Crossed A Few Minds In The Wwe Brass And Now We'll See If Shawn Is Willing To Take One For The Team and Do Business Or If He's Going To Hang Around And Wait For Another Lame Watered Down Dx Reunion When Hunter Returns...

You've completely misunderstood everything I've said. Shawn Michaels has never and will never be the owner of the WWE or in charge of talent. Vince McMahon is. I said that VINCE knew what was best for business, not HBK.

And please don't write every word starting in caps, it just pisses everyone off.

 

[Hardcore383]

Here are my thoughts...

First of all I cant understand why everyone thinks Bret had lousy mic skills. Just because he didnt use profanity and didnt have funny catch phrases doesnt mean he wasnt good. I thought his interviews were well thought out and well spoken and call me crazy but everytime he spoke i wanted to get up and fight with him. (Granted i was 12 at the time.)

Second of all, I feel like Shawn Michaels will always have a greater legacy then the Hitman just because he will have a longer career with higher profile matches. Shawn will be remembered for innovating such matches as the ladder match, hell in a cell, etc. But dont forget that the ladder matches DID originate in the Calgary Stampede in the late 80's and that the first ladder match in the WWf wasnt Michaels/Ramon it was Michaels/Bret.

Im not one to talk because I wasnt there but I heard Shawn was a dick to the fans at various autograph signings. I did meet Bret, however, and I have to say he was a class act.

If Brets career wasnt cut so short I think that his legacy would have continued to grow greater. Shawn will go down as oneof the greatest much like Flair. But I truly believe that had not Flair stuck around as long as he did, his legacy wouldnt be as great either. Same Scenario with HBK. Hitman will go down, much like Hogan, as being the number one guy of his time. I really cant say that for Shawn.

In the end I think Bret said it the best on his dvd. He never hurt anyone, never refused to job and never botched any moves. This is why I believe that hes the greatest.

For the longest time I hated Shawn Michaels. But even the most die-hard Hitman fan cant deny his greatness. Nowadays I cant wait to watch his matches regardless of how old he is. But to me he'll always be 2nd best.

The #1 spot will always go Bret Hart.

 

[ErkBono23]

For Any One Out There Who Wants To Pull The "what's Best For Business" Line With Regards To Shawn Michaels , You Need To Rember One Thing...this Is The Same Guy Who Was Asked To Go To The Smackdown Brand Last Year And Refused...he'd Rather Stay With His Little Buddy Triple H Than Do What's Best For Business...well, We're All Going To Get A Chance To See If He Knows About Doing Business Properly, Because With Undertaker Potentially Gone For The Next 6-8 Months, (if His Injury Is As Serious As They Are Reporting) The Best Move For The Company Would Be To Move Hbk To Smackdown...he Is The Biggest Star In The Wwe Next To 'taker And They Need His Presence On The Program...batista, Kennedy And Finlay Cannot Carry The Brand...raw Has Cena, Orton And Edge AND THE McMahons...i'm Sure That This Thought Has Crossed A Few Minds In The Wwe Brass And Now We'll See If Shawn Is Willing To Take One For The Team and Do Business Or If He's Going To Hang Around And Wait For Another Lame Watered Down Dx Reunion When Hunter Returns...

this makes makes no sense at all...you respond by making it seem as if Shawn has the last word on what goes on in the company...we are going to get a chance if he knows how to do business properly? when? have you talked to vince? who owns the company? Vince Mcmahon thats right....he decides what is the best move for the company..if he believes it is needed for shawn to be moved shawn will then be moved...IT WOULD BE BEST FOR THE BUSINESS..thank you for verifying my previous statement even further...when he was previously asked Smackdown was not in desperate need of him...we still do not know how this sitatuion will plan out...if VINCE chooses he def needs to send shawn over it will be done...If Vince wants him to go regardless of what Shawn wants he will go...the reason for that is because vince believes it would be best for BUSINESS and because shawn still wants to bring in a paycheck..helping his business which is having a nice retirement plan...the last word is said by the man who owns and runs company not by one of his employees...

 

[Kasey]

he jobbed at wrestlemania and he jobbed once again for leaving...its how the game works...your going to the rival company...what more do you expect..regardless of how this situation happened it really doesn't matter...what made hart think he was actually going to get that win..he was goin to lose anyway and he lost in a conterversial fashioned that is still bitched about today..business is business..if i can't make profit off of u anymore why bother giving u something u want?...the man still bitches about it cuz he got fucked and he got fucked hard..shouldn't have left..tough..shit happens...deal...shawn stands over bret because he understand how the business works..be loyal to the man who signs your paychecks and don't bullshit like moving over to the rival company..he's entertained more, he's been a loyalist, jobbed to stars and risen stars. Of course Hart was the better wrestler but wwe was known for its ENTERTAINMENT mostly...therefore shawn stands tall because he understood the business..wrestling and mostly entertaining...

He jobbed for leaving? Are you serious? Did you even read what I wrote. HE WAS THE ONE WHO WANTED TO STAY. Bret. You know? The guy who got completely f**ked over by McMahon? Be loyal to the man who signs your paychecks? Are you serious? Really? Are you? Hart wanted to stay for less money than he was obviously worth and end up retiring a gray-haired old man in Titansports making peanuts while other guys like Shawn and eventually Austin raked in much more than he would've. Bret was also the guy who happily sat on the sidelines while Hogan pissed and moaned to get the title after Bret spent months rebuilding its credibility. Then Bret waited in the wings again until Luger screwed himself (thanks alcohol!) and was the consolation champion. Then he sat around again while Diesel got a mammoth push to be the next big marketable thing until that fizzled out and he was once more the utility champ. Then after Hart got the belt again, he gave it back to guess who? Vince was the one who suspiciously opted out of the 20-year deal and decided to have Bret initiate talks with Bischoff, not the other way around. And out of all the angles Vince could've set up for Hart to leave on, he chose this? Out of all of them it had to be against his worst enemy and a jobbing in his home country for a title loss (so much for loyalty). Then he lied RIGHT TO BRET'S FACE (this was also caught on tape) and told him that a schmoz finish would be fine. McMahon was also the dumb$hit who'd signed Hart with that clause in his contract knowing full well that Hart wouldn't budge...but he put the strap on Hart...then lied to him...then f**ked him. Plain and simple. Why people can't get this is beyond me.

 

[BRandonkin]

Everything you say is true Kasey. I get it. But i don't get why people can't see Vinces fear of Bret taking the title to WCW and doing the same with the women championship or what he tried to do with the ECW championship. I say what I have always said about the screw job, it is Bishoff fault with blood on all involved hands. Bishoffs because he played dirty all teh time. Vince could not afford Bret's contract. Stone cold made his money off merchandising. Austin and DX took the WWE where it needed to go to beat WCW. Obviously Bret merchandising was not as high as Austins nor was his viewership. Blood is on McMahon, DX, and the WWE for planning the setup and being part of the setup. Bret is guily for not dropping the title because of a personal annimosity between him and HBK instead of playing the role and following the script and understanding Vince's fear.. that just my opinion though.

 

[leifmozley1982]

How can any of you compare Bret Hart to Shawn Michaels. Bret Hart was a talented wrestler but was probably one of the most egotistical people to ever grace this sport. Refusing to lose in Canada because it would "blow the brains out of the Bret Hart character", just reeks of ego. And i know you are going to say exactly the same about Shawn Michaels but i dont remember Michaels threatening to take the WWF Title to WCW, and dont say Bret wouldn't have, because i think everyone in their heart of hearts know thats exactly what Hart and Bischoff were planning. But purely on a wrestling standpoint, there is no comparison anyway. Bret had lots of good matches but can anyone remember a classic except against Davey boy in 92? The only other classic Bret had was AGAINST Michaels in 96, which Michaels had to carry Bret for 45 minutes. Michaels classic matches would take ages to list. Ladder Match with Scott Hall (Two of those!), Two classics with Angle, A classic with Triple H after he had been out for 4 years, who else could have done that. The list goes on. I think you can tell which side of this argument i am on. Shawn Michaels is the best there is, the best there was, and maybe the best there ever will be.

 

[mxsaved619]

-as for ur classic matches here.. marty jannety has never had a classic match in wwe, i dunno about anywhere else, they were both young then and had to be split up.
-the razor ramon match was good, lead the way for tlc's
-deisel- this is y wwe tries to get these big bulked up guys, deisel was better as his body guard, classic match :S i dunno about that one
-no dissagreements with the angle matches
- dont even think hbk should have been in mania with benoit/hhh (just cuz it took away from benoit being in the main event)
-vince mcmahon, c'mon, everyone could see that hbk was gonna destroy him at mania

bret did lose his passion in wcw, cuz he wasnt used properly like ALOT of ppl in wcw, and i doubt bret really wanted to leave wwe

bret fought half the guys u mentioned plus owen/bulldog/perfect/yokozuna/ vader/ rock/austin/ i'm sure i'm missin much more

bret hart all the way

funny shawn michaels actually had a few more classics against: owen, bulldog, vader, and austin. Besides the bulldog(summerslam 92) michaels had far superior matches then bret could have ever dreamed with the others. Not to mention that perosonally the best feud I feel of hbks career is the short one he had against the undertaker. They had 3 amazing matches, and no dissrepect towards the undertaker, as he is an amazing icon himself, but shawn michaels performances owned anything bret could have ever done.

As for the other people who say shawn matches are routine, ok they are; but you can't sit there and say brets russian leg sweep, backbreaker, knee off the second rope, running chest first into the turnbuckle, and sharpshooter are not.

Finally the MONTREAL INCIDENT. Shawn had been asked to lose the title to bret at wm13. Read his book and you'll know that he didn't want to do it, but he says he would of. However, he had an injury he thought that wouldn't allow him to wrestle again. (when he lost his smile) At survivor series shawn wrote in his book that yes he and vince both decided that bret would get the title taken, even though bret didn't know. The only reason they had to do this was because Bret was being selfish and wouldn't lose it honorably. After wwe brought bret in and made him a star, I believe he deserves everything he got.

I like him for the most part, HBK is the best of all time..

 

[ErkBono23]

He jobbed for leaving? Are you serious? Did you even read what I wrote. HE WAS THE ONE WHO WANTED TO STAY. Bret. You know? The guy who got completely f**ked over by McMahon? Be loyal to the man who signs your paychecks? Are you serious? Really? Are you? Hart wanted to stay for less money than he was obviously worth and end up retiring a gray-haired old man in Titansports making peanuts while other guys like Shawn and eventually Austin raked in much more than he would've. Bret was also the guy who happily sat on the sidelines while Hogan pissed and moaned to get the title after Bret spent months rebuilding its credibility. Then Bret waited in the wings again until Luger screwed himself (thanks alcohol!) and was the consolation champion. Then he sat around again while Diesel got a mammoth push to be the next big marketable thing until that fizzled out and he was once more the utility champ. Then after Hart got the belt again, he gave it back to guess who? Vince was the one who suspiciously opted out of the 20-year deal and decided to have Bret initiate talks with Bischoff, not the other way around. And out of all the angles Vince could've set up for Hart to leave on, he chose this? Out of all of them it had to be against his worst enemy and a jobbing in his home country for a title loss (so much for loyalty). Then he lied RIGHT TO BRET'S FACE (this was also caught on tape) and told him that a schmoz finish would be fine. McMahon was also the dumb$hit who'd signed Hart with that clause in his contract knowing full well that Hart wouldn't budge...but he put the strap on Hart...then lied to him...then f**ked him. Plain and simple. Why people can't get this is beyond me.

Why you can't get that it is horrible business decision to send a FORMER employee to your rival company with YOUR title is beyond me...Regardless of what happened it doesn not fucking matter...Hart was leaving..therefore Vince can do whatever the fuck he pleases..there does not have to be any respect..no bullshit loyalty or wishes granted to the former employee...it is allllllll about business...and clearly mcmahon doing this to hart sure as hell helped his business sky rocket...new faces were coming in..it was a new era...Hart was not going to be a part of it...regardless of how great his wrestling skills were...yes he was lied to, yes he got fucked PLAIN AND SIMPLE thats how it works...what the fuck made him think he was leaving the WWE with that belt or with a nice farewell..he was leaving for a rival fucking company..u do what u have to do to protect your assets and that is exactly what Vince Mcmahon did...and Hart has yet to figure that out because the man still bitches about something that happened decade ago....Shawn played his part and did what he had to do for his company and his boss...We all get that he got fucked and screwed over..y it cant be understood that is was done to protect mcmahons business is beyond me....

 

[FlairFan2003]

Overall I would go with HBK - Being the best "wrestler" means in ring ability, mic skills, charisma, and HBK was superior to BH in those regards.

That doesn't mean Hart was not very good, he was. Both men could wrestle long matches and keep fans entertained, both had a variety of signature moves and could take big falls, etc, but HBK comes out on top based on better interviews and charisma. HBK has played three totally different characters from his time w/ The Rockers to the "Showstopper" that brought in the "Attitude" era, to the almost elder statesman role he has played more recenty. Hart lagely was the same, steady, character all the time, and was never as comfortable as a bad guy than he was as a good guy. The ability to play both roles well defines a lot about "greatness" in this business and HBK was better in that regard.

I don't like arguments that give HBK an edge based on the premature way Hart's career ended or who criticize HBK for his lack of "team player" spirit in the late 90's (not that Hart was much beter). Both men have a long body of work as mid carders and main eventers to look at, and both had some backstage issues at different times. Basically, HBK comes pretty close in ring skills to Hart but pulls far away in mic skills and charisma. He is the total package, the heir apparent to Ric Flair's legacy in teh 80's (more so than HHH, who is pretty good in his own regard). Still, Hart had a great career overall and his matches against HBK, Stone Cold, Mr Perfect, & Undertaker are among the most memorable of the decade in the 90's. He was very good, but HBK was a little better

 

[reddevil69]

this makes makes no sense at all...you respond by making it seem as if Shawn has the last word on what goes on in the company...we are going to get a chance if he knows how to do business properly? when? have you talked to vince? who owns the company? Vince Mcmahon thats right....he decides what is the best move for the company..if he believes it is needed for shawn to be moved shawn will then be moved...IT WOULD BE BEST FOR THE BUSINESS..thank you for verifying my previous statement even further...when he was previously asked Smackdown was not in desperate need of him...we still do not know how this sitatuion will plan out...if VINCE chooses he def needs to send shawn over it will be done...If Vince wants him to go regardless of what Shawn wants he will go...the reason for that is because vince believes it would be best for BUSINESS and because shawn still wants to bring in a paycheck..helping his business which is having a nice retirement plan...the last word is said by the man who owns and runs company not by one of his employees...

i never said that Shawn has the last word in the company, but there are a handful of wrestlers that have enough stroke to write their own ticket in the company...'Taker,HHH, and Shawn have enough clout and their relationship with Vince is strong enough that if they were strongly against an idea,he would probably concede...the information is out there in various interviews with former WWE employees about how certain wrestlers use their stroke to get their way..it's called politics....why do you think we have a smackdown title in the first place?...Brock Lesnar was built up to be unstoppable and became undisputed champion in 2002....HHH was given the World Title out of a Haliburton on RAW by Bischoff, completely cutting the credibility of Lesnar in half...you think that wasn't politically motivated ? Hunter felt threatened by Brock...Lesnar has given several interviews regarding this...read the book World Wrestling Insanity for more proof of this....it's like Paul Heyman said to JBL, "the only reason you are Smackdown champ is because HHH doesn't want to work Tuesdays"....HHH is apparently pulling the same shit now with Mick Foley which is rumored to be the reason why Foley hasn't been involved in a PPV match this year...if Shawn doesn't want to leave Raw, he's not going anywhere...if he moves to Smackdown i'll believe it when i see it....my point to your previous post is that Bret Hart's refusal to job to Shawn in Montreal has many other factors involved and it wasn't just Bret not wanting to do business...he wasn't trying to mess up Shawns career, like Shawn was saying he was going to do to Steve Austin at WrestleMania 14....Austin has said it in his book and in other interviews that Shawn was screwing around and telling Vince and others in the company that he was not going to put Austin over...factor in the fact that he had nothing to lose because he was retiring after mania and i believe that Shawn was being a disruptive jerk...I have a televised interview with the Undertaker form a sports talk show where he states that Shawn was being a pain in the ass, and if the match with Austin had not gone down the way it did that night, it would have been a very long night for shawn michaels...i don't ever recall hearing about any wrestlers having to threaten to discipline Bret for not wanting to put any one over...Montreal was a totally different set of circumstances.... Shawn didn't like it when it was done to him by Hogan at summerslam 2 years ago either and took shots at Hogan on Raw every chance he had for 2 weeks after that match....and with regards to the theory that Bret would have taken the WWF title to WCW, i don't think that ever would have happened...i don't believe that Bret would try to hurt or cripple the company where his own brother, two of his brothers-in-law, and his close friends like the Undertaker and Foley still had to work and feed their families....Undertaker is universally regarded as the most respected member of the WWF/E locker room by everyone who has walked through the door of that company in the last 17yrs and he has spoken out about Shawns behaviour in the past and dislike for him as a person..and he was outspoken about Austin walking out of the company and refusing to do what Vince asked him to do, which was job to Lesnar...and he has been vocal about his dislike for Hogan....he has never said a bad word about Bret and they are friends to this day...i tend to think that if Bret was the type of guy to purposely damage the business, 'Taker would not respect him let alone consider him a friend....

 

[Shocky]

You can tell the younger posters from the older ones in here. Pre-2002 Shawn Michaels was not the Patron Saint of the WWE. He was not a great man to do business with. Shawn Michaels Simply put, was a cocky, arrogant, Son of a Bitch asshole. Simple as that. He has changed his life, some of that HBK remains, but if you didn't watch the business live in the 90's, then you really don't no.

From the Kliq, to saying he's not putting Austin over, to the bullshit he pulled at WM 12, HBK was a dick head. He and his buddies held the company hostage with the Kliq going over on everyone, and then pulled the "Kliq Incident in MSG" They broke kayfabe in the Garden, that is like saying God Damn in Heaven. Bret Hart and Owen Hart stayed away from each other in their feud, to make it look like they didn't like each other, that's giving it too the business. Shawn Michaels however thought the business owed him, and the Kliq pulled that crap.

HBK had his back injury at the Rumble in 98, and if it wasn't for the Undertaker threatening to beat the shit out of HBK, we may not have gotten the Austin era at WM14. The Undertaker is more of a company man than HBK was. Taker understood the handing of the torch, and i believe teh quote was something like hbk better agree to Job "Before the Undertaker finished putting his gloves on".

And then you get to WM 12. Hart and HBK didn't have real beaf with each other back then. Watch the ending of the match, and most know what I'm talking about. HBK tells Hebner to get Hart out of the ring. After a 65 minute match, Hart wanted to shake HBK's hand, and instead of doing the right thing and giving 10 seconds up for that, Michaels demands Hart get out of the ring so he can have all of the glory, that my friends, is bullshit.

This topic can go back and forth all day, but I'm just setting the record straight on HBK. He's a good guy now, but the man was a dick in the mid-90
s that played just as much, if not more politics then Hogan. I'm not a Hart fan, but Hart didn't pull backstage strings like HBK, so the whole HBK is a company man arguement is a mute point. He maybe now, but when they were feuding, it was all HBK all the time.

 

[ErkBono23]

You can tell the younger posters from the older ones in here. Pre-2002 Shawn Michaels was not the Patron Saint of the WWE. He was not a great man to do business with. Shawn Michaels Simply put, was a cocky, arrogant, Son of a Bitch asshole. Simple as that. He has changed his life, some of that HBK remains, but if you didn't watch the business live in the 90's, then you really don't no.

From the Kliq, to saying he's not putting Austin over, to the bullshit he pulled at WM 12, HBK was a dick head. He and his buddies held the company hostage with the Kliq going over on everyone, and then pulled the "Kliq Incident in MSG" They broke kayfabe in the Garden, that is like saying God Damn in Heaven. Bret Hart and Owen Hart stayed away from each other in their feud, to make it look like they didn't like each other, that's giving it too the business. Shawn Michaels however thought the business owed him, and the Kliq pulled that crap.



HBK had his back injury at the Rumble in 98, and if it wasn't for the Undertaker threatening to beat the shit out of HBK, we may not have gotten the Austin era at WM14. The Undertaker is more of a company man than HBK was. Taker understood the handing of the torch, and i believe teh quote was something like hbk better agree to Job "Before the Undertaker finished putting his gloves on".

And then you get to WM 12. Hart and HBK didn't have real beaf with each other back then. Watch the ending of the match, and most know what I'm talking about. HBK tells Hebner to get Hart out of the ring. After a 65 minute match, Hart wanted to shake HBK's hand, and instead of doing the right thing and giving 10 seconds up for that, Michaels demands Hart get out of the ring so he can have all of the glory, that my friends, is bullshit.

This topic can go back and forth all day, but I'm just setting the record straight on HBK. He's a good guy now, but the man was a dick in the mid-90
s that played just as much, if not more politics then Hogan. I'm not a Hart fan, but Hart didn't pull backstage strings like HBK, so the whole HBK is a company man arguement is a mute point. He maybe now, but when they were feuding, it was all HBK all the time.

of everyone knows HBK was a dick back in the day and that he pulled his strings...If you are referring to me as the younger poster then you are wrong....my point is that what was done was done for business purposes..i think emotion and friendship is being put into this situation more then it really has to be..VINCE did what he did for his company and that is why the screwjob happened..shawn was a part in it...he probably enjoyed doing what he did but these 2 had there share of problems..including hart talking nonsense about HBK's family during promos and then running in the back and apologizing saying he did not want to stretch it that far right to HBK's face and then he continued to do it....overall HBK is better because while his inring ability does not meet the standards of hart his charisma and personality he brough into the ring did..and that is what surpasses him over Hart when we speak about world wrestling entertainment...

 

[Moon Knight]

He jobbed for leaving? Are you serious? Did you even read what I wrote. HE WAS THE ONE WHO WANTED TO STAY. Bret. You know? The guy who got completely f**ked over by McMahon? Be loyal to the man who signs your paychecks? Are you serious? Really? Are you? Hart wanted to stay for less money than he was obviously worth and end up retiring a gray-haired old man in Titansports making peanuts while other guys like Shawn and eventually Austin raked in much more than he would've. Bret was also the guy who happily sat on the sidelines while Hogan pissed and moaned to get the title after Bret spent months rebuilding its credibility. Then Bret waited in the wings again until Luger screwed himself (thanks alcohol!) and was the consolation champion. Then he sat around again while Diesel got a mammoth push to be the next big marketable thing until that fizzled out and he was once more the utility champ. Then after Hart got the belt again, he gave it back to guess who? Vince was the one who suspiciously opted out of the 20-year deal and decided to have Bret initiate talks with Bischoff, not the other way around. And out of all the angles Vince could've set up for Hart to leave on, he chose this? Out of all of them it had to be against his worst enemy and a jobbing in his home country for a title loss (so much for loyalty). Then he lied RIGHT TO BRET'S FACE (this was also caught on tape) and told him that a schmoz finish would be fine. McMahon was also the dumb$hit who'd signed Hart with that clause in his contract knowing full well that Hart wouldn't budge...but he put the strap on Hart...then lied to him...then f**ked him. Plain and simple. Why people can't get this is beyond me.

Lets not blame too much on HBK. after the match HBK told McMahon No way! No f&*king way I'm taking the title, He may not have known about it. Vince could also not afford to pay Hart, so he told him to go to WCW which Hart agreed to do. McMahon thought he could afford it, he was wrong. Hart also had creative control over the last 30 days of his contract, so he had the power to refuse to job to HBK, which is what McMahon wanted and had a right to want. I have a feeling McMahon would not have done what he did if Hart agreed to loose to HBK..But Hart went against the accepted idea that the guy leaving should loose and wanted to win his last match...Maybe Hart is more to blame then you are willing to admitt and HBk not as much.

 

[Kasey]

^Vince was wrong? I don't buy that for a second. Around the time he eschewed Hart out the door their ratings and attendance had already started to recover. The fact is that he ran out of creative ideas for Hart post-Canada/US angle and completely ditched one of his go-to guys because Austin's star had already bloomed.

I wouldn't saddle ALL the blame onto HBK, but I'll damn sure saddle a hefty load of it onto his shoulders. It's easy to see in the tape that he wrenched the Sharpshooter in as hard as he could so there was no way Bret could've budged out of it until the bell was rung. As for whether or not I'd champion Michael's backstage ethics, he and his crew held up McMahon in '95, so what would be the difference in him pulling stroke in this situation (especially against a guy he can't stand).

Bret was nothing but a loyalist who had a man lie to his face (a man he was committed to serving and had never EVER said no to in 14 years mind you). Hart was the definition of team player. Even Jake Robert's crazy old ass said in a shoot interview that even HE could see that McMahon played those two off of each other due to legitimate heat as far back as 1996 when Jake had a short stint as a road agent/wrestler. Besides, this was a long-winded situation that had nearly come to a head earlier in the year when Shawn made the crack ON RAW, no less about Hart schlepping Sunny. In turn Hart yanked out some of his mop and beat the shit out of him in kind.

Hart had already agreed to drop the belt to ANYONE else whenever Vince wanted him to. And like I've said before...out of all the people, luck would have it that Vince chose the worst candidate out of the bunch and then lied to Hart's face about the ending of the match. And Bret didn't even require a victory. He actually suggested a schmoz so that Shawn wouldn't lose face in the situation. Obviously, the other boys in the back took offense to what had happened after that evening because the WWE front office worked through the night to prevent a full scale mutiny and a possible strike the next night on Raw. Even The Undertaker voiced his displeasure to Vince (hence the reason Vince went into Hart's room to apologize...and got clubbed as a result). And for the record, to anyone who might assume, I think HBK is a hell of a worker.

 

[Moon Knight]

Kasey, you are forgetting that Hart had creative control over that match and didn't want to lose it, it's not he would lose at all but the fact he didn't want to lose to anybody and had a long history of not wanting to lose in Canada, most of all to HBK. So if McMahon wanted HBK to win and Hart refused to? The plan was to have a DQ finish and Hart either hand over the title or lose it to Shamrock...Shamrock? A DQ finish and a Shamrock title is NOT a good idea, but Hart would only accept this, that idea is harts' fault not mcmahon, it's not mcMahon's fault Hart didn't want to loose to HBK and put McMahon in a bad situation. HBK was the right choice, HBK was the best person to do it and with past storylines it made sense. Who's fault is it hart didn't want to loose to him? Hart put McMahon in a situation were he had to lose the title and HBK being the best option, but refused to do it. Hart could not remain the champ, he had to loose and refused to do it in Canada to HBK, why should McMahon get 100% of the Heat over this? HBK should have won the match, and Hart forced McMahon into a DQ finish. You of all people know that DQ finishes suck and should used next to never, I hate DQ finishes and think HBK should have gone over clean. If HBK was not the right choice, then who was?

 

[X]

Kasey you seem to be putting Hart in the light as though he were some angel that never politicked backstage. Everyone knows about the Kliq's politics. But to say that Hart never said no to McMahon is just a straight up lie, he refused many times to job, including in Montreal to HBK which you seem to have forgotten.

Bottom line is Vince made a decision he thought was best for the company, and guess what, it was best for the company because when they got rid of Hart they became the number one show on all of TV and destroyed all other competition.

Hart screwed himself by being naive enough to believe that Vince would let him walk out of that match with the title.

 

[Jaycobo]

Thats a hard decision to make. On one hand, you got my favorite "wrestler" of all time in the wwe. On the other hand you have one of my current favorites. I picked bret cuz he's one of my all times.

 

[Kasey]

Kasey, you are forgetting that Hart had creative control over that match and didn't want to lose it, it's not he would lose at all but the fact he didn't want to lose to anybody and had a long history of not wanting to lose in Canada, most of all to HBK. So if McMahon wanted HBK to win and Hart refused to? The plan was to have a DQ finish and Hart either hand over the title or lose it to Shamrock...Shamrock? A DQ finish and a Shamrock title is NOT a good idea, but Hart would only accept this, that idea is harts' fault not mcmahon, it's not mcMahon's fault Hart didn't want to loose to HBK and put McMahon in a bad situation. HBK was the right choice, HBK was the best person to do it and with past storylines it made sense. Who's fault is it hart didn't want to loose to him? Hart put McMahon in a situation were he had to lose the title and HBK being the best option, but refused to do it. Hart could not remain the champ, he had to loose and refused to do it in Canada to HBK, why should McMahon get 100% of the Heat over this? HBK should have won the match, and Hart forced McMahon into a DQ finish. You of all people know that DQ finishes suck and should used next to never, I hate DQ finishes and think HBK should have gone over clean. If HBK was not the right choice, then who was?

He had agreed in ANY other instance after Montreal to drop the belt to Shawn and even applied with Bischoff for a work extension for Titan (if that's not loyalty, then I don't know what is). McMahon wanted him to basically "blow out his character's brains" as Hart put it on his documentary. As far as the whole situation goes, McMahon knew about this whole schtick during the summer. That's why he saddled the title on Hart in the first place. He knew he was getting rid of him, and through all the trials and tribulations he set the entire scenario up in a way that would culminate in a situation he knew was going to be bad for Hart's character from jumpstreet.

PPV arenas are booked months in advance and McMahon thinks for the future. Between August and November, Vince could've had Bret drop the title at any time. The fact is, he didn't want to lose to Shawn, and Shawn alone, because Shawn re-iterated numerous times that he wasn't going to return the favor whatsoever for ANY jobs as early as September. Vince knew full well what was going to happen or he wouldn't have booked the two together in a match that was going to end in a non-finish because of the anti-climactic nature. Hart had even gone so far as to say that he'd be "happy" to put Michaels over cleanly at the 12/7 PPV in Springfield, if I remember correctly.

Shawn flat out refused to do any jobs (not just ones in a specific country mind you), and when McMahon propsed the idea of Shawn winning the title in Montreal, Hart rightly balked at the prospect because not only were they going to take the title from that point, but summarily dismiss Hart and damage not only his credibility, but also demoralize the Canadian fanbase which he was the posterboy of. They didn't just want to have him job...they wanted to send damaged goods to Bischoff on a silver platter, because Shawn wasn't going to return any favors and he'd already established that numerous times to Hart and McMahon.

The truth is that Vince and The Kliq masterfully painted Hart into a corner as early as August, and when Hart actually used his brains and didn't just take the bone they threw him, they f*cked him. What's funny is that no one else even mentions whether or not HBK had creative control in his contract? I guess that was an unwritten portion of it, right? Bret ain't perfect, but by comparison to Michaels/Vince in this situation, he's cleaner than a preacher's sheets. So you guys tell me what you think is ethically better. A wrestler exercising his rightful creative control against a guy who is such a smug prick that he bluntly states he ain't jobbing to Hart, ever? Or...a guy who has no real creative control (except his lips conjoined to Vince's ass) who won't job PERIOD? If you still choose HBK, you're blinded by your love for his character.

 

[Emmet]

Kasey you seem to be putting Hart in the light as though he were some angel that never politicked backstage. Everyone knows about the Kliq's politics. But to say that Hart never said no to McMahon is just a straight up lie, he refused many times to job, including in Montreal to HBK which you seem to have forgotten.

Bottom line is Vince made a decision he thought was best for the company, and guess what, it was best for the company because when they got rid of Hart they became the number one show on all of TV and destroyed all other competition.

Hart screwed himself by being naive enough to believe that Vince would let him walk out of that match with the title.

Well if you had a father-son like relationship with your boss you would probably take his word for it when he said the match would be DQ'd.

As for Bret refusing to job, ive never ever read a interview or article or read a book from another wrestler when talking about Bret Hart that they ever said he refused to job, except for Montreal. HBK didnt job for him at WM13 why should Bret do it back? Bret said he would have dropped it to anyone the next night or whatever night.

HBK's refusing to job in the mid and late 1990s are now legendary, its come from msot top stars, Foley, Taker, Austin. You've never heard any of them complain about the Hitman have you? HBK was a prick bottom line. How anyone can defend him is beyond me. Plain and simple.

 

[BRandonkin]

Now I read in Austin book That Michaels would not of Job for anyone else but him. That what Austin says in his book. So I don't get how Austin name keeps comming up in this refusal to Job. The Rock and HBK have never wrestled so I don;t know why the Rock would have anything to say about it. By the time Rock was over enough for a push HBK was long retired. Taker and Foley are the only ones who I heard had a legit gripe. taker is the one who convinced Micahels to drop to Austin and was not with these threats that posters are putting up here. He just showed HBK the future and he agreed and to drop to Austin. HBK and Austin were tag champs together and had a pretty good match at King of The Ring. All Wrestlers have pride. Austin did not want to become a mid carder and quit. Bret refused to lose to Dino Bravo despite damn near killing himself pride. The Rock is an ego in itself. I think HBK just had the longest run and that why it is legendary. But HBK put over many people.

 

[Emmet]

I have Austins book on my knee and Ill quote you from the book that HE wrote:

''My relationship with Shawn is alot better than it used to be, Its not that hes gone through any real changes, but because its a different day and age. We're alot closer friends than we were back then

Shawn had a lot of issuses back then, before WMXIV, he had alot of demons, he was burning the candle on both ends and wasnt exactly feeling like a million bucks, and then wham, I come along, SCSA, getting white hot and breathing down everyones neck. I think that was unsettling to him. I think that adversely affected him.

He was asked to drop the belt to me, and at the time I dont think he really wanted to do it. If it had been anybody else other than me he probably wouldnt have done it. But he did do it for me.''

So in other wards he wasnt going to drop the title to Austin until Taker came in and told him to do so otherwise he kick the shit out of him. HBK forfieted alot of his title reigns, I dont know exactly how many but its at least 3 or 4 title reigns he forfieted.

 

[Budro5454]

Both were the complete package... not only did they put on great matches, but they also put a lot of people over. How many times did Hogan do that? Like once? to the Warrior.

 

[OverniteCelebrityLM]

Earlier I had a post in here that was consider spam, even though it was relevant and got a b.s. infraction so here's to "correct" it. I think HBK is better than Bret Hart. Technically, Bret Hart is more sound but that's the only thing Hart leads in. Michaels is a better performer and can carry the worst wrestler in any match and should be the champion right now. He's also more versatile and can do more things than Hart ever could. To the earlier post that said something about Austin saying Michaels would only job for him, Austin must not watch much WWE television and the beer must of gone to his head because Michaels has put over many a wrestler. Most of whom, he was much better than. IMO, Michaels is the best in and out of ring performer ever with Flair being the best wrestler ever. You put them both together, you get the ultimate wrestler.

 

[albertob92]

k i dont know what ur all thinking. Sure michaels can do stuff bret can never do but michaels is by far one of the worst wrestlers to step into the ring and sell a big bump. God only knows thy the hell michaels makes those stupid faces and wriggles around the rings during those moments.

With regards to putting over other guys, yea he's done it a few times so im not gonna argue. But what really pisses me off is why Shawn is still main eventing. I was ok with him being in the 4-Way at backlash, but shawn should not have been main eventing wrestlemania. It comes back to the fact that it was supposed to be Triple H/Cena, but since Trips went down, obviously his best friend, and extemely influential backstage Shawn Michaels would step in. I'm so sick of seeing Triple H and Shawn Michaels being featured so prominently, i never liked either and i dont understand why everyone was so happy to c DX back, cuz it was nowhere near as good as the original. Some nights DX was the focus of RAW when it should logically be Cena, whos the champ, and that to be is just stupid and egotistical of those 2.

So to me, that has to be the deciding factor. As far as i know Bret never used politics to get himself into main evens like hickenbottom does, and god knows that Bret had to earn everything he got. Brets had tons of amazing matches, while Shawn has decent ones, his only great ones would be the ladder vs. Razor Ramone, and the hell in a cell with Taker.

 

[reddevil69]

Earlier I had a post in here that was consider spam, even though it was relevant and got a b.s. infraction so here's to "correct" it. I think HBK is better than Bret Hart. Technically, Bret Hart is more sound but that's the only thing Hart leads in. Michaels is a better performer and can carry the worst wrestler in any match and should be the champion right now. He's also more versatile and can do more things than Hart ever could. To the earlier post that said something about Austin saying Michaels would only job for him, Austin must not watch much WWE television and the beer must of gone to his head because Michaels has put over many a wrestler. Most of whom, he was much better than. IMO, Michaels is the best in and out of ring performer ever with Flair being the best wrestler ever. You put them both together, you get the ultimate wrestler.

i think that what Austin says in his book refers to the HBK of a decade ago....yes Shawn has put alot of guys over since he came back in 2002, but between the summer of 1995 and Wrestlemania 14 in 1998 he put over one wrestler in that 3 year period and that was Psycho Sid...