BRandonkin
Pre-Show Stalwart
I don't see where taker came in and said I'll kick the shit out of you. So where is all this aggression coming from I have no idea. Thank you for finding the exact quote I appreciate that.
Pick Your Poison: Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart
- Thread starter Britney Spears
- Start date
I don't see where taker came in and said I'll kick the shit out of you. So where is all this aggression coming from I have no idea. Thank you for finding the exact quote I appreciate that.
Shawn Michaels, hands down, is the best wrestler to grace a WWE ring. Bret Hart could have came back to the WWE, but he has too much pride. The shit happened 10 years ago and he just can't get over it, what an asshole. Bret Hart is dead to me, and he never really could put himself or anyone else over. His best move was the Sharpshooter, and he had nothing else. He wasn't a speedy guy and his technical skills sucked. Shawn Michaels could pull off just about anything with his agility and occasional powerhouse moves. Sweet Chin Music owns the Sharpshooter anyday.
Did someone above me really just say that Michaels is one of the worst wrestlers to ever step into a ring because he oversells? Right, thanks for your opinion, please direct all other comments to your wall because none of us can respect someone's opinion if they honestly think Michaels is a bad wrestler.
This thread has gone way off topic I think into just another screwjob thread. Look, Hart refused to job more then just at Montreal, he refused to job to Luger for one if I remember correctly. Bret had his fair share of politicking backstage, obviously not as much as Michaels did. But people need to stop bitching about how Bret got screwed. This is a BUSINESS. People get screwed, toes get stepped on, I don't hear anyone saying ECW or WCW got screwed by WWE because they went out of business. Shit happens. Was it fucked up? Yeah. Did it affect the quality of wrestling to come? Hell no. So everyone just needs to calm down and let the past be the past.
This thread has gone way off topic I think into just another screwjob thread. Look, Hart refused to job more then just at Montreal, he refused to job to Luger for one if I remember correctly. Bret had his fair share of politicking backstage, obviously not as much as Michaels did. But people need to stop bitching about how Bret got screwed. This is a BUSINESS. People get screwed, toes get stepped on, I don't hear anyone saying ECW or WCW got screwed by WWE because they went out of business. Shit happens. Was it fucked up? Yeah. Did it affect the quality of wrestling to come? Hell no. So everyone just needs to calm down and let the past be the past.
Alright guys, time to steer this ship back on course. This has been a good thread so far, but it's dangerously getting close to falling into a Montreal Screwjob thread. There is a whole hell of a lot moer to Michaels V. Hart then the Screwjob. I know it's hard to talk about the two without bringing it up, because it was the climax of their feud.
Let's move it back to the Wrestling, Mic Skills, Charisma conversaion for now. Believe me, I'll make a thread before the end of the year to discuss the tenth anniversary of the screwjob, and you can flame away in there.
Let's move it back to the Wrestling, Mic Skills, Charisma conversaion for now. Believe me, I'll make a thread before the end of the year to discuss the tenth anniversary of the screwjob, and you can flame away in there.
Bret Hart in my view made wrestling look as real as possible, you watch hbk punch and Hart punch and tell me which looks more real, you see Bret take a face first turnbuckle and then see HBK do his stupid somersault turnbuckle crap and tell me which looks better. Bret made wrestling look a whole lot real than HBK did. When telling a story in the ring not many rivaled Bret. HBK defintely isnt up there.
shayneomac
Dark Match Jobber
With all due respect in the time that the two were both competing Bret Hart wrestled just as many if not more classics than HBK. Summer Slam 1992 vs The British Bulldog. Wrestle Mania 10 & Summer Slam 1994 vs Owen Hart. Wrestle Mania 8 vs Piper. Wrestle Mania 13 vs Austin. Wrestle Mania 12 vs HBK. e.t.c. Yes HBK has had a lot of classics since his return but Bret Hart isn't around anymore so it isn't fair to compare HBK's latter years to Bret Hart's earlier ones.
As far as entertaining goes. Bret Hart was around when WRESTLING was the key factor not mic skill. It's not Brets fault that he wasn't around for the attitude & post attitude era where mic skills are all that matters, e.g. John Cena.
As far as Bret's mic skills and entertainment value goes. Vince McMahon himself said that nobody in the HISTORY of the WWE can tell a story in the ring like Bret Hart. His feuds with Owen Hart & Steve Austin were amongst the greatest feuds of all time and his I hate America angle kept the WWE alive when WCW was kicking their ass.
Along with Ric Flair & Hulk Hogan. Bret is one of only 3 men that can genuinely claim to be the GREATEST of all time. Don't get me wrong, I respect HBK alot & am a big fan, especially for what he went thru at WM 14 & he definately is in the top 10 but will never be considered the out and out greatest.
P.S. Bret Hart brought the ladder match to the WWE not Shawn Michaels.
As far as entertaining goes. Bret Hart was around when WRESTLING was the key factor not mic skill. It's not Brets fault that he wasn't around for the attitude & post attitude era where mic skills are all that matters, e.g. John Cena.
As far as Bret's mic skills and entertainment value goes. Vince McMahon himself said that nobody in the HISTORY of the WWE can tell a story in the ring like Bret Hart. His feuds with Owen Hart & Steve Austin were amongst the greatest feuds of all time and his I hate America angle kept the WWE alive when WCW was kicking their ass.
Along with Ric Flair & Hulk Hogan. Bret is one of only 3 men that can genuinely claim to be the GREATEST of all time. Don't get me wrong, I respect HBK alot & am a big fan, especially for what he went thru at WM 14 & he definately is in the top 10 but will never be considered the out and out greatest.
P.S. Bret Hart brought the ladder match to the WWE not Shawn Michaels.
You have to be kidding me right? Do you realize Bret almost 50 years old? Considering how much his body has broken down in the last decade (screwjob or no screwjob), there's no way he'd even be able to wrestle on a regular basis now (stroke or not), yet alone carry a company as a world champion.
And don't give me the Undertaker example and how old he is or even Flair. Flair doesn't main even anymore, and the Undertaker only got a title reign before everyone felt he hadn't gotten a fair run during his career (which Bret did, for the record). And even at that... not even a month into doing a regular WWE schedule and Taker is injured. And you think Bret would be able to work a full schedule? I don't think so.
Now considering how worn down Shawn is, and he continues to wrestle the schedule and matches he does, that puts him ahead of Bret in my eyes. Obviously we don't know how Hart would've been had he not been injured but I doubt he would've been able to accomplish what Shawn is accomplishing these days if Bret didn't have the unfortunate sequence of events he had after he left WWF.
B
bunter17
Guest
I feel you have to go with Shawn Michaels. The name of the company is World Wrestling Entertainment. From the time I started watching in a serious way one guy caught my attention and immediately captivated me and that was Shawn Michaels.
Don't get me wrong Bret Hart is a great wrestler but he will never be the entertainer that Shawn is. Combine Shawn's wrestling abilities with his charsma and abilty to entertain and you have possibly one of if not the best performers of all time.
Don't get me wrong Bret Hart is a great wrestler but he will never be the entertainer that Shawn is. Combine Shawn's wrestling abilities with his charsma and abilty to entertain and you have possibly one of if not the best performers of all time.
Being a great entertainer and being the superior wrestler are different. Dont get me wrong, Im a huge HBK fan and always will be, but its tough to put him over Bret Hart. If you want to compare great matches they are both about even, however there really isnt any question that HBK was more explosive in the ring. His character was built for controversy and Hart was the "all buisness" type. In my mind Bret was the man from Wrestlemania VIII up until who Bob Backlund thing, and HBK just took over after XII. I just dont really think its fair to compare the two since HBK probably doesnt get to where he is without Bret and WMXII.
This is a really hard question. Actually the funny thing is that despite the heat between these two, and the fact that a lot of people feel strongly about taking a side, I genuinely respect and have a lot of admiration for both men. The Ironman match that they had was one of the best matches of all time.
To me, Bret was the better technical wrestler, and Shawn was better on the mike. Bret could execute any move and make it look so real, and his storytelling skills in the ring were second to none. He could face any opponent and make them look good. Shawn could make me so mad on the mike I would want to jump through the screen and punch him, and at times he could make me laugh so hard I couldn't breathe.
Regarding the incident in Montreal, when it first happened I was very angry with Vince and Shawn - yes I am a Canadian. But over time, I've realized that no matter who was at fault, it's over now and it was just business.
Since Bret retired, I've rooted harder for HBK than anyone. I think Cena is OK, but I would love to see HBK get one last title run before he retires. I think WWE owes him that for all he's done for the company over the years, and for all the fans that he's entertained.
Overall, I would say that Bret is #1, and Shawn is just a bit behind him.. not even to be considered #2 in my eyes, but maybe a #1a. Having said that, I have to disagree with many of you that said that Bret's matches do not generate emotion. I think you are wrong. In May of 1999, as you know, Owen died. In July of 1999, my mother died of a brain aneurysm and stroke. So Bret and I were grieving in parallel. As it turned out, my mother didn't have a will, and not only that, had thousands of dollars in debt. As the executor of her estate, I realized that I would have to sell the home that I grew up in so the debts of her estate could be paid. Even though I had been living on my own for a few years at the time of her death, the thought of losing my mother and the house I grew up in was almost too much to bear. I didn't think I would be able to make it as my world was closing in. In November of 1999, just as I was going through this depression and stress, I was invited to a WCW pay per view taking place in Toronto, Canada. The PPV was a culmination of a tournament to crown a new WCW champion, and Bret was in it. As the show started, I was rooting for Bret of course. I was surprised that despite losing his brother, he was still able to go on the road and put on shows for all his fans. And after the final match, when Bret beat Chris Benoit (it was a great match), Bret climbed the turnbuckle and held up the belt, and pointed into the crowd. At one point, he pointed at my section, and I felt as if he was pointing right at me, saying "Don't worry, everything will work out. Don't you ever give up.". It sounds stupid and corny, but it really happened that way. That one moment inspired me, and got me through the hard times. I'll remember that moment the rest of my life, and I will always be indebted to Bret for it, even if he never knows how it affected me.
Anyhow, enough blubbering. Both were fantastic wrestlers, and both are legends. But for my money, Bret will always be #1.
To me, Bret was the better technical wrestler, and Shawn was better on the mike. Bret could execute any move and make it look so real, and his storytelling skills in the ring were second to none. He could face any opponent and make them look good. Shawn could make me so mad on the mike I would want to jump through the screen and punch him, and at times he could make me laugh so hard I couldn't breathe.
Regarding the incident in Montreal, when it first happened I was very angry with Vince and Shawn - yes I am a Canadian. But over time, I've realized that no matter who was at fault, it's over now and it was just business.
Since Bret retired, I've rooted harder for HBK than anyone. I think Cena is OK, but I would love to see HBK get one last title run before he retires. I think WWE owes him that for all he's done for the company over the years, and for all the fans that he's entertained.
Overall, I would say that Bret is #1, and Shawn is just a bit behind him.. not even to be considered #2 in my eyes, but maybe a #1a. Having said that, I have to disagree with many of you that said that Bret's matches do not generate emotion. I think you are wrong. In May of 1999, as you know, Owen died. In July of 1999, my mother died of a brain aneurysm and stroke. So Bret and I were grieving in parallel. As it turned out, my mother didn't have a will, and not only that, had thousands of dollars in debt. As the executor of her estate, I realized that I would have to sell the home that I grew up in so the debts of her estate could be paid. Even though I had been living on my own for a few years at the time of her death, the thought of losing my mother and the house I grew up in was almost too much to bear. I didn't think I would be able to make it as my world was closing in. In November of 1999, just as I was going through this depression and stress, I was invited to a WCW pay per view taking place in Toronto, Canada. The PPV was a culmination of a tournament to crown a new WCW champion, and Bret was in it. As the show started, I was rooting for Bret of course. I was surprised that despite losing his brother, he was still able to go on the road and put on shows for all his fans. And after the final match, when Bret beat Chris Benoit (it was a great match), Bret climbed the turnbuckle and held up the belt, and pointed into the crowd. At one point, he pointed at my section, and I felt as if he was pointing right at me, saying "Don't worry, everything will work out. Don't you ever give up.". It sounds stupid and corny, but it really happened that way. That one moment inspired me, and got me through the hard times. I'll remember that moment the rest of my life, and I will always be indebted to Bret for it, even if he never knows how it affected me.
Anyhow, enough blubbering. Both were fantastic wrestlers, and both are legends. But for my money, Bret will always be #1.
Dude, all you are doing is specualting on something u will never know, u cant just assmue he wouldnt be able to do as much as shawn, plus shawn is a lot more limited nowadays. Who knows, if situation was different bret could be 30 times better than shawn now, or vice versa, but u cant use that as an argument.
anyway Nice story iron ricky...
but yea... im rly starting to get sick of ppl saying brets not good on the mic... understand his character for the first few yrs of main eventing wasnt supposed to do much talking, he just said wat was on his mind... BUT BUT BUT
when he turned heel and reformed the hart foundation, he was AWESOME on the mic, ppl didnt like the crybaby getting screwed over bret... but u werent supposed to! regardless of if u liked him as a heel, he played the heel role great, and he even was the only guy to be loved everywhere EXCEPT the USA, that takes skills, to be a face everywhere but one country.
When he flipped out on vince for screwing him in the cage match and after rumble 98, he is so in the moment, hes just real and that wat ppl dont understand sometimes. Yes its entertainement, but in my opinion, the more realistic u can make it seem, the more im entertained, and bret was the king of realism, in the ring and in promos.
And i really agree with the post above just talking about how wen bret throws a punch it looks brutal, thats rly important, a lotta guys now cant do that... Carlito, Orton, RVD....
they r both awesome, BUT, HEY GUYS GUESS WHAT!?
SHAWN CANT CARRY THE COMPANY! No one watched during his first title reign after he beat bret, NWO was going on... bret however carried the company for the better part of 5 years, 92-97. Shawn had it from about 97-98 then stone cold was bigger than him... and shawn took over for 6 months in 96 after he beat bret and led one of the least interesting title runs ever.... now his next two were much better yes... but didnt last, and then he got hurt for 4 yrs... then he came back, not nearly as good as he once was, which was awesome, but bret was way more important to the industry as a main eventer.
Saying HBK didn't carry the company but Hart did is bullshit. Bret was given an oppertunity to run with the ball many years before HBK. And for the majority of Hart's main event run WWf was a joke. WWF wrestling, gimmicks and angles were generally awfull from 1992-1996 . Do you not remember Hart's classic feuds with Bob Backlund, Jean Pierre Lafitte, Issac Yankem etc? It actually turned around about the time that HBK became champ, and started to get better. I'm not saying that it was Michaels that turned it around. But it wasn't Hart either.
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
In Shawn's defense (and in Bret's) the mid-nineties was a disaster for all of the American wrestling business. It had nothing to do with either man's talent level, either. During the mid-nineties look at the roster they had in the WWF. HHH, Hall, Nash, Bret, Michaels, Bulldog, Owen, Vader, Shane Douglas, Bigelow and a slew of other top guys who did great business elsewhere at various other points. All in their respective primes and at their physical apexes, no less. If that's not a stacked roster, then I sure as hell don't know what is. But you can't do anything with talent, no matter how good, if the booking is crap. The company had a limited payroll and most of what was happening scripting-wise was a farce that only appealed to those with Forrest Gump I.Q.'s.
The deal is, most people forget that the business was in a slump because Vince and Bischoff were basically regurgitating the same boring, dumbass show over and over again for the whole decade (up until 1996), but were just substituting different personnel in each angle. If the NWO angle had never come to pass, there never would've been a catalyst to re-invigorate the market. Vince had no idea what the hell to do with himself in those days and I have PPV upon PPV archived that says so (except for the wrestling, which was top notch most of the time). Michaels can carry a company. He'd undeniably have been one of the key pieces of the puzzle during the near-millenium heyday that the WWF had if it weren't for his back injury. After all, he was the top dog during the point when the WWF began nipping at WCW's heels and eventually overtook them. Same with Hart, except for with him leaving to WCW. The issue wasn't their talent, it was the cumulative direction of the company.
I hate how this thread turned into a Screwjob thread a little while ago. I despise when people get off-topic. I don't think the question was ''Who used more politics?'' I think the question was, ''Who was the better all around wrestler?'' Sure, politics come into play sooner or later. I was hoping it wasn't going to, but considering the immaturity of some of the n00bs here, it was bound to come. To be honest, HBK was an asshole in the 90's, but that was BACKSTAGE. The things that we're not supposed to know about. The Wrestling Community is a hungry bunch. We thrive on backstage news.
Shawn Michaels was a better all-arounder than Bret. He had more charisma, he stayed in the business longer, and could do more things than Bret could've ever done. People talk about how Bret's character wasn't a ''promo-cutter.'' If your the top guy, how are you going to stink up the place on the mic? You're the Champion. You have loads of things to talk about in 5 minutes. Bret was just so boring to listen to. He was so plain and listening to him was like listening to a dying puppy dog. The generation gap between Shawn Michaels and Bret was huge. Shawn was more of a 90's wrestler who liked the turn the business was taking, and Bret didn't like it. I don't think Bret ever did like the Attitude Era.
Bret and Shawn are both completely different. Their styles, and their personalities. Both of their ego's didn't allow them to put the other over cleanly. I do agree that it was wrong for Michaels to have declined a ''hand-shake'' from Hart. I don't think that was supposed to happen though. That would be like breaking kayfabe at WRESTLEMANIA! Unless they were both babyfaces, of course. Shawn refused to give Cena a handshake too.
Bret was an 80's guy and Shawn was a 90's guy. Shawn was the newer, hipper, young wrestler, while Bret was the veteran on his last few years at the top. Maybe Bret didn't want to leave the top of the mountain, maybe Shawn was too anxious to get there. But then again, it took Shawn just as long as Bret to get the Title. In some ways, they're very similar. People say that Shawn couldn't handle Bret when it comes to technical wrestling. Are you joking? Shawn matched Bret move-for-move at WrestleMania 12. Anyone who says that a 40 year old Bret Hart carried a 30 year old Shawn Michaels must be bullshitting themselves. That's such a bunch of crap.
Shawn was no saint in the mid-nineties. The mid-nineties was sort of WCW's time because most of the WWF guys were getting old. Kind of like in 98, where WCW's guys got older and the WWF guys were younger. Seriously, The Rock has no right to challenge HBK not putting anybody over. HBK is not that stupid to not put over guys who would've been taking his spot. Really, who in their right mind would decline to lose to Austin, who was arguably the hottest star at the time. Maybe HBK was going through the same thing Bret did, or maybe HBK was just that obnoxious. I go with the first thing.
I don't believe the 'Taker incident with Shawn at all. It sounds believeable, but not enough for me. 'Taker wouldn't threaten to fight someone if he didn't put someone over. Shawn states in his book that he respected the hell out of 'Taker. He said that he wanted to be the highest paid guy on the roster, besides for 'Taker. He said that what 'Taker deserved, 'Taker got. So, for some reason, I highly doubt that 'Taker, ''Wrapping his fists'', telling Shawn not to do any stupid shit, ever happened.
Shawn Michaels was a better all-arounder than Bret. He had more charisma, he stayed in the business longer, and could do more things than Bret could've ever done. People talk about how Bret's character wasn't a ''promo-cutter.'' If your the top guy, how are you going to stink up the place on the mic? You're the Champion. You have loads of things to talk about in 5 minutes. Bret was just so boring to listen to. He was so plain and listening to him was like listening to a dying puppy dog. The generation gap between Shawn Michaels and Bret was huge. Shawn was more of a 90's wrestler who liked the turn the business was taking, and Bret didn't like it. I don't think Bret ever did like the Attitude Era.
Bret and Shawn are both completely different. Their styles, and their personalities. Both of their ego's didn't allow them to put the other over cleanly. I do agree that it was wrong for Michaels to have declined a ''hand-shake'' from Hart. I don't think that was supposed to happen though. That would be like breaking kayfabe at WRESTLEMANIA! Unless they were both babyfaces, of course. Shawn refused to give Cena a handshake too.
Bret was an 80's guy and Shawn was a 90's guy. Shawn was the newer, hipper, young wrestler, while Bret was the veteran on his last few years at the top. Maybe Bret didn't want to leave the top of the mountain, maybe Shawn was too anxious to get there. But then again, it took Shawn just as long as Bret to get the Title. In some ways, they're very similar. People say that Shawn couldn't handle Bret when it comes to technical wrestling. Are you joking? Shawn matched Bret move-for-move at WrestleMania 12. Anyone who says that a 40 year old Bret Hart carried a 30 year old Shawn Michaels must be bullshitting themselves. That's such a bunch of crap.
Shawn was no saint in the mid-nineties. The mid-nineties was sort of WCW's time because most of the WWF guys were getting old. Kind of like in 98, where WCW's guys got older and the WWF guys were younger. Seriously, The Rock has no right to challenge HBK not putting anybody over. HBK is not that stupid to not put over guys who would've been taking his spot. Really, who in their right mind would decline to lose to Austin, who was arguably the hottest star at the time. Maybe HBK was going through the same thing Bret did, or maybe HBK was just that obnoxious. I go with the first thing.
I don't believe the 'Taker incident with Shawn at all. It sounds believeable, but not enough for me. 'Taker wouldn't threaten to fight someone if he didn't put someone over. Shawn states in his book that he respected the hell out of 'Taker. He said that he wanted to be the highest paid guy on the roster, besides for 'Taker. He said that what 'Taker deserved, 'Taker got. So, for some reason, I highly doubt that 'Taker, ''Wrapping his fists'', telling Shawn not to do any stupid shit, ever happened.
Kasey
Connoiseur of the MILF
Actually, The Rock does. He laid down for Lesnar in undeniable fashion, jobbed to Foley, Austin, and Angle. All while he was in the prime of his career. Unlike Michaels who found every trick in the book to usually lose his WWF titles other than actually getting pinned and only remotely jobbed when he was older and was basically showing up to collect a check due to the mounting debt from his wrestling school fiasco. When Michaels was on top, he wouldn't let anyone supplant him for long. Hell, Sid only held the title so Shawn could come back as the underdog and win it back at the Alamodome in front of his hometown crowd.
I'd believe the Taker incident. Taker was the reason Vince McMahon was stupid enough to walk into Hart's dressing room in Montreal to apologize. Taker told him to. Does anyone in their right mind think that Shawn would voice his actual opinion of Taker if they're both still in the company together? Hell no. He'd get his ass kicked if he did. He's smarter than that. I wonder how much accuracy there is in his book and if he mentions how he made the "Sunny Days" comment on Raw and resulting real-life ass-beating he took from Bret afterwards? You know, with all the hair being pulled out and him ducking out of Wrestlemania 13.
reddevil69
Getting Noticed By Management
The incident with 'Taker did happen.....i have a video tape of Undertaker on a tv program called Off the Record from 2002 when he was in Toronto Canada and his exact words referring to the HBK/Austin match were "let me put it this way....if the match had not been done the way it went down, it probably would have been a very long night for Shawn Michaels, 'cuz i was gonna do what i thought needed to be done"....Shawn states clearly in his book that Taker did not 'tape up his fists in order to beat him up'....all that means is that the version of the story where people have said 'Taker was taping his fists did not happen...that does not mean that 'Taker did not warn or threaten Shawn.... i have it on tape and watched and heard the words from 'Taker and i'm sorry, but when it comes to credibilty in this business, Undertaker is at the top of the list...he's the most respected member of the WWE locker room for a reason...i'll take 'Taker's word over Shawn's any day...and as far as wrestling books go, the WWE edits and produces these books, which means that Vince has final say on them and they are always going to be reasonably favorable to the wrestler who writes them and also the WWE...
you know what... I honestly think that shawn and bret are the two best ever... shawns a better promo cutter but not by much, and brets better at the in ring story telling, but not by much...
they had a feud that lasted 10 years... first in the tag, rockers vs hart foundation... then Ic... then World... one of the best runs for two wrestlers ever against each other...
I think brets upside is more important than shawns, but they are both fuckin awesome
they had a feud that lasted 10 years... first in the tag, rockers vs hart foundation... then Ic... then World... one of the best runs for two wrestlers ever against each other...
I think brets upside is more important than shawns, but they are both fuckin awesome
johncenaismylover<3
Dark Match Jobber
i agree with debisib they are two of the best ever but when it came to cutting promos it was shawn, in the ring i think that they basically had the same skill level. but bret will always be the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be and shawn will always be the heartbreak kid so basically there both great
This is true.. but at the same time weren't the ratings like, the lowest they'd ever been with him as champion? I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm a big Hitman fan.. I just think Owen was where the money could/should've been. HBK is my absolute favorite wrestler of all time though.. He's brilliant inside and outside of the ring.
C
chrisx
Guest
HBK all the way.
HBK- More Charismatic, Entertainer, Great and Classic matches.
Bret Hart- Classic matches and Good techincal wrestling skills.
HBK- More Charismatic, Entertainer, Great and Classic matches.
Bret Hart- Classic matches and Good techincal wrestling skills.
Balls Mahoney
Dark Match Jobber
I've always been a Shawn Michaels fan, always will be. I never hated Bret, but I was never too fond of him either... his promos were dull and boring... HBK has it all. Shawn Micheals would definitly be in my top 10 wrestlers of all time, while the Hitman would be lucky to make my top 30..
BRandonkin
Pre-Show Stalwart
Bret hit main event before Michaels and Bret wrestled after Michaels. Bret jump to main event in 91 and wrestler to 2001. HBK wrestled as a solo from 1992 to 98 then from 2002 to the present. So HBK is 11 eleven years to Bret 10 years not much difference man.
We know Bret did, but Michaels innovated teh Ladder match. Michaels and ramon are the innovators of the ladder match. Innovator is not the first or the introduction, is to make something new, and that what Michaels and Ramon did, they made it soemthing that no one ever seen. It like the Thriller video again fellas. MJ was not the first to make music videos but he was an innovator of the form. That what Michaels is an innovator.
BRandonkin
Pre-Show Stalwart
I just think that HBK was a superior wrestler and performer. Michaels was not techincan like Bret, but he was as all around as they come in the ring. Even Bret has made mention that aspiring wrestlers should go to Shawn's school and this was before Christ has ever come in to shawn's life. It doesn't matter if Shawn did not job or did, his matches were great and to be honest if you look back at 1996 run, with the exception of the Undertaker, Mick, Vader and Sid, there were not many who could of carrried the company at that time. WWE was not stunt devil league at the time for Mick to take over and Vader was not the most liked to work with(funky). Bret and Diesel gone. So who was there really to carry at that time. Dean Douglass became main eventer later, but not for that time. So let get off HBK jobbing.
reddevil69
Getting Noticed By Management
Actually, the WWF experienced it's lowest ratings, PPV buy-rates and lowest house show attendance while Shawn Michaels was the champion...he talk's about it in his book and it is a known fact that the worst fiscal year the WWF had was 1996...Bret was gone for 8 months of that year...not saying that is the reason, just stating facts....people seem to think that HBK was some huge draw and he wasn't....he is a much bigger draw today than he was 10 yrs ago...
Similar threads
