Pick Your Poison: Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart

[reddevil69]

Well remember, when you talk HBK, you are pretty much talking about 2 different people all together. I've probably watched every Shawn Michaels match possible since he joined WWE. Believe me, I prefer HBK to Bret Hart any day of the week, but the criticism pre-2002 Michaels gets is well deserved. Post-2002 Michaels is a changed man and will job, so any criticism he gets should be argued.

The reason I criticize the injuries in 97 is with supposed serious injuries, Michaels was back 6 weeks later. His giving up of the title in early 97, I'll buy that, but I won't buy his second injury post KoTR that year. He was supposed to start a feud that year with Hart to last throughout the summer, yet HBK mysteriously gets put on the shelf again. I remember reading online how disgruntled HBK was because of the success of Hall and Nash in WCW, and there were talks of Hbk trying to play hardball with the WWE throughout the summer. Is it any coincidence that when HBK finally comes back at Summerslam, its in the role of a heel and with his best friend, and in a stable, ala the n.W.o.?

That was the problem in 97, Bret Hart was down with a legit injury, but he was on TV every week, HBK wasn't. When WWE needed the star power, HBK pouted and disapeared, when if he was the top star, his ass needed to be out there somehow. I remember all of the time Stone Cold would Hijack Bret Hart's Wheel Chair and pound on his leg. That's where I draw the line with HBK and Hart, Hart was there, Hbk wasn't.

I agree with you ...Shawn says he has a knee injury in 1997 and returns 6 weeks later and today in 2007, he has a knee injury and will be sidelined until 6 months later in November?....and once again i'll say it, how many times can you forfeit a title because of an injury???...there's an old saying that if you can walk into the building and forfeit you're title then you can walk to the ring and do the job...it doesn't have to be pretty, but you can have a 3 minute match on Raw and do the job....Undertaker tore his bicep last month and waited 9 days to have a match on smackdown with Batista, and did it in a cage no less and still went 20 minutes, before dropping the belt to Edge...bottom line is that all this discussion about the 1997 Bret/Shawn fiasco has Shawn Michaels coming out looking very unprofessional and there is a cloud over how legitamate his injuries were that year, and furthmore there are far more wrestlers that are respected in the fraterntity that have gone on record as taking sides with Bret than Shawn ....Ron Simmons, Foley, 'Taker, the Rock, Austin,and Curt Hennig have all been quoted at one time or another as siding with Bret....Shawn has HHH, the Harris twins and Chyna to vouch for his side of the story in the WWF that summer/fall.....judge for yourselves, i don't know what happened for a fact 'cuz i was not there but, i'm inclined to take the first group of wrestler's accounts of the events as they saw them in the locker room over the 2nd group's...furthermore whether it's true or not you cannot deny that between 1993 and 1997 that shawn did favor wrestlers who were his buddies....i'd like to see Shawn lose to Yokozuna after having worked his ass of for 5 months as champ like bret did only to have Hogan step in and and do 30 seconds of work and somehow come out with the title....i sincerely doubt the HBK of 1993 - 1997 would have shown up for the match that day if that were the case, judging by the pattern of his "injuries" and who he worked with during that time....hell, he couldn't stand jobbing to Hogan 2 years ago as evidenced by his cheap shots at hogan on episodes of Raw the weeks' following summerslam....i'm no hogan fan and i actually think Shawn should have gone over but he agreed to the outcome, so what's the point of being unprofessional and taking cheap shots after the fact?....if it was leading to a rematch i'd understand.... and as far as Shawn dropping the European title cleanly to HHH.....uhhh ok......that was not exactly putting someone over as much as it was saying " hey look, we're Dx and we're going to have all the gold, let me lie down for ya on TV buddy".......

 

[Slyfox696]

First of all, theres no proof at all that Taker ever threatened HBK if he didn't lose to Austin.

In addition to Taker's quote, I also believe HBK himself has admitted that Taker was backstage taping up his fists, a clear sign that HBK better do business. I believe that was in the Heartbreak and Triumph book. But, I'll ask my fried about that. She's obsessed with HBK and knows more than anyone I know.

First IC Title Reign - Dropped to Marty Janetty cleanly

He also won it back from his friend 3 weeks later...

Second IC Title Reign - Vacated due to Shawn being suspended for testing positive for steroids. I honestly can't imagine who WASN'T using steroids in the WWF at that time. No refusal to job or dropping to friend here.

And yet, he still didn't have to job it out...

First Tag Title Reign - Title vacated because Diesel and HBK start their feud. Again, I don't see how this can be attributed as HBK trying to weasel out of dropping the title, considering there was no planned opponent he could've even decided on whether or not he'd job to.

Another vacated title...

Second Tag Title Reign - Vacated because of controversy in the match between HBK & Diesel and Hart & Yokozuna. This was the plan all along; once again, don't see any controversy here.

The third title being vacated in a row...seems to be a trend starting here...

Third IC Title Reign - Forfeit title goes to Shane Douglas---and despite Shane's constant cries of Michaels just not wanting to job to him, you seem to be forgetting the fact that HBK got the shit beat out of him in Syracuse, New York a week before and wasn't in good shape. Why risk an injury with one of your fastest rising stars?

Convenient that something always happens to Michaels when it's his turn to job...

First World Title Reign - Dropped to Sid. I don't exactly know why Sid is considered HBK's friend...I mean even if he is, how does that change anything? Does that negate the fact that he dropped it cleanly to Sid?

If he's dropping it for his friend, then yeah kind of. In the wrestling business if you only put over your friends, you don't last long.

Second World Title Reign - This one I'll give you for sure. HBK did the wrong thing here, but don't forget either that his knee was legitamately in horrible shape and the planned ending for the rematch with Bret was very dangerous to the knee. HBK still should've fought the match though, and I'll agree with you on that one.

Was this when HBK "lost his smile"? And, the ending for the rematch was not dangerous to the knee. Hart has even made public the very layout he wanted to use, and how it would work his injury into a storyline.

Third Tag Title Reign - Vacated because HBK is legitly injured. Where's the controversy?

So, how many times has he vacated the title now? I've lost count.

First European Title Reign - Cleanly dropped it to HHH. Again, I don't see how this negates the fact that he didn't refuse to job or sneak out of the match at all, and he only held the title for a few monthes and defended it maybe once or twice; the title didn't mean anything really to him at the time because he was also the World Champ half of that time.

Isn't Shawn good buddies with HHH?

Third World Title Reign - Once again, there is absolutely no evidence at all that 'Taker ever threatened to kick HBK's ass if he didn't lose to Austin---completely clean dropping of the title here to Austin and he goes into retirement for his legitly fucked up back.

I believe this has sufficiently been addressed now.

Fourth World Title Reign - Drops it cleanly to HHH; obviously they're friends, very good friends in real life.

HHH is good buddy, and was the much bigger star.

Fourth Tag Title Reign - Dropped cleanly to the Hardys in a battle royal. The only reason he ever even got the title was to kickstart the feud with Cena for Wrestlemania, and him turning on Cena was an integral part to that feud. Can't see any controversy here either.

Cleanly to the Hardys? HBK eliminated himself when he eliminated Cena. How was this dropping the belt cleanly?

So lets review: 12 title reigns. One of them was because of his refusal to job. 4 of those reigns he vacated the title; not a single one of them because of any refusal to put someone over. 6 of those reigns he dropped the title cleanly. And the forfeit win for Douglas was in no way Shawns fault; the guy was injured. When you're injured, you don't wrestle.

Why not? Everyone else does? In fact, wasn't HBK injured at Wrestlemania 14 as well?

So the majority of the time, he drops the title cleanly. And we all know HBK was fucked up on roids and painkillers as well as fucked up on a serious power trip with quite a bit of immaturity in the 90s. Of course he refused to put some people over; mainly Bret Hart. However, he has changed his ways since then, and he isn't even capable of refusing to drop the title to someone anymore.

He doesn't drop the title cleanly the majority of the time. He's dropped cleanly to Janetty, Sid, Austin, and his last World Title reign to HHH (the Euro title doesn't count, and I think you understand why). And, like I said earlier, three of those are HBK's good buddies, and the other was from fear of a beating.

I read this some where else, and I think it was a great example of the biggest problem with Michaels and his ability to get out of jobbing.

Winning a title is a pinnacle moment in a guys career. You take the current champion to the limit and beat him clean, you're set (of course assume there's decent follow up booking), but if you're handed a belt because the current champ "lost his smile" or win a hastily tossed together battle royal because the current champion just refuses to lose to any of creatives choices, that "crowning" moment tends to lose its luster.

I'd dare say Randy Savage's first WWF Title reign was marred by the fact that he didn't beat the current (or even any recent) champion in route to the victory. Having Hogan and Andre take each other out, and going through mostly midcarders (Gang, Reed, Valentine) before beating DiBiase (who'd never hold a world title) played as almost a footnote to the "bigger" story of the on-going Andre vs Hogan feud. Savage being Savage did a wonderful job, and made his reign memorable by the end, but the way it started, made it for more challenging than it should have been.

Most title reigns are remembered for the moment they began and ended. Most Michaels reigns began with the heroic, over-coming all odds super face victory, yet 8 of 12 ended with lost smiles, finger pokes and strippings.

Shane Douglas is one of the most forgotten WWF Intercontinental Champions because, despite carrying the title, he never won it and many tend to blame the mess that was WM13 on Michaels walking away from the title because of his refusal to drop it back to Bret.

The champions that following him are put in a very tough position of trying to have a credible title reign, when not get that "championship" moment that Michaels himself always seems to get whenever he touches a title.

Heck, look at the World Heavyweight title even. It wasn't until HHH dropped the title and then regained it that he, and more importantly, that title were seen as credible.

You can never have too many "boyhood dreams" and "18 year journeys".

A guy getting handed a belt because the current champions only goal is putting himself over is going to have a serious uphill battle.

Shawn Michaels is easily this industry's most selfish performer.

Now, admittedly this guy pretty much hates Shawn Michaels, but the point he makes is pretty spot on.

 

[mabuza]

Bret Hart was a better technical wrestler than Shawn.However I feel that Shawn was the better brawler and was far more entertaining.He was able to job to someone and still save face,because noone crahed&burned quite like Shawn,and the fans loved it.

 

[salopstick]

would it surprise anybody if in a few years montreal comes out as a worked shoot.

this year is the 10th anniversary of montreal and people are still talking about it, how many other storylines can we say of this.

bret is understandably pissed with vince for owen (RIP) but has now made a career out of the screwjob, and it still gives him an out for his loss to hbk

 

[thething91]

HBK is the best i definately choose him over bret hart, but i like kane and john cena too, also ric flair, bobby lashley, finlay, the hardy's and undertaker. etc.

 

[reddevil69]

Bret Hart was a better technical wrestler than Shawn.However I feel that Shawn was the better brawler and was far more entertaining.He was able to job to someone and still save face,because noone crahed&burned quite like Shawn,and the fans loved it.

Shawn was the better brawler?...are you serious?....Bret Hart threw the best worked punches ever with the exception of the Undertaker and i'll throw Austin in there as well...Shawn has never been a brawler and you're the first person i've ever heard make reference to that....Shawn is a flyer and a high spot guy, not a brawler or a technician and he does way too many Flair chops since coming back in 2002...that's because he and HHH and Flair are all a nice cozy bunch backstage now though....

 

[Slyfox696]

Yeah, Shawn has never even really been a "good" brawler. Now, he's better at an up-tempo, high-flying match, but not a brawler. Bret was certainly better at that.

 

[reddevil69]

In addition to Taker's quote, I also believe HBK himself has admitted that Taker was backstage taping up his fists, a clear sign that HBK better do business. I believe that was in the Heartbreak and Triumph book. But, I'll ask my fried about that. She's obsessed with HBK and knows more than anyone I know.

He also won it back from his friend 3 weeks later...

And yet, he still didn't have to job it out...

Another vacated title...

The third title being vacated in a row...seems to be a trend starting here...

Convenient that something always happens to Michaels when it's his turn to job...

If he's dropping it for his friend, then yeah kind of. In the wrestling business if you only put over your friends, you don't last long.

Was this when HBK "lost his smile"? And, the ending for the rematch was not dangerous to the knee. Hart has even made public the very layout he wanted to use, and how it would work his injury into a storyline.

So, how many times has he vacated the title now? I've lost count.

Isn't Shawn good buddies with HHH?

I believe this has sufficiently been addressed now.

HHH is good buddy, and was the much bigger star.

Cleanly to the Hardys? HBK eliminated himself when he eliminated Cena. How was this dropping the belt cleanly?


Why not? Everyone else does? In fact, wasn't HBK injured at Wrestlemania 14 as well?


He doesn't drop the title cleanly the majority of the time. He's dropped cleanly to Janetty, Sid, Austin, and his last World Title reign to HHH (the Euro title doesn't count, and I think you understand why). And, like I said earlier, three of those are HBK's good buddies, and the other was from fear of a beating.

I read this some where else, and I think it was a great example of the biggest problem with Michaels and his ability to get out of jobbing.



Now, admittedly this guy pretty much hates Shawn Michaels, but the point he makes is pretty spot on.

yes the guy does hit it spot on...you cannot dispute that logic at all.....titles and title matches are meant to be used to launch a performer to the next level or to push the current title holder to greater heights or to acknowledge an already credible performer's contribution's to the industry by symbolically putting them on the top of the roster, like Undertaker's win at Mania this year.......when you are the champ and are supposed to do the honors for someone it is a huge deal....there are alot of guy's from that era mentioned above that were upset backstage at Mania 4 because they thought that Hogan was infinging on Savage's moment by trying to re-direct the spotlight on himself at the end of the event....WM 4 was Savage's night and i always felt that there was this small cloud over it because of Hogan...i remember thinking, why does Savage need Hogan out here to help him win?....but as mentioned above, after a 13 month title reign, Savage proved to everyone he was worthy of being the champion and could carry the promotion and draw good houses...(why he's not in the HOF and does not have a DVD collection out is beyond ridiculous, but that's for another thread)....Shawn's title reigns are marred in controversy no matter what angle you look at it....nobody is that injured all the time or not "feeling the business anymore" every time they are supposed to put the title up at an event...it does seem very suspect...and HBK has the audacity in his book to say that Bret was inflexible and selfish?...i've said this before: let's see Shawn lay down for Yokozuna, (a guy who clearly was not someone who could carry the company), after pulling the wagon for 5 months as champ only to have Hogan come in and somehow after 30 seconds work,end up with the title....Bret agreed to that outcome, he didn't piss and moan and politick to keep the Belt and he didn't have a tummy ache or lose his smile or develop an injury to keep him from doing the job...he showed up for work and did what he was asked to do....Shawn even says in his book that he remembers speaking with Bret at the time about it and bret was not happy about it at all, and Shawn agreed to him that it was a bullshit deal...and for all the people who say that this is only about ability between the two, i could not disagree more....being a wrestler is not just about how you conduct yourself inside the ring, but also how you conduct yourself outside the ring and backstage as well...No One likes an asshole, i certainly don't want to knowingly support somebody who i think is a jag-off in reality and help them earn a living....

 

[debisib]

Yea shawn just has way too much downside in and out of the ring...

From his lack of ability to throw solid punches alll the way to his backstage demeanor, his inability to carry the company without help, and his weak hand in Vinces back pocket.... all of these things contribute too much to say hes better than bret..

Sure bret was kind of a lil bitch, but with reason, he held himself better, hes never had a bad match in WWF, his most miniscule moves looked painful, and he didnt use his power to push around the company... he lost to a lot of scrubs through his career...

 

[X]

You seem to think that HBK gets to choose who he loses to and how storylines go. That is complete bullshit Slyfox, granted when the Kliq was at their strongest in 95-97 he had significant pull backstage, however he never had a creative clause such as Hogan & Bret did. The only power he had was his star power with his buddies.

You honestly believe that Vince McMahon, the guy who has never taken shit from anyone, is going to lie down and say "Ok Shawn you get to decide everything and I'll play no part at all"? Bullshit is all I'll say, complete bullshit. Almost every single one of the vacated titles were because of STORYLINES. As in those things written monthes in advance and planned for?

Seriously, how is he responsible in any way for the vacated titles? Those weren't his decisions; they were Vinces. Just as when he was suspended for using steroids, it was VINCE'S decision to vacate the title, not Shawn's.

And why again can't you drop titles to people you are friends with? Because most people are friends backstage, infact almost all wrestlers usually are. You could say the same thing about almost any champion dropping the title to his "friends". Further more every time he dropped the titles to his friends, it was because of STORYLINES WRITTEN IN ADVANCE. How many times must I clarify this?

When your boss tells you to drop the title to someone, even if they're your friend, you do it. How is that selfish in any shape way or form? All of the times he's vacated a title or dropped it to a buddy it was because of a long feud being drawn out.

Granted, HBK screwed Bret. That's common knowledge. But everything else is just bullshit. You could say the same about Mick Foley, considering he dropped the title every time to personal friends of his. But yet where is all the controversy and name calling of Foley? Oh yeah there is none.

being a wrestler is not just about how you conduct yourself inside the ring, but also how you conduct yourself outside the ring and backstage as well...No One likes an asshole, i certainly don't want to knowingly support somebody who i think is a jag-off in reality and help them earn a living....

That's total and complete bullshit. Your backstage work does not affect your ability or worth as a wrestler, otherwise Hogan would be regarded as one of the worst wrestlers to ever live. HBK used to be one of the biggest assholes in the biz. Understood. He has changed however and grown up, just as we all do. There is zero point in mulling over this past, and it plays absolutely no role in judging his worth as a WRESTLER.

 

[Slyfox696]

You seem to think that HBK gets to choose who he loses to and how storylines go. That is complete bullshit Slyfox, granted when the Kliq was at their strongest in 95-97 he had significant pull backstage, however he never had a creative clause such as Hogan & Bret did. The only power he had was his star power with his buddies.

You know, you say a lot of things are bullshit...like every one of my posts.

You honestly believe that Vince McMahon, the guy who has never taken shit from anyone, is going to lie down and say "Ok Shawn you get to decide everything and I'll play no part at all"? Bullshit is all I'll say, complete bullshit. Almost every single one of the vacated titles were because of STORYLINES. As in those things written monthes in advance and planned for?

And, you honestly believe that it is a mere coincidence that of the 12 titles he's held, he's only layed down to lose 4 of them? And, three of them were to good buddies?

And why again can't you drop titles to people you are friends with? Because most people are friends backstage, infact almost all wrestlers usually are. You could say the same thing about almost any champion dropping the title to his "friends".

Except that, with the exception of his encounter to Austin, he has never dropped the belt to someone whom he wasn't close with. He's done it for his best friends, but not for anyone else.

When your boss tells you to drop the title to someone, even if they're your friend, you do it. How is that selfish in any shape way or form? All of the times he's vacated a title or dropped it to a buddy it was because of a long feud being drawn out.

Name me two other people that have had as many titles without having to truly get beat in half of them?

Granted, HBK screwed Bret. That's common knowledge. But everything else is just bullshit. You could say the same about Mick Foley, considering he dropped the title every time to personal friends of his. But yet where is all the controversy and name calling of Foley? Oh yeah there is none.

Foley puts people over. *shrugs*

And, it's not name-calling. It's just stating facts. And, it's too big of a coincidence that in his 12 titles, he's only had to lay down for 4 of them.

That's total and complete bullshit. Your backstage work does not affect your ability or worth as a wrestler, otherwise Hogan would be regarded as one of the worst wrestlers to ever live. HBK used to be one of the biggest assholes in the biz. Understood. He has changed however and grown up, just as we all do. There is zero point in mulling over this past, and it plays absolutely no role in judging his worth as a WRESTLER.

This is true. HBK nowadays, minus a few instances, seems to have grown up immensely. He still has his moments, but supposedly is much better than he used to be. I'll give him credit for that, no doubt.

But, it still doesn't change the fact that Bret was the better wrestler.

 

[BRandonkin]

Michaels first loss was against rival Marty. They were not friends after Marty felt Michaels betrayed him with walking out of WWF. They really disliked each other at that time. Some going as far as to say the kick on the Barbershop was stiff and caused a concussion.

Michaels tested positive for steroids. Nash, HBK, Vince have gone on record to say that. Michaels was stripped of the title. How can that be fake. That is 2 of the eight title vacancies gone already.

When Diesel and HBK vacated the tag titles, it was the beginning of the Big Daddy Cool era and was ultimately a push for both of them to rise to the top. Back when the WWE wasn't having guys hog the title and main event, Bret had headlined Wrestlemania 9 and 10. Michaels got the push and Diesel became champ and Michaels got his Royal Rumble winning. Their forfeit started and great Tag Tournament won by a Kliq member and Bob Holly.

The I-C match after his lose to Diesel at 11. I know we are not saying the beating in Syracuse were fake when Bulldog and a few others ran from the attack and got Michaels help. The Dean Douglass angle was as real as they come and that is nuts to say that was fake when that was a legitimate injury. This is why the WWE can talk about all the concussion Michaels had. This was the first and led to the Hart Angle as well

The second Tag Team one Michaels was I-C champ why have two titles. Just like Michaels would lose the Euro. Just like DIesel lost the I-C belt back to Ramon while Tag champs. No need to hold 2 titles.

The Stone Cold and HBK tag title run was seperated so that the Hart Foundation, Stone cold, HBK and taker could fued with one another. Why have to main eventers holding tag gold. ( Did not understand that about rated RKO)

The comeback of Michaels was incredible. And he won the title at Wrestlemania 12. Now these 2 world title losses are suspect to me as well. Ironically he did loose and when it back in San Antonio and the second he lost his smiled. Yet Bret still did not win the title. Undertaker won it and Bret got his feud started with Austin. Some may say that karma hit Bret and Michaels because Austin took WWE further than them two ever could. Michaels lost at 14 was because of taker both ways. Cause Undertaker injured Michaels back and because he threatened to hurt Michaels.

I count 4( European one was funny but still suspect) suspect losses. 4 to further a story line. 4 Foley and the rock and all them talk about the actual screwjob and how bogus HBK was for particpating in that. The Rock about how bad Michaels attitude was as even he and HHH admit he was an angry little man.

The politics of wrestling does not take away from the popularity Michaels experience in that period. In Your house when the fans broke the barricade to hug Michaels. He was next in line for the title run. they had so much power because no one stable had ever rivaled their popularity. Michaels had some classic just like Bret. And in the ring they go point from point. I mean the iron man match, HBK is a great counter hold wrestler and a great high flyer and spot man while Bret is a technical force and know moves that not eve Vince knows. I give the edge to Michaels because of the continued support he has always had. They way he has always gather my attention. The way he has always stole the show no matter what spot he was in. He set the groundwork for the hardy's, the edges, the ortons. There are not to many wrestlers with personality that Bret has really inspired. After all I started watching because of HBK. And fourteen years later I still cheer for HBK

I

 

[reddevil69]

You seem to think that HBK gets to choose who he loses to and how storylines go. That is complete bullshit Slyfox, granted when the Kliq was at their strongest in 95-97 he had significant pull backstage, however he never had a creative clause such as Hogan & Bret did. The only power he had was his star power with his buddies.

You honestly believe that Vince McMahon, the guy who has never taken shit from anyone, is going to lie down and say "Ok Shawn you get to decide everything and I'll play no part at all"? Bullshit is all I'll say, complete bullshit. Almost every single one of the vacated titles were because of STORYLINES. As in those things written monthes in advance and planned for?

Seriously, how is he responsible in any way for the vacated titles? Those weren't his decisions; they were Vinces. Just as when he was suspended for using steroids, it was VINCE'S decision to vacate the title, not Shawn's.

And why again can't you drop titles to people you are friends with? Because most people are friends backstage, infact almost all wrestlers usually are. You could say the same thing about almost any champion dropping the title to his "friends". Further more every time he dropped the titles to his friends, it was because of STORYLINES WRITTEN IN ADVANCE. How many times must I clarify this?

When your boss tells you to drop the title to someone, even if they're your friend, you do it. How is that selfish in any shape way or form? All of the times he's vacated a title or dropped it to a buddy it was because of a long feud being drawn out.

Granted, HBK screwed Bret. That's common knowledge. But everything else is just bullshit. You could say the same about Mick Foley, considering he dropped the title every time to personal friends of his. But yet where is all the controversy and name calling of Foley? Oh yeah there is none.



That's total and complete bullshit. Your backstage work does not affect your ability or worth as a wrestler, otherwise Hogan would be regarded as one of the worst wrestlers to ever live. HBK used to be one of the biggest assholes in the biz. Understood. He has changed however and grown up, just as we all do. There is zero point in mulling over this past, and it plays absolutely no role in judging his worth as a WRESTLER.

Bret had "reasonable creative control" for the last 30 days of his contract for 1997...that means that in all 14 years with the company he had control for 1 month at the end of his final contract and it stated that the company had to be reasonable with him, not that he had complete say in what the outcome of his matches were..i don't see how Bret could have any more stroke with Vince than shawn had between 1994 and 1997.....Shawn losing his smile and subsequent injury were not planned months in advance, but HBK vs. Bret for WM13 was and Shawn pulled that stunt because he didn't want to drop the belt to Bret....how do explain that he was back in the ring 6 weeks later after a "serious knee injury" and now in 2007 he's going to miss 6 months with the same injury, a knee injury....and i'm quite sure he didn't go to Vince and say, "i'm not dropping the belt to Bret, fuck you"....he most likely went to him and explained that he was hurt and burned out, so what is vince going to do, fire him?...you can't force a guy to work if he's hurt...i'm sure Shawn was injured but not to the degree that he claims, all of the things surrounding that situation including statements made by other wrestlers that were there at the time just don't hold water....i'm not claiming it as fact, i'm just saying that if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it's more than likely a duck.....there's an old saying that if you can walk into the building and forfeit you're title then you can walk to the ring and do the job...it doesn't have to be pretty, but you can have a 3 minute match on Raw and do the job....Undertaker tore his bicep last month and waited 9 days to have a match on smackdown with Batista, and did it in a cage no less and still went 20 minutes, before dropping the belt to Edge....why couldn't Shawn put someone over on Raw instead of his "smile speech"?...he could have dropped it to Taker or Vader or Austin or Sid again instead of forfeiting it...Bret won it at the four way and dropped it to Sid the next night so he could do business with Austin and so that Undertaker could get the belt at Mania...Shawn could have just as easily walked out to the ring for a match the same night of his speech and they could have done an angle where they play on the knee injury,someone interferes after a few minutes or where Sid just thrashes him and takes the belt...instead we have to hear how he's lost his smile and he misses his friends who are down in WCW...well if you lost your smile and passion for the business then leave and stop taking the fan's money...don't cry hurt and return 6 weeks later (after mania) with a miraculously healed knee....


i'm not saying that it affects the worth of a wrestler or their ability, i'm saying that it taints the performer somewhat knowing that they are a jerk in real life.....i never liked Hogan even at 10 yrs old but as i grew older and found out what an ass he is and how he tried to decide the way in which certain guys earned a living, i disliked him even more...the fact is that until the whole incident with Shawn and Bret, there was no real substantial information to lead anyone to believe that Bret was an asshole and difficult to work with....there was alot of negative press for Shawn and all of it has been substantiated at one time or another by respected wrestlers like Foley, Taker, Hennig, The Rock, and Austin....all the negative things had an affect on the way many people viewed Shawn including myself...i thought he was a tremendous performer but i also thought he was a jerk who didn't deserve and appreciate his place in life, and from reading his book that is exactly how he described himself during that time...that kind of shit did not make me want to root for him, the same way i don't want Barry Bond's to break Hank Aarons's record(even though he will)because he's a shitty person and treats his teammates like dog shit and acts like a primadonna...i'm not disputing the fact that he's a great ball player.....and yes Shawn's a changed man now by all accounts, good for him...he is still a great performer as well, good for us, the fans...


Foley had 3 titles and dropped two the Rock, who is NOT a personal "friend" of his...they got along but were not friends, they came together to do business and make money....Foley was very upset with Rocky after the Rumble 99 match and did not speak with him for nearly 2 years after that match..... the 3rd title he dropped to HHH and they are not friends either...there is no love lost between the two and to this day there are reports of HHH trying to railroad Foley's current ideas for matches....i don't see where you get the Foley comparison at all....

 

[Big Ace]

People, people, people. *Sigh*

When did this become a thread about how used more creative control? I thought this was about ''Who's the better all-around wrestler?'' not that. I didn't think people were supposed to know about backstage things. I've stated it once, Shawn Michaels did his job. Bret Hart did his job. They were both two of the greatest wrestlers that I've ever seen, if not THE greatest.

But, there must be a winner. There is no tie. In my opinion, HBK had better mic skills and could adjust his style to Bret Hart. Bret, was always lacking in that area. He always stuck to mat wrestling and never became a brawler. I liked him at the same time for that. Had HBK been a horrible wrestler like some people say, then Bret Hart vs Shawn Michaels at WrestleMania 12 wouldn't have been one of the best matches of all-time.

 

[Slyfox696]

But, there must be a winner. There is no tie. In my opinion, HBK had better mic skills and could adjust his style to Bret Hart. Bret, was always lacking in that area. He always stuck to mat wrestling and never became a brawler. I liked him at the same time for that. Had HBK been a horrible wrestler like some people say, then Bret Hart vs Shawn Michaels at WrestleMania 12 wouldn't have been one of the best matches of all-time.

Two things...

1) When was HBK ever a good brawler?

2) Watch Wrestlemania 13 vs. Steve Austin and tell me he can't work a brawling match.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Personally I'm on the side of shite. Two of the greates performers in WWF/E history. Two wrestlers who could probably go all out for an hour. At the biggest show of the year. And it bored the shit out of me. Seriously I think this could be the worst Mania main event of all time. Hogan matches suck. But at least they dont go on for over an hour. HBK was in his prime. Hart was just inching past his. But both could have put on an absolute classic. The thought of them wrestling for a whole hour is a dream. But there's only short bursts of fast paced action. Ok they if they had gone a full hour at full pace they would have blown themselves out. But they barley broke a sweat. They didn't even attempt to get a fast paced match going. They didn't even do the mat work of somebody like Brian Danielson.

If somebody as limited as The Rock can go out for an hour and entertain than HBK & Hart should have been able to.

 

[roach]

agreed!. i got into wrestling as the attitude era was starting, so i never really watched bret hart wrestle. but i have saw him on videos and youtube etc. so when i bought the history of the wwe championship i was so excited at the potential of this match, even though i knew the winner. i was watchin it and it is mostly punches, clotheslines and submissions. it got good at the last 5 minutes when they both went for finishers, and bret having the sharpshooter on for felt for ages when watchin it.

i also think a main reason for the boringness is because there was no pinfalls in the match until it was put to sudden death when it took only 1 and a half minutes of quick wrestling.

i think they should of had the first 20-30 minutes like it was, pretty slow, but have it gradually spring to life with pinfalls getting more rapid as it got to the end, and then have hbk winning 4-3 or 5-4 and then bret hart locking on the sharpshooter with 45 seconds to go, and then in the last 10 seconds hbk taps, and hart thinks hes retained it, only for the re-match at the end and for hbk to win after all

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I totally agree on the veiw on this match...yes you cant expect two guys to go all out for an entire hour, but these two had each other in headlocks for what had to be at least half of this match...I watched it live on PPV when i was little, and i fell asleep during it....I wouldve much rather seen them just go at it in a best 2 of 3 falls match or something of that sort, instead of this..dissappointing, probably the two best guys to ever go in a wwe ring, and this is what we got...im sure someone on here has seen their survivor series match (the screw job) but I havent, can anyone tell me if it was any better than this bore???

 

[reddevil69]

I totally agree on the veiw on this match...yes you cant expect two guys to go all out for an entire hour, but these two had each other in headlocks for what had to be at least half of this match...I watched it live on PPV when i was little, and i fell asleep during it....I wouldve much rather seen them just go at it in a best 2 of 3 falls match or something of that sort, instead of this..dissappointing, probably the two best guys to ever go in a wwe ring, and this is what we got...im sure someone on here has seen their survivor series match (the screw job) but I havent, can anyone tell me if it was any better than this bore???

the screw job match is not a great match...ok at best....the best match that Bret and Shawn ever had was at survivor series 1992....Shawn was IC champ and Bret was WWF champ....they went around 25 minutes and it was great....if you can find it you need to watch it...

 

[reddevil69]

Two things...

1) When was HBK ever a good brawler?

2) Watch Wrestlemania 13 vs. Steve Austin and tell me he can't work a brawling match.

i could not agree with you more...

 

[Skillz]

This match in my opinion is one of the greatest matches of all time, and my personal favorite WrestleMania main event. If you think this match was boring then you really don't understand the story of the match. This was the first time ever in WWE that a match was going to be one full hour. Logic only tells you that if you know you're going to be wrestling for an hour, you have to pace yourself, it would be stupid to go full bore the whole match because you'd just get burned out, which is why there were a lot of rest holds. This match was simply amazing, and if you think there wasn't much action you are very wrong. Both Hart and Michaels pulled off all the moves in their arsenal, and also moves they've never done before. There were also many high spots too, which were timed to perfection. The psychology of the match was perfect, everything about the match was perfect.

 

[hbk&triple h]

Shawn Michaels is way more of a brawler than Hart is even if Shawn doesn't come across as the brawler type.Thats literally the only match that Bret ever had where he became a brawler.

Bret sticks to more of mat based skills and chopping down his opponent.

Shawn has been in plenty of matches where he has punched and chopped his opponent many times.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

This match in my opinion is one of the greatest matches of all time,

Seriously? Have you ever seen any Tom Billington matches.

If you think this match was boring then you really don't understand the story of the match. This was the first time ever in WWE that a match was going to be one full hour.

I totally get the story of the match. They told a story and I apreciate it. Thing is the match was still boring. I'm not saying it was a bad match. It was a good match. Just boring.

Logic only tells you that if you know you're going to be wrestling for an hour, you have to pace yourself, it would be stupid to go full bore the whole match because you'd just get burned out, which is why there were a lot of rest holds.

True but they didn't do anything really that would blow them out. There were the occasional slice of action. But thats it. Flair used to do it every night. And in my opinion HBK is vastly superior and Hart is equally as good as Flair. So I'm sure they could have managed a bit more movement. It was Wrestle Mania.

This match was simply amazing, and if you think there wasn't much action you are very wrong.

Really? For an hour long match there isn't much action at all.

Both Hart and Michaels pulled off all the moves in their arsenal, and also moves they've never done before.

Then there not as great as people would have you believe. Lesnar, Angle, Rock, HHH etc managed the same why cant they. They should have thought up some more moves. They should have been better prepared.

There were also many high spots too, which were timed to perfection.

Many high spots? Name me 10. I was an hour long match after all.

The psychology of the match was perfect, everything about the match was perfect.

Nobody can debate that.

 

[hbk&triple h]

This match is a classic in my view.I mean it may have been slow for the majority of the time but how often do we get to see two guys go at it for an hour at Wrestlemania?Not often.

And how often do we actually get to see a main event with actuall technical wrestling?Not very often either.

You expect them to go out there and just start blazing through the match.They would kill themselves.

The way the match went was perfect.WE had amazing mat wrestling, some high spots, the injuries were sold, and we just had a plain ol' good match.

 

[curlerdude61]

Bret Hart is the best. By far HBK has his upsides ill admit that but his matches are the same over and over again. And frankly the whole DX thing back in the 90s was childish and terrible it was a way to try and get people to watch over WCW and the nWo. Bret is, was and always will be the greatest wrestler ever. and the WWE blew that with the Montreal Screwjob.

Comparisons:
Championship reigns(all promotions): Micheals 17 Bret Hart 31

Micheals part of the best and worst stable of all time(imo) DX lasted from 1997 - 1998 then summer of 2006 - january 2007, Hart part of the stable the Hart Foundation from 1984 - 1997

Micheals Wrestling from 1986- current with a 4 year injury break in 1998 Hart: 1976 - 2000 with no extended injury breaks

And to finish off Hart never truly lost the world championship of the promotion he was on when he left(vacated WCW title due to injury which led to retirement in 2000 and Screwed by McMahon, Micheals, and Earl Hebner in 1997 in Montreal) Micheals also lost almost all of his Canadian fanbase due to the Montreal Screwjob.

HART > micheals