Should Vince have dumped Shawn Michaels in 1997?

[Coco]

My understanding of the Montreal Screwjob, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Bret was gradually nudged out the door to WCW because Vince was siding politically with those who were against Bret and this happened under the illusion that money problems meant Vince couldn't pay Bret his contract (something I believe is one of many lies). Now this thread isn't about who was right and wrong and whether Bret had the right to refuse that job to Michaels, but whether Bret was the right guy to push out the door. Bret was making money oversees still and boosted ratings with his anti-American storyline (once again, correct me if I'm wrong). Meanwhile, Shawn killed business across the board (not just the Monday night war ratings, but across the board... correct me if I'm wrong) during his run on top in 1996. If Bret getting pushed out of the company was to ease tensions backstage or make Michaels and his allies happy... was Bret the right guy to let go? Wouldn't it have been objectively better to get rid of Shawn if one had to go?

This has never made sense to me. Assuming you don't know that business was going to explode in a few months, wasn't Bret the safer guy to keep from a business standpoint?

 

[UltimoDragon]

Bret was on a massive long term contract and very old school wrestling. HBK was the up and comer and rode the heat from Montreal to keep his push going.

While I respect Bret, you do right by the business. Can't see Daniels or a Taker bitching about it. Hell, Taker encouraged Mr.......Injured....Injured.... to piledrive him but Bret's ego wouldn't let him drop it in Canada.

He could have used the ' I was robbed ' gimmick in the WCW phase but couldnt really say HBK did anything bad. Bret Screwed the WWF so they Screwed him back worse than Hayes did to Colt Cabana

 

[jericho3150]

The answer is....no. Vince was changing direction of the company and Shawn was a big part of that.


Shawn wasn't the biggest draw but honestly neither was Bret.. remember that Bret headlined not only least purchased WWE PPV of all time but also co-mainevented the least bought wrestlemania of all time as well..Back then it was an ensemble cast and not a single person... Its just simple math to understand that Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Diesel, Razor Ramon and Undertaker drew bigger numbers than Shawn Michaels and Undertaker.

Bret was on the way out and Shawn and DX and Austin and WWF Attitude was the future of the company.

 

[FoleyIsGod]

I'd say no.

bret left the WWE, elaving it without one of its biggest stars. Vince saw the reaction HBK got over the incident, which in turn helped the rise of Austin. First by fueding with HBk, then Vince himself

As much as I like Bret, he is as much to blame as Vince for the whole shinanigans in Montreal. If the company says you drop the belt, you drop the belt, end of chat.

 

[Slam Master]

That is no way true. If you read Bret's book, Vince came to him and said he could afford to pay him and that money wasn't the issue. The storylines he laid out for Bret's future and the overall direction of the company were against Bret's liking; he had him losing to HBK 3 more times including Montreal before beating HBK for the belt, only to drop it to Austin at WM14, which meant he was no longer the top guy...For Bret is was about Bret, and not what was good for business. Bret wanted to stick with hero vs villain when the audience was ready for something new and exciting.

Shawn took all the heel heat when the started DX and that was the road to save the company..HBK didn't draw in 96 cus he was the only main-event guy on the card at the time besides Undertaker, and he hadn't even become champ yet...There was no way ONE GUY could compete with the entire nWo angle and edgy storylines that the WCW was doing when the WWF was still in cartoon land. He was putting his heart and soul into his matches, and if you watch them he flies around the ring and takes wickid bumps and high risks...Its amazing he's still doing it today really.

 

[Karnuj]

With the kind of performances shawn was bringing to the table at that time I think it would have been really dangerous to have HBK set loose. sure going to WcW he would have needed a new gimmick-ish but his style matches and his bretheren in the NWO at the time vince would have had the adverse affect of the monday night wars if he released shawn and not bret in my honest opinion.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

The Fact is Vince Mcmahon is not a push over, remember when Jeff Jarrett refused to drop the IC belt to china if Vince didn't pay him a screwpulas amount before departing for WCW?, Vince never spoke of Jeff again and didnt want him to any part of the WWE.

Or the Ultimate Warrior stating that he wont take part in a main event double feature at summerslam two minutes before doors opening if Vince didnt pay him what he asked for?.

Basically the list is endless, Vince has always reacted the same in all circumstances and that is to make sure the guilty party leaves, Bret wanted more money, Vince did what he could to stop Bret from going to WCW but then realised he couldnt come up with the same money and told bret to go, bret then refused to drop the belt, in the end Vince did what he felt was good for the business and IMO anyone who states otherwise needs to see both sides, whatever shawn and brett had against one another dont attempt to blame the company for it, or attempt to take it to a level where the company suffers, so one of them had to go and the best person IMO was brett, look what he did in WCW, he achieved absolutly nothing whilst shawn ushered in the reign of stone cold steve austin, the man who helped WWE skyrocket to the top.

 

[Coco]

Bret was on a massive long term contract and very old school wrestling. HBK was the up and comer and rode the heat from Montreal to keep his push going.

Bret drew more than Shawn. Fuck this "up and comer" bullshit. If one had to bite a bullet, the objective choice for business was Shawn.

While I respect Bret, you do right by the business. Can't see Daniels or a Taker bitching about it. Hell, Taker encouraged Mr.......Injured....Injured.... to piledrive him but Bret's ego wouldn't let him drop it in Canada.

It had nothing to do with Canada. He told Shawn he'd drop the belt to him and Shawn acted like a prick and said he wouldn't do the same. Bret stood up against Shawn, not against losing in Canada particularly. If Shawn would have done him a favor, he would have done the same for Shawn on Raw. He would have done the honors in Montreal if it had been Austin or Taker. Shawn's disrespect for Bret and the business are what Bret was protesting.

But most importantly, Bret had creative control. Vince not doing it Bret's way is breach of contract.

The answer is....no. Vince was changing direction of the company and Shawn was a big part of that.

Shawn wasn't needed. Hunter would have kept talking about his cock on TV, Bret would have put Austin over, life would go on, and the Attitude Era would still happen.

Shawn wasn't the biggest draw but honestly neither was Bret.. remember that Bret headlined not only least purchased WWE PPV of all time but also co-mainevented the least bought wrestlemania of all time as well..Back then it was an ensemble cast and not a single person... Its just simple math to understand that Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Diesel, Razor Ramon and Undertaker drew bigger numbers than Shawn Michaels and Undertaker.

Shawn and Taker had a decent enough supporting cast in 1996 in Golddust, Camp Cornette, and Mankind. I don't see why this is an excuse. Shawn's time on top and Bret being off did bad business. Once Bret got hot again, business got better. I see what's at work there. Don't you?

Bret was on the way out and Shawn and DX and Austin and WWF Attitude was the future of the company.

So those extra couple months for Shawn made that era? 'Cause I'm sure Austin was gonna get over just as strong without Shawn.

That is no way true. If you read Bret's book, Vince came to him and said he could afford to pay him and that money wasn't the issue.

Until about September. At that point (may have been later) Bret was told he was getting the majority of his money on the back end of his deal because cash was tight and was outright encouraged to talk with WCW. That is Vince pushing Bret out, for no good reason. The money was there and Bret didn't want to leave Vince. He was pushed out.

With the kind of performances shawn was bringing to the table at that time I think it would have been really dangerous to have HBK set loose. sure going to WcW he would have needed a new gimmick-ish but his style matches and his bretheren in the NWO at the time vince would have had the adverse affect of the monday night wars if he released shawn and not bret in my honest opinion.

Shawn isn't a big enough draw to really help WCW and match quality doesn't equate to a draw. Shawn leaving wouldn't have done anything to help WCW.

 

[Nate DaMac]

You definitely have a point man. Bret was still a huge draw overseas, while Shawn never really gained any drawing power until the reincarnation of DX not too long ago. Still, without Shawn sticking around, Hunter probably wouldn't have become what he is today. Your point is spot on, it was a huge risk to put everything on Shawn, but it was a risk that paid off. I disagree with your assessment of HHH though. Sure Austin would have gotten over eventually, but the future ensemble of DX that happened after Shawn left wouldn't have happened, thus Hunter likely wouldn't have been elevated the same way he was with Shawn by his side.

 

[Loveless]

Bret drew more than Shawn. Fuck this "up and comer" bullshit. If one had to bite a bullet, the objective choice for business was Shawn.

And yet strangely, Vince (a man who is known for prioritising money) backed Shawn every time. Wonder why? Well maybe it was because Shawn kept the WWF in business on his own while Bret was off sulking, or maybe it was because Bret had just turned 40 and Michaels at 32 had a lot more potential to bring future money in and would fit better with future plans. You're right, the objective choice is clear as day.

But most importantly, Bret had creative control. Vince not doing it Bret's way is breach of contract.

Creative control is saying "Hey, I'm not doing this, it's stupid and will damage my career" Creative control is not being allowed to dictate where, when and to who you drop the belt. Bret Hart was an employee who got far too big for his boots and deservedly got slapped down for it. You're an employee, you do what you're told.

Shawn wasn't needed. Hunter would have kept talking about his cock on TV, Bret would have put Austin over, life would go on, and the Attitude Era would still happen.

Hunter was no-one. HBK leaving would have been the final nail in the coffin of the WWE. Everyone who was watching because of him would have switched over, Leaving an ageing Bret, an on the up Austin and The Undertaker. Where do you go from there when Undertaker is busy with Kane? A fued that's already been done and is destined to be compared badly to WM 13.
Can't continue further, RAW is starting.

 

[RKOLEGACYRULZ]

well even if he did dump Shawn Michaels he would not be able to head to WCW when Vince McMoron did this along with HHH and HBK they lost someone who was stone of the WWF when WCW took him in ratings soared and all wrestling fans followed and tuned into WCW more coz WWE was nothing than!
HBK leaving will be the final nail in the coffin of the WWE. Everyone who was watching because of him will switched over when he heads to TNA! Since Kevin Nash wants his buddy there and there are talks he is not resigning with WWE since Michaels wants an easy schedule on himself and coz of his back TNA Is the place for him with a light schedule! I am not suprised if Batista heads to TNA also he is prone to injuries like Ken Kennedy was!

 

[langfora]

well even if he did dump Shawn Michaels he would not be able to head to WCW when Vince McMoron did this along with HHH and HBK they lost someone who was stone of the WWF when WCW took him in ratings soared and all wrestling fans followed and tuned into WCW more coz WWE was nothing than!
HBK leaving will be the final nail in the coffin of the WWE. Everyone who was watching because of him will switched over when he heads to TNA! Since Kevin Nash wants his buddy there and there are talks he is not resigning with WWE since Michaels wants an easy schedule on himself and coz of his back TNA Is the place for him with a light schedule! I am not suprised if Batista heads to TNA also he is prone to injuries like Ken Kennedy was!

are you serious?!? first of all, it would've been crazy for Michaels to be dropped, Bret Hart was getting stale, remarkable performer but stale. Michaels at that time was elevating his game and with the both of their ages factored in, the decision was a no brainer. WCW ratings did not soar when Bret hart arrived, in fact, they started to dip. HBK more than likely will retire with the WWE, why go to TNA ... he has nothing more to prove.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Now this is coming from a HUGE Bret Hart fan.

Shawn just fit in with the direction the company was going in when it trasitioned into the attitude era and was the right guy to keep. As much as I love bret he just didn't fit into the new mold of the company. The biggest reason is at the end of the day, it helped skyrocket the Attitude Era and help put an end to WCW.

 

[Deus1138]

I find so much of this discussion humorous because so many of you obviously only know of the Montreal Screwjob by what you have read on wikipedia and seen on forums. You didn't witness it first hand or you were too young to remember what really happened. Likewise, many of you are obviously too you young to remember the beginning of the WWF's attitude era, or what WWF was like before then.

Bret was always a midcarder. He may have been a high midcarder, but he was a midcarder. Michaels, HHH, and Austin were the main agents of bringing in the WWF's attitude era. Bret was feuding with Austin at the time. He was the face. This was when faces were baby faces and heels were heels. Funny thing was, people started cheering for Austin, the heel. That wasn't supposed to happen.

I respect Bret's skills, but he was never the money maker people like HHH and Michaels were. Really, how much money do you think the WWF made selling those $4 Hitman sunglasses? Compare that to the DX merchandise over the years.

 

[SinCityBlitz]

Now this is coming from a HUGE Bret Hart fan.

Shawn just fit in with the direction the company was going in when it trasitioned into the attitude era and was the right guy to keep. As much as I love bret he just didn't fit into the new mold of the company. The biggest reason is at the end of the day, it helped skyrocket the Attitude Era and help put an end to WCW.

I agree. Even though I loved the anti-USA Hart though. Great story line. But keeping HBK was the right choice considering the way the fed was headed.

Plus HBK would have been wayyy over in WCW while we saw what happened with Hart. The best thing Hart could have done was drop the title to HBK.

The breach of contract comment is a joke. You would have to go to court and try to convince a judge what "REASONABLE" creative control is. That's not going to work. Which is the REAL reason why Bret never sued. It would get laughed out of court.

 

[Nate DaMac]

You know what I find humorous? Someone having the balls to belittle us for discussing The Montreal Screwjob when you know jack shit more than anybody else. It's called a forum son. We can discuss any fucking thing we want. Furthermore, you discredit your own rant when you post inaccurate information. Those DX shirts were nothing compared to the merch Bret was pushing. Fact. The question was a hypothetical one. Obviously you just read thd title and ran your mouth. Vince letting Bret, an international superstar, go at the time over Shawn, a relative nobody at the time, could have been disasterous. In retrospect it was a good move, but at the time, it was definitely risky.

 

[jericho3150]

Shawn wasn't needed. Hunter would have kept talking about his cock on TV, Bret would have put Austin over, life would go on, and the Attitude Era would still happen.

Hunter wouldn't have gotten over like he did with the help of Shawn. And as for the Attitude Era going on like normal Im not to sure about... Shawn and Hunter pushed boundries of what could be done on TV.. DX and Austin were the foundation of what attitude was. Shawn and Hunter were the 2 main guys in Vinces ears at the time getting him to go in that direction.. Now if Shawn had left and Bret stayed Bret would have had a lot more power. He was a HUGE anti attitude guy and thought that wrestling was supposed to be aimed at kids.. Even in his book he blames Shawn for killing the business he loved... If Bret stayed and Shawn left the Attitude movement very well could have been aborted.

Shawn and Taker had a decent enough supporting cast in 1996 in Golddust, Camp Cornette, and Mankind. I don't see why this is an excuse. Shawn's time on top and Bret being off did bad business. Once Bret got hot again, business got better. I see what's at work there. Don't you?

You think Goldust and Mankind (before he got over) and Camp Cornette was even comparable to Shawn Michaels..Razor Ramon..Diesel..Bob Backlund..Jerry Lawler..Lex Luger..Yokozuna..Randy Savage...Mr Perfect..??

Its not an excuse..Its simply what happened... If Bret was such draw how come ratings didn't spike when he came back in late 96?? How come shows were he headlined are the worst drawing PPV's of all time?? How come ratings started dipping in WCW around the time he arrived??? How come Vince chose to get rid of him and let him go to WCW??? The answer was simple... BRET WASN"T A DRAW!! Brets time on top saw a steady and steep decline from the Hogan years... he was part of an ensemble cast.. most people watched WWF at that point because it was "The WWF" not because they couldn't wait to see what pirate or dentist or clown Bret would be facing..

So those extra couple months for Shawn made that era? 'Cause I'm sure Austin was gonna get over just as strong without Shawn.

He would have gotten over but I doubt it would have been as strong as the fued Shawn and Austin and Tyson built.. It was done great and was the perfect thing to launch "the austin era"

 

[BernacK6]

I find so much of this discussion humorous because so many of you obviously only know of the Montreal Screwjob by what you have read on wikipedia and seen on forums. You didn't witness it first hand or you were too young to remember what really happened. Likewise, many of you are obviously too you young to remember the beginning of the WWF's attitude era, or what WWF was like before then.

Bret was always a midcarder. He may have been a high midcarder, but he was a midcarder. Michaels, HHH, and Austin were the main agents of bringing in the WWF's attitude era. Bret was feuding with Austin at the time. He was the face. This was when faces were baby faces and heels were heels. Funny thing was, people started cheering for Austin, the heel. That wasn't supposed to happen.

I respect Bret's skills, but he was never the money maker people like HHH and Michaels were. Really, how much money do you think the WWF made selling those $4 Hitman sunglasses? Compare that to the DX merchandise over the years.

I only disagree with one point of your post...I don't think (nor do I want to start a debate over it) Bret Hart should ever be considered a high-midcarder at best. Bret Hart was the man to usher in the era of regular sized men holding the WWF Title. Think about it....before Bret, what regular sized dudes ever held the title? Savage was average by comparison to the beasts of his day (Hogan & Warrior, et al), Flair was the best wrestler at the time of his reign, and you'd have to go before WWF Mainstreamed the world to find regular sized men holding the top championship. Hart led to HBK, Austin, Angle, Guerrero, etc. All the guys that look like they could be our size could never have made that hurdle if Bret Hart didn't leap over it first. Bret Hart is one of the top 10 WWF Superstars of all time. He had very few peers in his prime in the ring. His run ended controversially, exactly how Vince McMahon had to make it end at that time.

Other than that point, I agree with you to the letter. 75% of this forum is not old enough to remember the Montreal Screwjob live. I watched it on scrambled PPV, but I was a teenager at the time and understood what was happening in front of my eyes (in scrambles of course). A real life break in kayfabe....very rare and something you'll never forget. The key to knowing anything about the Montreal Screwjob is to know that Vince McMahon was not going to be made a fool of again by a departing employee. Alundra Blayze (Medusa) made a giant impact in the Monday Night Wars by throwing Vince's property in a WCW trash can, and Bret was not going to be allowed to do the same thing. I don't agree with the ethics, and I think to this day that Bret was a man of his word and would have willingly dropped the title prior to his departure, but Vince wasn't going to take any chance on that.

 

[jericho3150]

Those DX shirts were nothing compared to the merch Bret was pushing. Fact.

Where did you get that from??? Brets merch highpoint was during WWF;s lowpoint... DX's merch was selling through the roof all through attitude.. second only to Austins..Im willing to bet ANYTHING that DX merch has outsold Brets..

Vince letting Bret, an international superstar, go at the time over Shawn, a relative nobody at the time, could have been disasterous. In retrospect it was a good move, but at the time, it was definitely risky.

Shawn Michaels was a relative unknown??? HBK was voted most popular wrestler of the year in 95 and 96.. He had 4 "match of the years".. He was very far from an unknown.

I love the international debate... Bret was popular over seas but it didn't translate into money... Its like when a band isn't selling well but they are very popular in Japan...

 

[MisterMondayNight]

With the Screwjob, it is my personal opinion that Bret should've lost the belt. However, the WWF should've let Bret lose it to anyone else but Michaels. Michaels never returned the favor after Wrestlemania 12, which he was supposed to at 13. Plus, he had zero respect for HBK and he would look bad losing to him in Canada, where he is super-over, and is seen as a hero. Why couldn't Vince have budged a little and had Bret lose the title to the Undertaker, Steve Austin, anybody, but Michaels? There were more over people in the WWE at the time. The Undertaker wasn't doing anything at the time, he didn't have a match at SS. Have him beat Bret, then he loses to Michaels at the Royal Rumble for the title, with interference from Kane and continue on as normal. Bret had the utmost respect for 'Taker, and he probably wouldn't have a problem putting him over, making everyone happy. Vince doesn't have egg on his face when Hart leaves, Bret can return with open arms, Michaels still gets the title and puts over Austin, and etc.

But to answer the question, no it wouldn' have been good to release him. He wouldn't have gotten injured if he was in WCW, and would've brought that company to the top permanately. But hindsight is 20/20, and he herniated his back severley, and he didn't wrestle for 4 years. But it was good that they kept him.

 

[RKOLEGACYRULZ]

are you serious?!? first of all, it would've been crazy for Michaels to be dropped, Bret Hart was getting stale, remarkable performer but stale. Michaels at that time was elevating his game and with the both of their ages factored in, the decision was a no brainer. WCW ratings did not soar when Bret hart arrived, in fact, they started to dip. HBK more than likely will retire with the WWE, why go to TNA ... he has nothing more to prove.

Boy you are so funny and ignorant WCW was kicking WWF's ass for 2 years and yes it is because of Bret Hart and Hulk Hogan and so on I mentioned the addition of Bret Hart the ratings soared more and they never dipped nimrod!
As you must ve read Nash wants to go to WWE but seeing it won'thappen TNA will get Michaels afterall he is old and fits with the oldies to recreate MEM!

 

[RKOLEGACYRULZ]

I find so much of this discussion humorous because so many of you obviously only know of the Montreal Screwjob by what you have read on wikipedia and seen on forums. You didn't witness it first hand or you were too young to remember what really happened. Likewise, many of you are obviously too you young to remember the beginning of the WWF's attitude era, or what WWF was like before then.

Bret was always a midcarder. He may have been a high midcarder, but he was a midcarder. Michaels, HHH, and Austin were the main agents of bringing in the WWF's attitude era. Bret was feuding with Austin at the time. He was the face. This was when faces were baby faces and heels were heels. Funny thing was, people started cheering for Austin, the heel. That wasn't supposed to happen.

I respect Bret's skills, but he was never the money maker people like HHH and Michaels were. Really, how much money do you think the WWF made selling those $4 Hitman sunglasses? Compare that to the DX merchandise over the years.

My friend I was at the Bell Center when the scewjob happened he indicated with his hands Bret Hart W C W and everyone knew there !
I respect Bret Hart never liked Shawn Michaels many of us thought he was acting so gay the new Michaels is better now but the DPX thing has gone too far already I got 2 words for them GETTING OLD!

 

[dxparza]

Even after these years this is still my favorite topic to talk about. First off vince made the right move and dropped the right guy. I'm sure he wishes there was another way the whole situation coulda been handled. Personally I think if hbk woulda been let go he woud have fit in greatly with the nwo and woulda been the leader of the wolfpac and send the wcw to its highest point it had ever been. Bret was getting stale and wasn't fitting in to the new direction at that time. Everything happens for a reason, maybe if he had stayed in wwf he wouldn't have gotten injured and we would to watch more of his stale boring garbage today. Maybe if hbk went to wcw he wouldn't have injured his back and we wouldn't have the privilage that we have to be watching him today. The 4 year break for hbk is the reason he's out there today, so I think everthing happened the right way and the right guy got dropped..


I might get a lot of shit for this but I'll always consider the montreal screwjob the greatest day in wrestling history. It opened the door for the whole attitude era.

 

[Emmet]

I find so much of this discussion humorous because so many of you obviously only know of the Montreal Screwjob by what you have read on wikipedia and seen on forums. You didn't witness it first hand or you were too young to remember what really happened. Likewise, many of you are obviously too you young to remember the beginning of the WWF's attitude era, or what WWF was like before then.

Bret was always a midcarder. He may have been a high midcarder, but he was a midcarder. Michaels, HHH, and Austin were the main agents of bringing in the WWF's attitude era. Bret was feuding with Austin at the time. He was the face. This was when faces were baby faces and heels were heels. Funny thing was, people started cheering for Austin, the heel. That wasn't supposed to happen.

I respect Bret's skills, but he was never the money maker people like HHH and Michaels were. Really, how much money do you think the WWF made selling those $4 Hitman sunglasses? Compare that to the DX merchandise over the years.

What nonsense are you talking? Bret was a high mid-carder? never heard a worse statement in this forum. Bret had as much a part to play in the rise of the attitude era as HBK or DX did, the America vs Canada angle in my mind was far better than anything HBK did in the Attitude era. Bret vs Austin was the beginnings of the era, Austin was made because of Bret.

Bret wasnt a money maker? are you taking the piss? When did HBK ever make any money? WWF only sold out overseas tours in the 1990s because of Bret Hart. He was huge overseas. HBK wasnt that well received Internationally, they could not buy into his playboy image. Neither were massive drwas in the States, but Internationally jesus its not even a comparision. Bret takes it by a mile.

 

[Tastycles]

There's two ways of looking at this. The first is immensely simplistic, and it goes like this. If Vince hadn't have screwed Bret, then he wouldn't have tapped into the Mr. McMahon character and gone on to be a huge success. That being said, he wouldn't have gone on to do that had Michaels not gotten injured either, so very fortunate there.

The second, and I think this is how we should look at it, is probably more relevant. If Michaels hadn't got injured, he'd have run WWE into the ground, good matches aren't enough, if nobody cares about you, they'll watch WCW. Hart could have elevated Austin, Austin could have elevated Rock, Rock could have elevated Foley and we'd have ended up with exactly the same main event picture we did end up with plus Bret Hart, which is none too bad.

Meanwhile, Michaels would be on WCW, no doubt HHH would have followed and the Clique wouls have gotten in a power struggle with Hogan. It probably would have been a disaster of biblical proportions, but eventually, someone would have fired one side of the beligerents, and the ship would hae been steadied. I don't know, the way WCW messed stuf up, maybe they wouldn't.

Utimately Vince chould have fired Michaels, but he didn't, and probably ended up coming better for it, despite that defying logic.