Survivor Series 1997, what of the venue?

[Justin Satiable]

I remember hearing all about the Montreal Screwjob and how Bret didn't want to lose infront of his countrymen in Canada. So, say, what if Survivor Series 1997 was held in the US?

Would Bret have simply agreed to drop the title?

Or do you think Bret would have "screwed Bret" anyway and refused to lose to HBK on his way out, knowing their mutual dislike?

Do you think if the Montreal Screwjob had never occured then we'd have seen a Bret Hart return to the WWF/E before his return this year?

 

[Yarrie]

I dont think it mattered where it was held. Canada was an excuse, he wouldn't have dropped the belt to Shawn if Survivor Series was held in San Antonio. Bret was arrogant and deserved to be "screwed", I think Vince/Shawn/Hunter are legends for doing it.

Had it not happened Bret prob still wouldnt have been back earier because he is physically screwed up. He might still have come back but it wouldn't have been such a huge deal, because with out "the montreal screwjob" Bret wouldn't have been remembered so strongly.

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

I don't think Montreal was an excuse for Bret, he was obviously leaving and Vince was thinking he might take the belt with him to WCW, like some diva did a few years before, and Bret told Vince he didn't want to drop it in his home country, VKM however not believing pulled off the screwjob so Bret no matter what could not leave with the belt, I think if it was somewhere else, he would have dropped it, I mean why not, it was going to be his last match, heck he could have dropped it the next night on Raw, but VKM felt like screwing him out of the title and leaving a stain in the WWE...which has now been cleaned on-screen..

 

[Hitman80]

The WWE really managed to re-write history with some fans.... It was never about losing in Canada.

Bret and Shawn had not got on for a long while but they agreed to work together again... Bret told Shawn he would do the job for Shawn, to which Shawn replied he would never do the job for Bret.

Bret as champion found this disrespectful, which it was. Bret was standing up for himself, every other wrestler in the company and for the traditions of the business.

Montreal and Canada had nothing to do with it and it would have been the same circumstances anywhere really.

On a side note Bret had 30 days creative control, the WWE had started burying him on TV and making him look stupid and put him in angles to make him look racist, etc. He was also looking out for his own stock in the business.

As for the belt, we all know Bret wouldn't have take the WWF title to WCW, we are not talking about someone who has not respect for the business like Flair.

I think the Montreal thing is something people will never agree on, some are on the WWE sides and some are on Bret's side and I think it is unlikely anyone will persuaded otherwise, so I am not wanting to get into a debate about the screwjob but think putting it out there as being because of Canada is inaccurate.

 

[bigbootydaddyV]

The WWE really managed to re-write history with some fans.... It was never about losing in Canada.

Bret and Shawn had not got on for a long while but they agreed to work together again... Bret told Shawn he would do the job for Shawn, to which Shawn replied he would never do the job for Bret.

Bret as champion found this disrespectful, which it was. Bret was standing up for himself, every other wrestler in the company and for the traditions of the business.

Montreal and Canada had nothing to do with it and it would have been the same circumstances anywhere really.

On a side note Bret had 30 days creative control, the WWE had started burying him on TV and making him look stupid and put him in angles to make him look racist, etc. He was also looking out for his own stock in the business.

As for the belt, we all know Bret wouldn't have take the WWF title to WCW, we are not talking about someone who has not respect for the business like Flair.

I think the Montreal thing is something people will never agree on, some are on the WWE sides and some are on Bret's side and I think it is unlikely anyone will persuaded otherwise, so I am not wanting to get into a debate about the screwjob but think putting it out there as being because of Canada is inaccurate.

I love how so many wrestlers who are in vince's good graces say fuck bret he didn't do what is right for business (HHH you son of a bitch i'm looking at you here), it's pretty easy to say that when the business is providing for you. Why should any other wrestler not be looking out for their own stock in the business though. I do believe Canada was a big part of Bret's position as he wanted to go out with a little dignity, but WWE would not throw him a bone. Vince could have easily granted bret a bit of an extension to not have this happen as I'm sure they all had plenty of time to know SS was going to be coming up and in Montreal. The WWE did nothing to mitigate the situation but expected Bret to do what was best for THEM not him. They did everything they could to water him down on his way to WCW and almost accomplished it. Ironically they helped bring him back to the top only WCW mismanaged the shit out of the opportunity. But my point is valid, a wrestler should be able to take care of their image because they need that going into another company since the fans don't forget who they are or what they've done.


Ok I may have gone off on a tangent there and I apologize, i just hate the whole HHH do whats right for business line, as for hte original topic I do think being in Canada played a big part of what the conflict started

 

[mrbooker]

I love how so many wrestlers who are in vince's good graces say fuck bret he didn't do what is right for business (HHH you son of a bitch i'm looking at you here), it's pretty easy to say that when the business is providing for you. Why should any other wrestler not be looking out for their own stock in the business though. I do believe Canada was a big part of Bret's position as he wanted to go out with a little dignity, but WWE would not throw him a bone. Vince could have easily granted bret a bit of an extension to not have this happen as I'm sure they all had plenty of time to know SS was going to be coming up and in Montreal. The WWE did nothing to mitigate the situation but expected Bret to do what was best for THEM not him. They did everything they could to water him down on his way to WCW and almost accomplished it. Ironically they helped bring him back to the top only WCW mismanaged the shit out of the opportunity. But my point is valid, a wrestler should be able to take care of their image because they need that going into another company since the fans don't forget who they are or what they've done.


Ok I may have gone off on a tangent there and I apologize, i just hate the whole HHH do whats right for business line, as for hte original topic I do think being in Canada played a big part of what the conflict started

HHH is 100 percent correct and if you want to stand up for bret then you are simply marking out. Really!!!! Bret was going to the competing company that was beating WWFs ass at the time and you expect to for Vince to simply let bret loss the title how bret wants . If montreal screwjob never happens bret shows up on nitro throwing the WWF title in a dumpster and WWF is shot to shit. Brets number 1 option to vince was to show up on raw and vacate the title fuck that bret got what he deserved, your leaving one company to go to the top company at the time and you think you can just vacate the title, and leave the WWF without actually losing your title, be serious i never understood how anyone could stand up for bret at all. I know the history how allegdly Vince told bret he can't afford to pay him so thats why bret left, regardless of the reason he was leaving and for him to think he can just leave on his own terms is straight ludacris.

To answer the question Canada didnt make a difference and if you ever heard any shoot interviews from WCW guys they all say the same thing about bret, his mic skills were trash in WCW since everything in WCW was live at that time, and in WWF harts promos, and interviews where taped it had nothing to do with him being missused it had to do with him not being up to snuff with WCW's vision of maineventers

 

[Digging4Plunder]

Guy above me.. you said it's ridiculous for bring to leave on his own terms? Everybody who was a star and in good graces got to leave on their own terms. Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair.. just two examples of great send offs. Don't you think Undertaker will too?

Anyway, Bret had some right to say "Hey Vince, we've done a lot together. Here's my idea, blah blah" Vince wasn't cool with that though and it sucks they couldn't make a compromise. Regardless of the venue, I believe Bret would've gotten "screwed" anyway. He chose to not lose on the night of Survivor Series and Vince had a decision to make. He could've made that same decision in New York, Los Angeles.. you get the point.

 

[OutsiderDX]

Bret EARNED the right to drop the title of his choosing by having "reasonbaly creative control" in the last 30 days. He spent 20 years with one company to gain that leverage.

It would be like you working for a company for 20 years, earning your pension and then company saying... ok we are taking back your pension. Because its "will benefit the business." How many of you people who think Bret should have dropped the title, would give up 20 years of pension???

Bret said in his book, he would have dropped the title as long as it wasn't in Canada.

If the venue wasn't in Canada, i believe he would have dropped it to Shawn. Or he would have negotiated to drop it to Taker or Austin on RAW.

 

[Yarrie]

Digging4Plunder,yes HBK and Flair did get to leave on their own terms, of course they weren't leaving to go to the competitor who were trying to hire all WWF's superstars and trying to put them out of business (of course we all put too much faith and belief in Flair, coz the big loser is back wrestling). People aren't ever going to agree on the screw job, I choose to believe HBK's version as why would he lie now, his book and DVD were so honest about everything else why would not fess up about that?

 

[Kaeden]

It would be like you working for a company for 20 years, earning your pension and then company saying... ok we are taking back your pension. Because its "will benefit the business." How many of you people who think Bret should have dropped the title, would give up 20 years of pension???

Actually, it wouldn't be anything like that. Its more like working 20 years in a company, and being a top earner in the company. The boss it doting on you, he says you're the kinda guy he'd 'build his company around.' And you thank him for his confidence by shitting in his mouth and quitting to go to another company, which has a nicer 401K plan.

 

[dxparza]

HHH is 100 percent correct and if you want to stand up for bret then you are simply marking out. Really!!!! Bret was going to the competing company that was beating WWFs ass at the time and you expect to for Vince to simply let bret loss the title how bret wants . If montreal screwjob never happens bret shows up on nitro throwing the WWF title in a dumpster and WWF is shot to shit. Brets number 1 option to vince was to show up on raw and vacate the title fuck that bret got what he deserved, your leaving one company to go to the top company at the time and you think you can just vacate the title, and leave the WWF without actually losing your title, be serious i never understood how anyone could stand up for bret at all. I know the history how allegdly Vince told bret he can't afford to pay him so thats why bret left, regardless of the reason he was leaving and for him to think he can just leave on his own terms is straight ludacris.

To answer the question Canada didnt make a difference and if you ever heard any shoot interviews from WCW guys they all say the same thing about bret, his mic skills were trash in WCW since everything in WCW was live at that time, and in WWF harts promos, and interviews where taped it had nothing to do with him being missused it had to do with him not being up to snuff with WCW's vision of maineventers[/QUOTE]

Amen man, Amen.. Bret got exactly what he deserved that night. the guy was leaving to the compition and was gonna be making way more money to work pretty much the same schedule if not a lighter schedule. I have alwasy respected Shawn Michaels for his in ring ability but after finding out that he was part of the screwjob, I gained even more respect for the guy. he did what was right for the company, like someone else already said Shawn Michaels Triple H and VKM were all in the right on this one. to answer the original question, I am sure that if SS 97 were in the USA bret would've dropped the title no problem.. bret said ''losing the belt in canada would be like blowing my brains out'' hmmmm... a little over dramatic bret.. The only reason Bret Hart in even a little bit relavent today is cause of the Montreal Screwjob. if it wasnt for that night he would've been forgotten years ago.

 

[dxparza]

HHH is 100 percent correct and if you want to stand up for bret then you are simply marking out. Really!!!! Bret was going to the competing company that was beating WWFs ass at the time and you expect to for Vince to simply let bret loss the title how bret wants . If montreal screwjob never happens bret shows up on nitro throwing the WWF title in a dumpster and WWF is shot to shit. Brets number 1 option to vince was to show up on raw and vacate the title fuck that bret got what he deserved, your leaving one company to go to the top company at the time and you think you can just vacate the title, and leave the WWF without actually losing your title, be serious i never understood how anyone could stand up for bret at all. I know the history how allegdly Vince told bret he can't afford to pay him so thats why bret left, regardless of the reason he was leaving and for him to think he can just leave on his own terms is straight ludacris.

To answer the question Canada didnt make a difference and if you ever heard any shoot interviews from WCW guys they all say the same thing about bret, his mic skills were trash in WCW since everything in WCW was live at that time, and in WWF harts promos, and interviews where taped it had nothing to do with him being missused it had to do with him not being up to snuff with WCW's vision of maineventers

Amen man, Amen.. Bret got exactly what he deserved that night. the guy was leaving to the compition and was gonna be making way more money to work pretty much the same schedule if not a lighter schedule. I have alwasy respected Shawn Michaels for his in ring ability but after finding out that he was part of the screwjob, I gained even more respect for the guy. he did what was right for the company, like someone else already said Shawn Michaels Triple H and VKM were all in the right on this one. to answer the original question, I am sure that if SS 97 were in the USA bret would've dropped the title no problem.. bret said ''losing the belt in canada would be like blowing my brains out'' hmmmm... a little over dramatic bret.. The only reason Bret Hart in even a little bit relavent today is cause of the Montreal Screwjob. if it wasnt for that night he would've been forgotten years ago.

 

[EffinSaySo]

The venue was perfect. The scenario was great. Bret was on verge of leaving to WCW. He still had the WWF Championship belt around his waist. And the greatest thing to ever happened, THE MONTREAL SCREWJOB.

It is the event that created a Super Heel in Mr. McMahon. From there, Mr. McMahon/Austin became the biggest storyline of 1998. If VKM was willing to screw a Canadian Hero in his Homeland, he would do the same to Stone Cold Steve Austin. It's what made Stone Cold into a megadraw during the Attitude Era.

Meanwhile, WCW used Bret Hart exactly what VKM could ever imagine/dream of. The WWF momentum began to increase in 1998 to a point that it turned Eric Bischoff from a genius to a destroyer of wrestling promotion. He tried to destroy WWF from 1995 to 1998...however WCW became obsolete in 2001 thanks to Ted Turner brilliant idea of merging his company with AOL (hope $7-$8 billion lost was karma). In 1999, they obliterated WCW in the ratings (making 1996-1998 WCW run look like chipmunks).

All we have now is a Rise and Fall of WCW, Best of StarrCade DVDs from that company down south coined "Where the Big Boys Played" (or "Where the Big Boys Get Paid"). Quite fitting. It was the Montreal Screwjob that started the McMahon heel character and launched the WWF from the depths of hell (close to bankruptcy) to a monopoly (cha-ching).

 

[pessimism101]

From what I understand, Bret Hart would have willingly dropped the belt to anybody, anytime, anywhere... except to Shawn Michaels. According to Bret's DVD (The Best There Is, The Best There Was, The Best There Ever Will Be), he was going to agree to drop the title to Michaels until Michaels told Bret that he would never job to him. From that moment on, Bret decided he wasn't going to allow Michaels to beat him, regardless of where the event was held.

So, to answer the question, yes, Bret would still have refused to drop the title (to HBK), the screwjob still would have happened, and the fallout would remain same.

 

[mrbooker]

Guy above me.. you said it's ridiculous for bring to leave on his own terms? Everybody who was a star and in good graces got to leave on their own terms. Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair.. just two examples of great send offs. Don't you think Undertaker will too?

Anyway, Bret had some right to say "Hey Vince, we've done a lot together. Here's my idea, blah blah" Vince wasn't cool with that though and it sucks they couldn't make a compromise. Regardless of the venue, I believe Bret would've gotten "screwed" anyway. He chose to not lose on the night of Survivor Series and Vince had a decision to make. He could've made that same decision in New York, Los Angeles.. you get the point.

Like so many people before me said your whole point of few is flawed Bret wasnt retiring or making it seem like he was retiring , it was very clear he was leaving to go to the #1 Wrestling brand at that time WCW. So no when your going to leave one company to work for its rival who was better then them at the time you dont get a send of and get to control how that companies WHC is handled. Bret wanting to just lose to anyone but HBK or Vacating the title on Raw and then going to WCW as the unbeaten champion from WWF is b.s. Vince would have to be nuts to have let bret do things his way. To much at risk and like I said its not a far fetched idea that Bret no shows and shows up on nirto and throws his WWF tite in the trash.

At that point survior series was still a decent PPV it was one of the big four Vince wanting his new unquestioned top guy and performer in the company to be, to win a title at a major PPV is understandable it marked a point where HBK was the guy and no one was on his level at that point. So for Bret saying o no i rather lose to this guy or that guy when he is on the way out the door, basically creatively changing the direction WWF is going is just not a valid request especially when WWF WAS NOT EVEN THE BEST WRESTLING COMPANY

 

[SinCityBlitz]

Bret should have done what was good for the business. Yes Shawn was a douche at the time but if you read Bret's book he was just as big of a douche as Shawn was.

I don't think the venue mattered at all because he's not from Montreal. He wasn't going to drop the belt to Shawn no matter where they wrestled. Now Shawn didn't help matters much and should have STFU but that's a different story.

You do the right thing for the boys in the back. That's pretty much the bottom line. As far as Bret's reasonable control goes. No one knows what reasonable is because it's different to everybody. I don't find it reasonable to pick and choose who you lose to when you're leaving for a HUMONGOUS payday. Just drop the damn belt.

BTW love Bret and he will always be one of my all time faves.

 

[Carpathian Florist]

Actually, it wouldn't be anything like that. Its more like working 20 years in a company, and being a top earner in the company. The boss it doting on you, he says you're the kinda guy he'd 'build his company around.' And you thank him for his confidence by shitting in his mouth and quitting to go to another company, which has a nicer 401K plan.

Vince actually told Bret to go to WCW because he couldn't afford to pay him the money he promised. It's amazing how ignorant people really are.
Bret was supposed to go to WCW in 1996, he chose to stay with Vince for less money out of loyalty, then Vince backed out on the deal.

The main point here is the 30 day creative control clause in Bret's contract, he had the legal right to say where he'd drop the strap and to who. As another poster said, he was going to drop it to Shawn until Shawn said not only wouldn't he job for Bret, that he wouldn't job to anyone anymore.

The heel turn did a lot to damage the Hitman's credibility as a hero, which is all Bret ever wanted to be. You can't blame a guy for trying to salvage what he's spent his life trying to create.

Funny how everyone insults Bret for staying true to his character, yet Undertaker gets praise for doing the same. Bret was a hero to millions of people, Mark Callaway will never be an undead soul-stealing zombie with mystical powers no matter how hard he sticks to kayfabe.

Before anyone starts bitching, this is not a condemnation of Undertaker, as I've always been a huge fan of his. This is an example to highlight the utter hypocrisy in the people who attack Bret.

 

[Carpathian Florist]

Bret should have done what was good for the business. Yes Shawn was a douche at the time but if you read Bret's book he was just as big of a douche as Shawn was.

I don't think the venue mattered at all because he's not from Montreal. He wasn't going to drop the belt to Shawn no matter where they wrestled. Now Shawn didn't help matters much and should have STFU but that's a different story.

You do the right thing for the boys in the back. That's pretty much the bottom line. As far as Bret's reasonable control goes. No one knows what reasonable is because it's different to everybody. I don't find it reasonable to pick and choose who you lose to when you're leaving for a HUMONGOUS payday. Just drop the damn belt.

BTW love Bret and he will always be one of my all time faves.

I find it extremely reasonable when you're forced out of the company you've given the best part of your life to, especially the one you chose to retire in. Bret's entire plan was a series to put over Austin as the champion, retire with a bit of dignity and work backstage for the remainder of his contract. Imagine having your life settled, your dreams of your glorious career winding down to remain in a backstage role of the business you love, just for your "father figure" of a boss to tell you to go somewhere else because he doesn't wanna uphold his end of the bargain anymore?
Bret lost a lot in that deal, the least he could do is get his character booked with a bit of dignity before he left the company he'd put so much into.

 

[ThePh3nomonal1]

Hey hey hey Bret was not forced out he left because he wanted more money than the WWF could pay him, if he really loved the company sooo much he would of just kept his curren paycheck and signed a new one!

But to answer this thread the venue didn't reLly matter in my mind bret did not want to drop the belt.

 

[Hitman80]

There are several points that fans always overlook and what the WWE push as true but are not true at all.

1. Bret had committed to the WWF for 20 years and it was the WWF that broke that contract, they shifted some of his money over and then actaully broke the contracts agreements. Bret didn't want to go and it was not a case of him abandoning ship and wanting his own way while doing it.... The WWF had messed about with his life and career by breaking the contract so Bret was entitled to a little bit of compromise to the way he left.

2. Bret's contract despite what the WWF have said over the years did not run out that night or the night after, his contract actually had most of the month to go so it wasn't a case of him refusing to lose his last match in the company, as far as Bret was concerned it wasn't his last match at all. So the time honoured tradition crap the WWF puts out there about doing the right thing in your last match for the company that made you is rubbish.

3. Shawn is a changed man now but his was a prick back then and Bret was right not putting someone over who had said he would never lose to Bret or anyone else in the company for that matter, Triple H will take Shawn's side because let's be honest without Shawn and DX Hunter would not have got nowhere near main event for a long time but Bret as a locker room leader stood up for everyone else by refusing to lose to Shawn, he said he would have lost to anyone else in the company (including the Brooklyn Brawler) so he was being reasonable within his creative control contract standpoint. The WWE said on national TV Bret had refused to lose to anybody and at anytime, well there was only one person involved in that incident and match that had said that and it wasn't Bret, another lie put out there by the WWE to try and fool their fans and re-write history.

The history didn't help between Bret and Shawn, it made sense as two faces and in a iron man match that they shook hands after their WrestleMania 12 match, instead Shawn told Bret to get the f*** out the ring straight after that match. Bret had just put him over at the biggest event of the year and Shawn showed no respect and or appreciation for that, I think Bret learned his lesson about putting Shawn over then.

To make Bret sound like that bad guy in it all is just rubbish, there is some blame on both sides but at the end of the day the WWF have lied and changed history over and over again about it over the years and there is a reason they do that.

 

[OutsiderDX]

Everyone is making it sound like wrestlers moving to from company to company is some epic event. Wrestlers have been moving from territory to territory for 100 years. 99% of wrestlers (before the monopoloy) changed banners.

Bret was switch companies like a 10,000 guys before him, and ppl want to say he was turning back on the WWF.

 

[One to Remember]

The WWF momentum began to increase in 1998 to a point that it turned Eric Bischoff from a genius to a destroyer of wrestling promotion. He tried to destroy WWF from 1995 to 1998...however WCW became obsolete in 2001 thanks to Ted Turner brilliant idea of merging his company with AOL (hope $7-$8 billion lost was karma).

How did Bischoff try to destroy WCW if he was the guy in 2001 that tried to buy it?! The only reason his deal fail through was because his partners were scared when they found out the TNT president did not want wrestling on "his" network..

In 1999, they obliterated WCW in the ratings (making 1996-1998 WCW run look like chipmunks).

Have you been huffing?
[quot]All we have now is a Rise and Fall of WCW, Best of StarrCade DVDs from that company down south coined "Where the Big Boys Played" (or "Where the Big Boys Get Paid"). Quite fitting. It was the Montreal Screwjob that started the McMahon heel character and launched the WWF from the depths of hell (close to bankruptcy) to a monopoly (cha-ching).[/QUOTE]

Are you high on crank?! Mismanagement and the corporate entity running WCW did more damage then WCW then the Attitude era.. If WCW did not party like it was 1996 when it was 1999 they would had stabilized and gotten better and quit hemorrhaging.

Its too complex to say what/who killed WCW but a man of reason and common sense knows it was not the WWF.. When we talk real world businss get that kayfabe off the brain..

Hey hey hey Bret was not forced out he left because he wanted more money than the WWF could pay him, if he really loved the company sooo much he would of just kept his curren paycheck and signed a new one!

Yeah I guess it was more money then they could but as a 52 year old business man you would think McMahon would know better then to write a check he couldn't cash. Maybe you would have a point if VKM had not RENEGED on his OWN offer.

And how could any of you defend the breaking of a contract and blast showing up on tv on another station with a belt that was his temporary possession? At the least your having a mark attack at the most your justifying one illegal act while promoting another illegality which is madness.

And there have been references to Madusa dropping the WWF Women's title.
[YOUTUBE]wrvbt24s8QM[/YOUTUBE]
How was Bret even gonna get the opportunity to show up on Nitro with the belt if he wasn't leaving the monday after Survivor Series? There was time to leave Canada, strip him, lose to other people, etc. It was McMahon's haste that caused the situation to deteriorate, his haste making no sense with Hart's contract still have time on it.
Maybe former AWA President Stanley Blackburn could had made a one night guest appearance in which he, Dusty Rhodes, and Gorilla Monsoon formed a three man committee to review the match and then over rule the ref's decision..??

Who are any of you to point to the Medusa incident when that occured AFTER VKM allowed Ric Flair to wonder around WWF programing with a huge golden belt that had nothing to do with anything?! The WWF set the precedence there.

None of that even matters because Hart was the qennesential WWF guy anyways, VKM's paranoia did not allow him to remember that. And when Hart came to WCW how much trashing did he really do to the WWF? How much of that would had never happened without the horrible send off?
His demands were justifiable taking into consideration his following in Canada and his loyalty to the WWF, and the fact he tried to stay to begin with.

P.S. I will say this in defense of those attacking those defending Hart's geography argument, what does an English speaking Albertan even care about Montréal or Québec? That I never got...

 

[theHeadliner]

HHH is 100 percent correct and if you want to stand up for bret then you are simply marking out. Really!!!! Bret was going to the competing company that was beating WWFs ass at the time and you expect to for Vince to simply let bret loss the title how bret wants . If montreal screwjob never happens bret shows up on nitro throwing the WWF title in a dumpster and WWF is shot to shit. Brets number 1 option to vince was to show up on raw and vacate the title fuck that bret got what he deserved, your leaving one company to go to the top company at the time and you think you can just vacate the title, and leave the WWF without actually losing your title, be serious i never understood how anyone could stand up for bret at all. I know the history how allegdly Vince told bret he can't afford to pay him so thats why bret left, regardless of the reason he was leaving and for him to think he can just leave on his own terms is straight ludacris.

To answer the question Canada didnt make a difference and if you ever heard any shoot interviews from WCW guys they all say the same thing about bret, his mic skills were trash in WCW since everything in WCW was live at that time, and in WWF harts promos, and interviews where taped it had nothing to do with him being missused it had to do with him not being up to snuff with WCW's vision of maineventers

Couldn't agree with you more. Not only was WCW dominating in ratings and buy rates, but they had basically an unlimited budget, they had taken so many of the WWF's already over-top guys, loyalty and trust were being thrown out the window. Yes, Vince probably could have trusted Bret, but it was too risky of a business decision, and Vince knew Bret felt betrayed. Vince and the WWF gave Bret all his opportunities to get as big, over, and popular as he was, and ultimately put him in the position to be such a "steal" for the competition.

It wasn't just about him showing up to WCW with the belt. Bret the Hitman Hart was at the time the WWF champion, the number one guy in the company in the eyes of many (Even though some felt it was Michaels who was the best and most exciting in-ring performer at the time). Bret, being the champ, the #1 guy, claims he was just going to show up on RAW, give a speech and forfeit the belt saying he couldn't work there anymore with everyone knowing he was going the the competition WCW, and him showing up on Nitro some short time later and cutting a promo on how bad the WWF was. That would have been a horrible business decision for Vince to allow.

Also, Vince allowed Bret to breach his contract to negotiate that great deal with WCW to put Bret in the position to retire in a few years young and in good shape. Prior to the WCW deal, Bret got that crazy 20-year WWF deal by going behind Vince's back to get leverage from WCW by being offered the deal for almost $3 million per year and a lighter schedule. He put Vince up against the wall and felt he had no choice but to offer Bret that huge contract cus all his advisors were telling him that losing Bret at that time would have been really bad for the WWF at the time, almost like the final nail in the coffin.

Bret tells it like he told Shawn he was willing to drop the belt to him, but Shawn replied back "Thanks but I'm not willing to do the same for you." We weren't there in the locker room, we don't know if that exchange really happened or if Shawn said those exact words. Yes Shawn was a dick, but in Shawn's mind he felt Bret was didn't respect him and didn't support him as champ, and took cheap shots at him in interviews, dirt sheets, etc. We can all take sides from the gossip and he said/she said, but the overlying facts say Bret should have dropped the belt. Yes, his Canada angle made him feel like he had to be the hero against the antagonist Shawn Michaels, and emotions and personally feelings were running higher than the logical business and professional choices and decisions that should have been made. The 30-day creative control clause was over his character, not who he loses to.