The reason Shawn Michaels gets so much flack

[theHeadliner]

This is not a bash Shawn or bash Bret Hart thread... They are my two top favorites wrestlers of all time. I'm just laying out the facts and situations and want to hear different viewpoints.

We all know in 1996 WWF business took a big dive and WCW took the lead in ratings and PPV buys. Shawn was champ for the majority of 1996, with Bret dropping the title to him. The WWF's business and product grew significantly worse through that entire era, and Bret and Shawn were the two top dogs, more so Bret Hart. Michaels catches a lot of flack and blame saying it was him, but his matches were the most entertaining and exciting at the time for any main-eventer in either company. Bret headlined the worse drawing WWF PPV ever. When Michaels headlined the garden before he became champ and shortly after, they sold out MSG for the first time in years, and Shawn was a big part of that. Plus, Shawn was one guy during a time when the WWF had no legitimate main event guys while WCW had established, over WWF guys and the nWo angle that no one could compete with at the time. Michaels did that over the line shoot in which he took shots a the real life Bret Hart with backstage on-goings with Vince in the ring where he said to Vince that while he was champ the WWF did the best business its done in 6 years and Vince agreed. There's more I left out so if anyone else wants to add other things, feel free.

Does anyone thing Michaels gets blamed because of personal animosity towards him since everyone who knew him during that time thought he was a complete asshole?

 

[Slyfox696]

This is not a bash Shawn or bash Bret Hart thread... They are my two top favorites wrestlers of all time. I'm just laying out the facts and situations and want to hear different viewpoints.

We all know in 1996 WWF business took a big dive and WCW took the lead in ratings and PPV buys. Shawn was champ for the majority of 1996, with Bret dropping the title to him. The WWF's business and product grew significantly worse through that entire era, and Bret and Shawn were the two top dogs, more so Bret Hart. Michaels catches a lot of flack and blame saying it was him, but his matches were the most entertaining and exciting at the time for any main-eventer in either company. Bret headlined the worse drawing WWF PPV ever. When Michaels headlined the garden before he became champ and shortly after, they sold out MSG for the first time in years, and Shawn was a big part of that. Plus, Shawn was one guy during a time when the WWF had no legitimate main event guys while WCW had established, over WWF guys and the nWo angle that no one could compete with at the time. Michaels did that over the line shoot in which he took shots a the real life Bret Hart with backstage on-goings with Vince in the ring where he said to Vince that while he was champ the WWF did the best business its done in 6 years and Vince agreed. There's more I left out so if anyone else wants to add other things, feel free.

Does anyone thing Michaels gets blamed because of personal animosity towards him since everyone who knew him during that time thought he was a complete asshole?

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make, but you do seem to be missing a few details. For example, when Shawn was the champion during 1996 and the WWF nearly went out of business, and saw ratings decline to the lowest they've ever been, Bret Hart wasn't with the WWE. Bret Hart left after Wrestlemania 12, and didn't come back until Survivor Series. The reason I mention that is because you seemed to be implying that Bret Hart was the main guy on top when the WWE tanked, and the truth doesn't support that. The other side of that 1996 argument, of course, was the birth of the nWo, so there are a couple of ways to look at it.

The reason people don't look at Shawn Michaels as being a big draw is because he never was a draw. And that's no slight on him, very few guys his size draw domestically on a national scale. American sports enthusiasts want bigger and stronger, in every sport really.

So again, I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, but I think HBK, in terms of the business side, is rated pretty accurately. I think he's overrated in the ring, but business-wise I think he's treated pretty fairly.

 

[MTL722]

I clicked on this thread because I wasn't sure what you meant by "flack", Shawn Michaels is considered by most to be the best performer in WWE history. The Montreal incident has been beaten to death and beyond and relatively recently been put to bed by both Hart and Michaels.

Yes Shawn was, as you said and by his own admission, an "asshole" in his early days but to say everyone who knew him thought that would be untrue. Im sure Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, Trips, and X-pac didnt think he was an asshole otherwise they wouldn't have aligned with him backstage.

Like Slyfox, I'm not sure the point you're trying to make here nor do I know the purpose of this thread but I for one dont have any sort of ill will towards shawn michaels as a character or as michael hickenbottom. He was an incredible performer and I'm sure most would agree regardless of any "flack"

 

[hellod245]

Ok I am not HBK fan so it might feel a bit bias but Shawn really was never a big draw. Another poster above was right that Bret dropped the belt to HBK at WM 12 and left and came back in SS later that year where he wrestled best match in wwf since WM12 (coz again he was involved) from WM12 to SS mankind and Taker were the ones carrying Raw with their intense feud. Shawn was more into backstage politics and thought he is huge but he never was. He was nowhere near Hitman as a draw. Vince knows that and that is why he never let Bret out of his heart genuinely because I feel he knows that if it was'nt for Bret's popularity in Canada and U.S. WWE would have tanked before attitude era. That is why he took so much crap from Bret after screwjob but kept trying his best for 12 years to bring him back to the company. I am sorry if you are a shawn Micheal fan but he is a douchebag I like him as a performer but no respect for him at all.

 

[TheLoneCharles]

Back when Shawn first became champion the then WWF was almost in a similar state that it is in now: Lame PG characters, boring storylines, and some great matches sprinkled in. I was a loyal fan of the WWF, and while WCW was gaining popularity, so I actually watched during this era.

Shawn was putting on great matches and even in his first reign came off as more of a "legit" champion than Bret Hart was when he first won it from Ric Flair. Shawn was definitely the draw by then. Coming off of Diesel's one year reign, followed by Bret Hart's third reign, there was no one else. Well except Undertaker, but he was mostly confined to battling the assorted "monsters" they seemed to bring in regularly back then.

Back to Shawn's power as a draw: "If a tree falls in the middle of the woods and no one is around to hear it." So basically....since most people were tuning in to the new NWO angle and the WWF had people losing interest similar to today, so most people simply just weren't aware of Shawn Michaels greatness. His back injury in 1999 and subsequent 3 year hiatus made people forget, but I always had a respect for Shawn for not jumping to WCW with his buddies.

 

[asiatic7]

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make, but you do seem to be missing a few details. For example, when Shawn was the champion during 1996 and the WWF nearly went out of business, and saw ratings decline to the lowest they've ever been, Bret Hart wasn't with the WWE. Bret Hart left after Wrestlemania 12, and didn't come back until Survivor Series. The reason I mention that is because you seemed to be implying that Bret Hart was the main guy on top when the WWE tanked, and the truth doesn't support that. The other side of that 1996 argument, of course, was the birth of the nWo, so there are a couple of ways to look at it.

The reason people don't look at Shawn Michaels as being a big draw is because he never was a draw. And that's no slight on him, very few guys his size draw domestically on a national scale. American sports enthusiasts want bigger and stronger, in every sport really.

So again, I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, but I think HBK, in terms of the business side, is rated pretty accurately. I think he's overrated in the ring, but business-wise I think he's treated pretty fairly.

I agree, I don't get what is being said in the OP. But, I agree with this quote. Shawn was never really a draw for Vince either and I think thats why he tried to go with Sid later that year, just my opinion. I think he was trying to re- capture the magic of having a big, larger than life guy like Hogan, again, just my opinion ( I think that's why Diesel was champ too). Bret was bigger outside of the U.S. they did well in Europe and Canada when Bret was a headliner. If you go back and watch shows from 93-95, they weren't really set in large arenas, but in the U.K. and the rest of Europe, they drew exceptionally well. I'm not taking anything from Shawn. He worked hard to get his spot. He was having some great matches back then 94-97, but I think Vince was trying to capitalize on HBK's popularity back then, because he was so over, but it didn't quite translate economically for Vince.


I miss the days of wrestling when we didn't know all the backstage political B.S.

 

[Wald]

I always had a respect for Shawn for not jumping to WCW with his buddies.

Don't mean to reign on this parade but it's well documented that Shawn asked for his release at least twice to go join WCW. Some say he was just playing politics and making Vince choose between him and Bret but ultimately he did ask to leave the WWF.

As for the opening post, it's already been covered by other responses but 1996 (which was Shawn's year as from before the Rumble the spotlight was on him) was the WWF's worst year in terms of gates and merchandise. You can argue that that was down to the nWo all you want but facts are facts, plus Shawn was champion for 4 months by the time the nWo formed and people still weren't buying him as champ.

You mention Shawn as headlining New York so I'll ask you to go watch the Sid match at Survivor Series 1996 and tell me that crowd loved him.

Look the whole thing about Bret and Shawn as that both were great in the ring but neither were top draws, and by top draws I mean Hoga, Austin, Rock etc. They were very good draws but not top of the line. I think Cornette said it best when he was talking about Triple H, they're the guys who work with the guy who makes the tonne of money.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Bret did a good job as a draw but was never "stellar" in the way that Hogan, Austin Rock etc were in the US... BUT he made up a lot of it on foreign tours, that simply would not be booked if he wasn't there. So much of WWE's international life at the time was down to 3 guys, Davey, Bret & Taker.

As for Shawn the problem was more in his positioning as a babyface for the title run than anything. The "boyhood dream"/faceturn angle came across as cloying and Jose Lothario didn't work as a mentor for him but the problems were sewn all the way back to his first Rumble win in 95. Bret had a great angle the previous year with the "injury" and dual winners, Shawn got first guy to win from #1 but the problems were it was the shortest Rumble with guys every minute and #2 in the Rumble, Davey was the last man with Shawn. Rather than making Shawn the Iron Man of the situation it made Davey Boy an equal contender and it was only half an hour, so less of an achievement than Flair had made from #3.

So Shawn was positioned "weakly" into WM11 in the most weakly promoted title match to that date. Sid in his corner didn't help him and the loss to Diesel, and the rest of the years shenanigans with Marines and fake head traumas from Owen just reinforced that Shawn was a bit of a wuss when compared to the new, tougher guys coming in like Steve Austin or Bret who had previously always wrestled "hurt", even in storyline.

So by the time it was positioned for Shawn to win at WM12, even then it had to be overtime, sure it was dramatic...but it needed to be a decisive win if Shawn was going to be taken seriously as champ, within the 60.

Once word got out that Nash and Hall were out, Shawn was without his buddies to work with in those title feuds that not only he but Vince were banking on to headline that summer.

Those dice were cast in late 95 before Shawn even won the Rumble (this time longer) so WWE had a full 4-5 months to sort something and they did to an extent by bringing in Vader and Mankind who were the only decent matches Shawn had during that run. Once Hogan had turned it was too late, WCW had the momentum and Shawn, naturally a much better heel than a face was trapped with an annoying gimmick in a title run that was bland and vanilla compared to what was going on in WCW.

He did try to get out, I think a lot had to do with that even while his feud with Bret was simmering that he never believed Bret would go, that he would have to be the one to go, and once WCW was hot with his buddies, of course he would have loved to dump that belt on Nitro ala Alundra Blaze. Remember he was shacked up with Sunny for a lot of that time too, so that fallout (especially if the Bret rumors are true) would have come into play.

Ultimately, Shawn gets "flack" because he was, for 90% of his rise, a complete prick... he was drugged up, nasty, manipulative and not about the business but himself and his kliq. Once the marines battered him, he was set on a path, he was lucky to lose just "his smile" and by the time his "back gave out" he was damaged goods to the fans and the business at large. That he came back at all has always been a source of controversy, was he ever that badly hurt? or simply so messed up that he couldn't work? He turned it around to a big extent, but some will always remember the way he was... Being born again is great for him, his family and his career... repentance does a lot for a person, but not everyone will forget, even if they forgive.

 

[justinept]

Look the whole thing about Bret and Shawn as that both were great in the ring but neither were top draws, and by top draws I mean Hoga, Austin, Rock etc. They were very good draws but not top of the line. .

Hart was a curious case. He didn't draw a ton of money domestically, but he outdrew everyone overseas. I was a big Bret Hart fan, but for whatever reason, they worshiped him in Europe.

That said - the biggest reason Michaels gets flack is because of WrestleMania 13. With the company pretty much down to its last dollar, and VKM struggling to keep the water coolers filled, Shawn Michaels bailed on the company for what most every wrestler has since said was a fake injury. Whether it was a real injury or not is irrelevant at this point. The WWE needed a Michaels/Hart rematch to headline the event and draw a respectable buy-rate. Instead, Michaels lost his smile, forfeited the title and WrestleMania 13 delivered the lowest buy-rate in WWE history.

 

[Waylon Mercy]

As for Shawn the problem was more in his positioning as a babyface for the title run than anything. The "boyhood dream"/faceturn angle came across as cloying and Jose Lothario didn't work as a mentor for him.....

This is the part here that really made Shawn's first championship run problematic. Up to that point, Shawn was one of the best heels going in the business. Suddenly he is prancing around to "Sexy Boy", gyrating like a male stripper, and being passed off as a role model to young kids. The whole look and act just didn't fit in terms of being the top baby face of the company. To me, the whole thing seemed forced. All of the other issues surrounding Michaels' less-than-stellar title run in '96 are well documented. He was a polarizing figure backstage, and he had a number of issues with drugs. His buddies from the Kliq had moved on, and he really didn't give a damn. The icing on the cake was when Bret did come back, and rather than face him in the ring and drop the title as he was asked to do, he suddenly lost his smile. It was a pretty pathetic time in his career.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

I didn't really get into the "role model" stuff because it was clear he couldn't do it from day one. His successful periods were all as a heel and involved him being sneaky and cowardly rather than a heroic figure. That they tried to present him as such while retaining the "flamboyant" aspects of the character was never going to work. That they even tried to make him top face still surprises me as he never really had the tools at that time to do it, even his later face period was based more on him being away and "reborn" rather than any heroic traits he has.

Vince takes a lot of the blame for "punishing" the guy who could have been the face to Shawn's mega heel... HHH... Had Vince known about Hogan then the perfect counter would have been to use the Kliq break up to fuel Triple H on a face turn push, Trips blaming Shawn for holding him down and making him carry his bags just for a taste... but how big are you now your buddies are gone? Of course had that flown then Austin 3:16 wouldn't have... but HHH was going to be pushed until the MSG incident, had Vince punished Shawn instead then 96 could have been a lot better.

 

[braveh]

Despite poor ratings for Raw, how many of those who tuned did so to see Michaels wrestling skills? How much of those 2.0 ratings were older fans maybe old Steamboat fans who would have switched over to Nitro in a second if there wasn't any great wrestling on Raw?

I see what you're saying. Bret Hart and Micheals have a horrible track record as far tv-ratings go. But they also helped to establish WWF's monthly PPV's.

Summerslam 1995 - Shawn Michaels vs Razor Ramone - Great match!

 

[Ding_Dong_#2]

The real reason that Shawn Michaels gets so much flack because he is generally not a nice person.

Forgetting his on-screen persona, he is a self-absorbed, two-faced, arrogant, pathetic excuse for a human being. He is a fantasic in-ring performer and deserves to be held in high regard but his character and mic skills have always been shockingly bad; as a heel, it was just an extension of his true personality so it carried some weight but as a face, it was awful; those hackneyed expressions (only The Miz is worse), use of religious symbols on his clothes; it was awful. His legacy is that he was on top during the least successful period in WWF history.

He is a long way behind The Rock, Austin, Hogan, Hart, Flair, Savage and always will be. Great technical ability, wonderful prowess between the ropes but there are many performers who could say the same thing.

 

[hellod245]

The real reason that Shawn Michaels gets so much flack because he is generally not a nice person.

Forgetting his on-screen persona, he is a self-absorbed, two-faced, arrogant, pathetic excuse for a human being. He is a fantasic in-ring performer and deserves to be held in high regard but his character and mic skills have always been shockingly bad; as a heel, it was just an extension of his true personality so it carried some weight but as a face, it was awful; those hackneyed expressions (only The Miz is worse), use of religious symbols on his clothes; it was awful. His legacy is that he was on top during the least successful period in WWF history.

He is a long way behind The Rock, Austin, Hogan, Hart, Flair, Savage and always will be. Great technical ability, wonderful prowess between the ropes but there are many performers who could say the same thing.

You are right. Shawn's biggest accomplishment was that he was the top face during least successful time in wwe and he had so much bad attitude because of that. Think how would he react if he was healthy in attitude era and had to see Austin and Rock become 10 times more popular than he ever was. I am sure he would have had so many fights backstage with each of them.

 

[FlairFan2003]

WWE Business started to decline in late 1990 and steadily contiued, albeit slowly, through the end of HulkaMania. There was definately a decline during Hart's time as champ, much sharper. By the time Monday Nitro came along in 95 Raw Ratings were stuck between 2.4-2.7 range pretty consistently. Granted, that was about equal to Nitro but fact was interest in wrestling in general and WWE in particular declined throughout the whole, boring, Brett Hart New Generation Era.

Hart is very protective of his public personna, and gets very irate at any implication business declined because of him. He maybe the most defensive individual Ive ever seen interviewed about a career. Hart, fairly or unfairly, will always be tagged as the poster child for the biggest business decline in WWE history (although Cena & Punk may eclipse that as today as current business drops to new lows).

Michaels proved his value as a major draw during his comeback post 2002. Anytime he was prominently featured he helped deliver good numbers, and generated significant interest. However, there is no doubt that he was a jerk so to speak during his mid 90s heyday, he freely admitts that. The backstage politics and grandstanding from that time clearly will always be a part of his legacy, just like "creative control" and self promotion will always be a part of Hogan's legacy, you just cant white wash a part of someone's career because the narrative is unflattering.

I do feel that HBK clearly elevated his legacy by being a team player, working with younger talent, and when asked putting people over, he certainly was treated well by WWE but at the same time he was helpful in improving the program and helping build other wrestlers. Brett Hart will never have that aspect to his legacy, he pretty much ends as the guy Vince didnt value enough to keep who demeans anyone who dare criticize any aspect of his career. In fairness, if he hadnt been injured Hart may have taken a similair path to his late career, we will never know. Also in fairness to Hart booking of the overall product was poor during his New Generation run, and that was beyond his control.

In the end HBK proved his value as a draw during his comeback. Business declines started before Hart took over as the main guy and there was some lousy booking during that time but he was still the main guy when business didnt just decline it tanked, Hart was a boring character with limited charisma and mediocre promo skills, his best asset was his in ring skill, and when the much more charismatic and entertaining HBK came along he was eclipsed as No. 1 guy, just a short time after he got there, it was the right decission with the company moving into the "Attitude Era" style of promoting, where Hart's limited charisma and his very vocal displeasure with that more adult oriented style of programming made him a liability. Vince made a choice between who was more valuable and he chose Michaels, history shows that was the best choice. HBK will never totally get away from his borish behavior in the middle of his career but his contributions in his post 2002 comeback have erased much of that or at least made up for it.

 

[Wald]

Hart was a curious case. He didn't draw a ton of money domestically, but he outdrew everyone overseas. I was a big Bret Hart fan, but for whatever reason, they worshiped him in Europe.

No I understand that, I'm from Ireland and am a huge Bret mark. He was bigger than Hogan, Warrior, Taker everyone over here

 

[MisterRob]

Here’s the truth: What made WWE so bad during this period was not Shawn Michaels’ in-ability to draw, nor Bret Hart’s in-ability to draw, it was three main things. One: the writing, booking, and the entire direction of the WWE at this time. It was much like the PG era now and people, especially adults, weren’t interested in that. Number two goes hand-in-hand with one, and that’s the introduction of Monday Nitro for WCW and the way it was being booked, which right off the start began to introduce surprises like Lex Luger and continued on into the invasion angle and birth of the now, which kept the audience guessing what would happen next.

Three: The Kliq. It was during this time that the Kliq came into prominence backstage and gained a ton of influence in the booking of WWE’s product and certainly the matches that took place. You saw the same sort of thing happen in WCW with Kevin Nash towards the period WCW declined and began to tank, as that was when things centered around Kevin Nash’s character and he was booking.

Those are the true reasons for the WWE’s decline, not specifically either of those talents in-ability to draw as champion. If things were different in the direction of the company and its booking, it’s hard to say whether either Bret Hart or Shawn Michaels could’ve fared a lot better in terms of drawing. Just look at Kevin Nash: A big, strong, larger-then-life wrestler who bombed as champion in the WWE and was one of its weaker drawing champions during that time. But when he went to WCW and was surrounded by edgier and innovative booking, he was actually a very good draw within the now for WCW.

With that said, I personally disagree with anyone who says Bret Hart was a bad draw. The WWE were going back and forth and trading wins during the time he was champion, and during the last few months especially before his decline as champion the WWE had been winning the ratings for Monday night. That was the build up to the Iron man match and Bret Hart’s departure for almost a year, and consequently Shawn Michaels first reign as champion.

Bret Hart may not have been a huge draw in the US on the scale of Hogan, Austin, the Rock, etc. But Hart WAS a draw, even Vince McMahon has claimed this, and he certainly was internationally for WWE. Hart was also instrumental in helping build Shawn Michaels to take over as champion, and in building Steve Austin into the “Stone Cold” character who would explode into a mega star. WWE didn’t tank with Bret Hart holding the reigns, they were still successful, still kept toe-to-toe with WCW, and they certainly were growing and expanding their international audience during that time.

Shawn Michaels, though, isn’t claimed by people in the business and those who actually KNOW as a draw and he WAS in fact champion for the WWE’s worst period. You can’t put Bret Hart into that equation because he was gone during that period. It was only when Steve Austin took the torch and became the face of the company from Michaels that WWE began to rise and become successful again. You can even look at DX as an argument: Even when Shawn Michaels was gone, retired, HHH lead the new DX to being a draw and being extremely over. Can the same be said of other stables when they lose their main star and top draw? Do they still remain just as over or become even more so? Of course not.

Without Shawn Michaels the WWE not only survived but became even more successful, without Bret Hart the WWE tanked with Michaels holding the reigns.

 

[Swarles Barkley]

That said - the biggest reason Michaels gets flack is because of WrestleMania 13. With the company pretty much down to its last dollar, and VKM struggling to keep the water coolers filled, Shawn Michaels bailed on the company for what most every wrestler has since said was a fake injury. Whether it was a real injury or not is irrelevant at this point. The WWE needed a Michaels/Hart rematch to headline the event and draw a respectable buy-rate. Instead, Michaels lost his smile, forfeited the title and WrestleMania 13 delivered the lowest buy-rate in WWE history.

But not having the rematch was a blessing in disguise because it led to the meteoric rise of Steve Austin. I think Austin would have always been the top guy, but that match with Bret at WM13 was the launching point for him. Without that match, I don't know how high Steve Austin goes. The visual of him with blood running down his face was a WWF staple for a decade. Michaels backing out of the rematch may, in hindsight, have been the best thing that ever happened to the WWF. Had Michaels and Hart fought, who knows who Austin would have tangled with, but I doubt it would have been as memorable as the match he had with Bret.

 

[Waylon Mercy]

The sad thing is, as you watch the "Rivalries" DVD with Bret and Shawn, with JR leading the interview, it is plain to see that Michaels was so messed up during this time that he really has no recollection of things. Bret remembers pretty much every last detail of what fueled their bitter rivalry during this period, even though he sustained a major concussion and had a subsequent heart attack. Shawn, on the other hand, looks at Bret a lot during the discussion and appears confused. This kind of lends credence to the fact that he was really messed up on drugs during that time. That, and his brain is slowly eroding due to all the bumps he has taken in the ring.

 

[MTL722]

The sad thing is, as you watch the "Rivalries" DVD with Bret and Shawn, with JR leading the interview, it is plain to see that Michaels was so messed up during this time that he really has no recollection of things. Bret remembers pretty much every last detail of what fueled their bitter rivalry during this period, even though he sustained a major concussion and had a subsequent heart attack. Shawn, on the other hand, looks at Bret a lot during the discussion and appears confused. This kind of lends credence to the fact that he was really messed up on drugs during that time. That, and his brain is slowly eroding due to all the bumps he has taken in the ring.

I'm surprised it took so long for someone to bring up the "Rivalries" dvd. Every question you really have about Shawn could be answered by watching it. Having both Bret and Shawn right next to each other (not to mention JR asking questions) forced both men to be truthful about events that occurred in their careers. You also see how hard it is for Shawn to put together lucid recollections of what was happening back in the 90's.

The guy really struggles while Bret very clearly remembers everything from conversations to rumors that were going around at the time. It really goes to show that Shawn might have been more messed up than anybody knew.

Anybody commenting on this thread that hasn't seen the DVD should do it as soon as possible. (Netflix has it)

And for the record, I've watched the casket match between Michaels and Undertaker probably 100 times just for that moment of impact that "ended Shawns career" and I can't see how on earth it put him out for 3 years when Austin was only out 1 after Owen broke his neck, but thats a different discussion

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

This is silly.

Blaming either Bret or Shawn for the state of the business between 1994-1997 is absurd. They were the ones keeping it alive. Look at who they had to work with?

Bret lost to Yokozuna
Followed by a 10 month Yokozuna championship reign
Meanwhile Bret was feuding with Doink and Jerry Lawler..

And you want to blame Bret Hart for this?

When Bret did win the title back - who did he feud with? Bob Fucking Backlund.
Who held it for what? 1 day before being squashed by Diesel? BTW... Bret's feud with Owen during this time was a classic... draw or not... everyone should be greatful they got to watch this happen.

OK, but then Diesel held the belt for 12 months.

In the meantime, Bret was feuding with...More Bob Backlund, More Jerry Lawler.. Oh and yes, how can we forget Issac Yankem....

And you want to blame Bret for not drawing?

He finally ended Diesel's run and had a 5-star match with HBK. He then left the company for 7 months.

Who did Michaels have the pleasure of main eventing with? British Bulldog, Vader and Sid... The face depth in WWF at this time consisted of Shawn Michaels, Ultimate Warrior and Ahmed Johnson...

Again... Michaels wasn't exactly having his best matches vs. these guys... but what can you expect? He was doing his best to keep the company alive.

From there we were treated to the amazing Bret/Austin feud and eventually the Bret/Michaels-Canada/USA feud and the eventual screwjob. In late '96 and throughout '97 WWF may not have been drawing ratings, but their show was actually incredibly entertaining... And it lead to the big boom in 1998. Ratings don't change over night. And sometimes it takes a year of amazing programming before ratings start to increase. And for this, I credit Bret, Shawn, Taker, Kane and Austin.

I strongly believe the funk WWF was in during the mid-90's was not because of Bret or Shawn. These guys, along with Undertaker... did everything they could to keep the company from dying. Face it... When Mabel, Isaac Yankem, Bob Backlund and Jerry Lawler are in your main events... you're not going to draw.

Undertaker is a great example of this. He was a top guy during this time. Why doesn't the blame fall on him? He eventually drew buys and ratings in the attitude era.. So was it his fault in 1996?

Of course not... there was close to no depth on the roster during this time.

Bret and Shawn kept it alive. If not for them... Mabel and Backlund could have main evented a WrestleMania...

 

[jacdnwarrior]

It never ceases to amaze me how people try to make HBK into a victim. HBK does have fans and people who adore him no matter what. That's fine. The thing fans of his won't accept, is that just because you're a fan of his doesn't make him above criticism or being held accountable for his failures. Every one has their failings. We all do.

I'm not a fan of Michaels. I find him to be an amazing performer but he's more of an acrobat, which has its appeal, but just doesn't work for every one. He did his best but he made a lot of mistakes in appealing to the WWF audience. I'm focusing on the audience not the performers because most of us have heard that already.

Here's my problems with him:

1)He was not a draw, he was worse than Bret. Can't fault him entirely for that but let's be truthful he wasn't a draw.

2) He tried too hard to get people's admiration or sympathy. Nothing turned me off him more than his 'I Lost My Smile' speech. Then there's the video montage of him with that song 'Tell me A lie' that played when he announced his departure. It was just so needy and desperate for attention.

3) As mentioned before, his style might have played a part in himnot being as successful as the face of the company.

The thing about wrestling it's a tough man's sport. Some performers can get away with playing the effeminate performer, sensitive, examining your feelings type of performer, some can't. Doing the things I listed above turned off me and maybe, a lot of the male audience within that time period. Women may have sympathized and cried but truth is they aren't the main demographic WWF wanted. Men don't care about your smile, your tears etc. they want to see you kick ass.

 

[justtxyank]

On the draw issue, I think people do a disservice to people like Diesel and Shawn Michaels. No, they didn't draw the way they should have, but I don't think it's because fans wouldn't watch them as champions. Someone in here said HBK didn't draw because of size, yet Diesel didn't draw that well either and he had the size.

I am of the opinion that they didn't draw because Vince McMahon turned both of them into vanilla, baby kissing, fan club wrestlers. They were so obnoxious. If Diesel had been allowed to continue as cool, badass Diesel he would have drawn. Shawn's most popular times were as a heel in the early 90s and then the DX version in the late 90s. The period after his face turn where he was kissing little girls and getting the stupid intro was a disaster.

The problem has more to do with Vince then those two. Everytime Vince has his way he sends the business PG and wants vanilla baby kissing faces. It hasn't worked since Hogan, and even Hogan wasn't as vanilla as Vince wanted HBK to be.

 

[Wald]

I am of the opinion that they didn't draw because Vince McMahon turned both of them into vanilla, baby kissing, fan club wrestlers. They were so obnoxious. If Diesel had been allowed to continue as cool, badass Diesel he would have drawn. Shawn's most popular times were as a heel in the early 90s and then the DX version in the late 90s. The period after his face turn where he was kissing little girls and getting the stupid intro was a disaster.

This is a good point. I went through Michaels before but I'll touch on Diesel before talking on HBK again. Diesel got himself over as Kevin Nash before he started calling himself Kevin Nash in the ring. He was cocky, cool and a bad ass. Then the split with Michaels happened and all of a sudden the guy is the vanilla babyface who loves everyone and everything. It didn't work and people legitimately wanted Michaels to take the title off him at Wrestlemania 11 in the worst promoted main event ever at a Wrestlemania.

I mean, go back and look at that. You had an in-built story of two best friends, former tag partners and they even had the size difference levelled with Sid being introduced and it was the worst executed main event at a Wrestlemania ever. But anyway, as soon as Bret took the title off Diesel and he turned cocky and heelish again surprise surprise the fans took to him once more. Shame he was heading for WCW, but what is a surprise is that Vince allowed Diesel to leave strong and with a refined character that he brought to superstardom with the nWo.

Now for Michaels, he was doomed as a face from the get go. Rewind back to the Raw after Wrestlemania 11 and his face turn against Sid. Go watch it on Youtube and you'll see the blueprint for Michaels as a top draw was flawed from the beginning.

[YOUTUBE]Bi5geLcu9hY[/YOUTUBE]

HBK is acting heel here and disrespects Sid. Sid, who is supposed to be the heel coming out of this, rightly beats the hell out of the cocky boytoy to cheers from the audience.

Fast forward to Michaels feud with Bret. Bret is presented as the working class Canadian who has fought for every bit of respect and honour he was ever won. Michaels is shown with his top off or in a crop top and working out, again he comes off as cocky and Bret comes across as humble.

[YOUTUBE]p13JNqIhKW4[/YOUTUBE]

Look at the Wrestlemania 12 match and you'll hear that Bret had more cheers throughout the match than HBK (the crowd pops for a draw at the end). He was doomed as a face from here because he never changed his character up from being the heel to the face, except dancing with kids in the ring (which always looked a bit wrong to be honest) and doing that obnoxious Kliq Kam.

We were genuinely never given a reason to cheer for Shawn as a face, fault for that lies at the door of both Vince and Shawn. Vince was woeful as a booker at this time, really, really bad and refused to change up his product. Shawn should have been able to go to him as Champ and say this isn't working, we need to try something else.

 

[Waylon Mercy]

I didn't buy Michaels as the champ who realized his "Boyhood dreams", especially when right after that grueling and amazing 5 star Iron Man Match, Shawn clearly tells Bret to get the fuck out of his ring. Bret has played this down as of late since patching things up with Shawn, but it had to have stung really badly. Bret had given Shawn the match of his life up to that point, and this was the gratitude he was extended. It is clearly indicative of where Shawn's head was at right from the get go. I think Bret summed things up best when he described his relationship with Shawn as that of an older brother to a younger brother. The sky could have been the limit between these two guys, and if Shawn hadn't had his head stuck firmly up his ass, he would have realized how they could have lit the wrestling world on fire with a long-running feud. Bret envisioned a feud that would simmer and boil, as though these two were destined to be intertwined. I think that would have been the classic of all classic rivalries.