And yet, you're the one who said Hart's great matches with Bulldog, Owen and HBK were due to the production crew.Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I'll state mine now: the only one who looks bad in that thread is you.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
And yet, you're the one who said Hart's great matches with Bulldog, Owen and HBK were due to the production crew.Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I'll state mine now: the only one who looks bad in that thread is you.
It's been forever since I read the book, so I didn't remember that. I do remember Hart sticking up for Savage because Flair apparently had said something similar about Savage at some point.Nah, in Flair's book, Flair says he suggested something to do different during Bret's comeback, and Bret wouldn't hear any of it.
Bret said:A few months later, when I found out I’d be having a one hour marathon
match at the Boston Garden with Ric, I came up with a brilliant storyline
that I ran by Vince, who loved it. When I ran it by Flair in the dressing room
the night of the show he immediately interrupted me and began telling me what
we were going to do instead. I finally had to cut him off and sadly dress him
down in front of several wrestlers saying, “Ric, I’m the champion and this is
how it’s going to go.” He dropped his jaw, turned red, and took his seat,
saying, “You’re the champ.” He never, ever got over it either.
And that's all I've been trying to get across.Now, I am a Bret Hart fan, so I have nothing bad to say about the guy. I think his "5 Moves of Doom" was just, as Bret put it, apart of his finisher. His finisher wasn't just the Sharpshooter, but that entire set of moves he used to weaken his opponent up for the Sharpshooter. So, of course he had to have it in every match, since those moves combined was officially his finisher (much like how Hogan wouldn't just beat people with the leg drop, but he also had the super punches and the big boot to be apart of his finisher). I've never seen Bret Hart have two matches that looked similar at all. He was a marvelous worker.
It's been forever since I read the book, so I didn't remember that. I do remember Hart sticking up for Savage because Flair apparently had said something similar about Savage at some point.
Just out of curiosity, was it the same instance Bret talked about in his column?
Red rep is coming for me, I can feel it.
Red rep is coming for me, I can feel it.
People voting against purely because of what he's done outside the ring is very hypocritcal and yet these same people will probably get Eddie Guerrero fairly far.
I'm pretty sure it is, since reading the setting of Boston rings a bell.
And yeah, he makes similar claims about Savage, but he uses it as an excuse why one of their matches was horrible (Vince had them restart it), and also as a way to describe how his matches with Steamboat were better than Savage's match with Steamboat at Wrestlemania 3.
But yeah... Flair's main criticism against Hart that I remember from the book takes place in Boston, and it was because Bret wouldn't let Flair interrupt Bret's comeback.
other than the architecture classes that kicking my ass right now, pretty good. yourself?
I've yet to read Ascension 27, but It's on my to do list.
I've decided I'm not going to read the tournament bracket this year; I want some surprise.
Especially since the wrestling industry has been heavy with drug use for decades. I don't condone someone using drugs, but to vote against a WRESTLER because of drug use is just silly. Back in the 80s, it seems it was harder to find someone who WASN'T on some kind of drug, than to find one who was.Pretty sad that Hardy gets hated so much for his drug issues.
Especially since the wrestling industry has been heavy with drug use for decades. I don't condone someone using drugs, but to vote against a WRESTLER because of drug use is just silly. Back in the 80s, it seems it was harder to find someone who WASN'T on some kind of drug, than to find one who was.
Especially since the wrestling industry has been heavy with drug use for decades. I don't condone someone using drugs, but to vote against a WRESTLER because of drug use is just silly. Back in the 80s, it seems it was harder to find someone who WASN'T on some kind of drug, than to find one who was.
Except y'know Eddie went clean whereas Jeff has proven on a number of occasions that he simply doesn't give a shit.
Whilst arguing over the NWA International Heavyweight Championship.So an championship won in an indy promotion classifies as a world championship now? Oh boy.