Who had more talent? The Hart's or the Klique

[CCS]

After reading both Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels books it got me thinking. Which side really has more talent. Both Shawn and Bret claim their respective sides had more talent. So which group really had more talent? I'll break it down. For the sake of a good arguement I'm including the extended Hart family (British Bulldog,Dynamite Kid, and Jim Neidhart)



The Hart Family
Stu Hart
Bret Hart
Owen Hart
Jim Niedhart
Davey Boy Smith
The Dynamite Kid


The Klique
Shawn Michaels
Triple H
Sean "X-pac" Waltman
Kevin Nash
Scott Hall


Both sides have multiple word championships. Both sides have a lot of talent. But which is really better? I'm going to go with the extended Hart family. They had all the talent in the world and they didnt have to politic to get it over. Every single member of the list of Harts i used had enough talent to become a world champion (excluding Jim Neidhart) All of them was great had great matches during their time and in my opinion they should all be Hall of Famers.

 

[Crush1]

Wow this is a really tough one and i dont think i'm the right person to answer it as i havent seen much of the stuff both groups did. But if i were to judge on the few matches i've seen of both these amazingly talented groups, i would go with the Hart family.

The reason is because these guys made wrestling really popular not only in the US but also in Canada. And with all of the matches i've seen Bret Hart stood above all. Bret Hart had some magic to just keep me glued to my monitor while watching his mathc against Michaels more than once. So i think just because i'm more intrested in the Harts and not the Klique maybe proves they had more talent.

 

[HBK-aholic]

Great thread, I'll rep you when I can.

I think Bret is the strongest link on the side of The Harts, Shawn is the strongest in the Kliq. This is tough, but Bret Hart goes over everyone except Shawn Michaels in the Kliq, I believe. Shawn in the only person I can call better than him. However, Triple H is also more powerful than any of the other Harts. While 'legends' in their own right, the Hart family wouldn't be recognised as as great as they are, without Bret Hart.

I'm just rambling on, aren't I? Anyway, I think the Kliq are stronger because they have the better list there. Great moments spring to mind with almost all of the Kliq, but there are a lot less when it comes to the Harts, a big feat especially considering there are more of the Harts.

 

[Marquis]

This is a tough one indeed. While i am biased towards the Hart family there is no denying both group were very talented, but my vote still goes to the Hart family.

They put on the better matches and cut decent promos. I won't deny they weren't as good on the mic as the Klique, but they all had the potential and talent to be world champions and better ones then the Klique. Sadly only Bret reached the apex. I would have loved to have seen Davey given a world title run. Overall more successful? Probably the Klique, more talented? no doubt in my mind the Hart family.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Although pretty much all the glory went to the Kliq, the Hart's were definetely the more talented of the bunch. Now I am from Calgary so there is probably alot of bias in me thinkin this. The Kliq had some awesome talent but at the same time, I feel the likes of HHH, hall, and nash have no where near the talent level of Davey, Dynamite, and Owen, they just got the pushes because they were the more marketable of the bunch. I also feel Bret was great, but I can't honestly say he was better than Shawn Michaels or vice-versa. Overall though I have to give the Hart Family having the better talent.

 

[Savage1]

This is a tough argument to make...if it is based solely on talent then there are some underlying factors. I was, am, and always will be a Bret Hart fan and I am also a Shawn Michaels fan. In the 90's they were two different people. Bret was the hero...squeaky clean, well spoken, always carried himself professionally. Shawn was the prima donna, bad boy, brash, cocky and edgy. Talent wise these two are neck and neck. Bret was technically the most sound wrestler ever. Shawn was always a hard worker and innovator. As far as thier respective stables go, I would give the overall edge to the Kliq. I hear the argument that the Harts had more talent and that the reason the Kliq held more titles was because they were more marketable...my thought is that in some sense marketability is a type of talent isn't it? Triple H is still at the top of the heap. Nash was one of the best big men in the game. Hall was the best wrestler to never hold a major world title(which I think was partially to do with his demons). Waltman was...eh...okay. But these guys were great on the stick, great in the ring, and had "the look". To me the intangible that makes someone marketable enough to hold major titles is a talent. I'm done rambling. Thats my opinion. Take it or leave it.

 

[klunderbunker]

Wow I'm not sure. I think my first instinct is the Harts, but it's very close. The biggest thing hurting the Klique is Waltman. The guy was too small, didn't have the move set to make up for his size which many people his size have been able to do, he was upper mid card at his very best, and he just seemed worthless to me. This leaves you with Hall, Nash, HHH and HBK, which is a damn good foursome. Up against the Harts though, that's hard to do. The key to the Harts is that there's so damn many of them. Stu is someone that I don't know if any of us have seen, but from what I've heard he was a master. Jesse Ventura was a fan of his so that has to mean something. Bret and Owen we know are both awesome, and Neidhart was good when he was with Bret. Add in the Bulldogs and they're damn near impossible to beat. Bret and Shawn I think cancel each other out. HHH is then by far the most talented of the four, but is he more talented than Owen and Smith combined? I don't really think so. Overall just based on the sheer size of the Hart family, I'll go with them.

 

[Remasked Kane]

Success wise, this is an easy victory for the 'Klique'. Michaels, Helmsley, and Nash are legitimate World Champions, those three plus Hall also being some of the highest money earners in wrestling history as well (not to mention many other smaller championship reigns for every member of the group). Only Bret Hart managed the same level of success as Shawn, Hunter, and Kevin.

Talent wise, it's just as easily a victory for the Hart Family. Only Shawn can hang with Bret and Dynamite, and Owen gives the second most talented member of the Klique (Triple H) a serious run for his money. The only 'drop' in talent for the Hart Family is Neidhart (I'm ignoring Stu Hart for this discussion), who probably is the least talented of the wrestlers on this list, but throwing in British Bulldog with Bret, Dynamite, and Owen and you have the four best wrestlers to ever come of a single family or group.

 

[Darkmamba]

I agree with what you had to say, except who was included in the Hart Family. Dynamite Kid was never part of the Hart Family. He worked out of Stampede Wrestling when Bret did, and was put in the British Bulldogs along with Davey Boy. Dynamite isn't a relative of any of them. You are probably thinking of Jim "The Anvil" Neidhart who married into the family. Same as Davey Boy.

 

[hodgy]

He may not have been directly related but he was a distant relative in two ways. As i hope u know he was the cousin of the late Davey Boy Smith. Also he was married to Bret Hart's ex-wife Julie's sister. Thus pretty much making him a part of the family.

 

[The Heartthrob]

Okay, so if you want to go extended versions of both sides, then you're leaving a key member off each side...with the Hart Family, you had an unofficial Hart, in the late Brian Pillman, who is regarded as one of the best high flyers of the 90s.

and on the Kliq side of the equation, you're forgetting PJ Walker, better known to the wrestling world as Justin Credible. Some of his best matches was teaming with Lance Storm as part of the Impact Players.

But if you're looking for the best overall talent between both sides, then hands down it goes to Owen Hart. Scott Steiner recently did an interview, where he quoted Scott Hall as the greatest wrestler to have never won a major world championship. NO CHANCE! At least in WWE terms, the greatest wrestler to have never worn the WWE/WWF Championship was the King of Harts.

 

[waylon p]

it all comes down to what sort of talent you are discussing.

if you are looking for in ring wrestling ability in terms of move set only, there is no contest. bret and his brother were two of the best pure wrestlers ever. there were no slouches in the hart group.

but looking at the klique, you have some of the best entertainers the wrestling world has ever seen. i just wish shawn and hunter had been with them when they hooked up with just about the only man from whom they might learn something in that department in the form of the immortal hulk hogan.

so, in the end, it depends on whether your definition of talent veers more toward "good wrestling" or "good t.v."

i have no doubt that they are equally important, but to judge the qualities of one against the other is a daunting task, in my book.

 

[HBK-aholic]

I'm kind of confused here, for the few saying the most successful were the Kliq, yet the most talented were the Harts. Call me silly, but I always thought if you were more talented, you'd be more successful. I can't imagine McMahon would (to use a phrase many like) 'hold back' the Harts.

The Kliq are a great set of individuals, all extremely talented in their own way, and that's what led to their success. I'm not trying to say the Hart family weren't talented in the slightest, I'm a huge fan of them. But the Kliq were the most successful, and that's because they are more talented.

 

[Tastycles]

In terms of success and lasting impact from their in ring careers, I think you have to go with the Klique. Nash, HHH and HBK are all world champions, and only Bret Hart has won it from the Hart group. In addition, the Hart Foundation, whilst a solid stable in its day, really didn't change the landscape of wrestling in the long term, in the same way that DX and the nWo did, both of which were dominated by Klique members.

I found it interestng that people were comparing Bret and HBK in previous posts. In terms of accomplishments, HHH's far outweigh that of HBK, so it should be him compared to Bret. For the record, I think HBK is much more entertaining, but his injury cost him the best years of his career.

In terms of matches, I think HBK and Bret Hart are in a different league to the others. However, all of the members of the Klique have at some time or other impressed me with their in ring ability. (I'm thinking 1-2-3 Kid more than X-Pac.) Owen Hart was immensley impressive in his early years, and probably third on the list but Jim Neidhart really lets the Hart's down here. He is a typical generic wrestler of the late 80s, and I really don't find that very enthralling.

However, I have left Stu Hart out. The reason for this is that he was 72 years old when I was born, and there isn't much wrestling from 50 years ago on youtube. I have no idea how good he was in the ring. What I do know is that he is responsible for training just about every single big name Canadian wrestler for the last 20 years. If he wasn't in the list, it'd be an easy win for the Klique, but he certainly makes the decision harder.

However, I think that the Klique still edge it. The Harts are let down mostly because the Dynamite Kid never really fulfilled his potential and Jim Neidhart is rubbish. That being said, of the list I think Stu Hart is probably the most important figure in wrestling (I'm taking the "talent" in the question to include training talent).

 

[image1986]

Politics aside the kilq win this faceoff for a few reasons. One every member of the kliq career benefited from association with hbk whether it was match with him or partnered up with him and made the majority of the group world champions. Now the harts on the other hand seem to not have the same level of success as bret. Talent wise there even because the kliq had the look and mic skills and was above average wrestling skills except for shawn who was the best out of all of them. The harts had the talent wrestling wise but few had the charisma expect owen and bret and without that the harts as a whole can't outdraw the kilq. In addition each individual member had success on their own expectly shawn and triple h. I don't believe triple h had more success than michaels at all but that's not what we discussing. If u take away bulldog and neidhart who were the weakness link then the harts only really had owen and bret and owen was never world champion(not to say he couldn't have been) but if u add the accomplishments of both factions then the kilq wins hands down.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

HBK-aholic is right, this is a terrific thread.

On the Hart's Side

You left off Rick Martel, who was also a Bret Hart in-law. But either way. With Bret Hart, you have the definitive legend who helped define the early and mid 90's, the man who carried some classic feuds, the best babyface for 3 or 4 years and the best heel of 1997, the man who toppled Yokozuna, etc. Hardly enough superlatives to describe Bret. Great seller, great worker, never injured an opponent. With Owen, you have a talented flyer and backstage favorite who is over rated thanks in part to his passing. This group has two of the greatest tag teams in wrestling history with the Hart Foundation and The British Bulldogs, and one of the greatest wrestling trainers in history with Stu.

On Kliq's Side

With the Kliq, you have Shawn Michaels, one of the best big-match performers and sellers in history. A man who TRULY broke through the Vince McMahon glass ceiling of big champions by winning several titles as a smaller guy and a high flyer, the man who is known for the best tag team split in wrestling history, and one of the greatest IC Champs of all time. You also had the two men who started the nWo, and along with Hogan, led WCW over WWF for quite a stretch of time. You also have Triple H - the Game - one of the best performers in wrestling today.

Both sides almost strike each other out in terms of talent. Imagine a War Games style match with Bret, Owen, Davey, Dynamite, and Jim on one side managed by Stu vs Shawn, HHH, Hall, Nash, and Waltman on the other. Holy hell, blood war.

But the Kliq side has one this the Hart side doesn't. DRAMA. The Kliq has caused ripple effects of drama on several occassions in wrestling, and to this day rumors abound about Triple H and "holding people back" and Shawn's attitude and Hall's demons and Nash's ego.

The Kliq side also drew better than Bret's side, and thats not really disputable. Bret is the best one in the contest, but the Kliq get the edge because they really made the better gate. Also, Hart's side has Owen and Neidhart as weak links - The Kliq only have Waltman.

 

[Emmet]

I look at this in 2 ways: Success and talent.

Success wise, the Kliq is the winners hands down, Nash, Hbk, HHH all world champs at one point or another (although I bet Vince wished he never put the belt on Nash). Hall a multi time IC champ. Waltman was well..Waltman. They all made their presence felt in one way or another throughout wrestling history.

Talent wise, The Harts win this without a doubt IMO. The funny thing about wrestling which you dont find in other sports, is that the cream never rises to the top all the time. Its never always the most talented guy which is the champ. Which if would be the case most of the Harts and Hart relations would all be champions by now.

Bret, obviously the best of the bunch, best out of all wrestlers from both sides. Dynamite kid, is easily a second best out of the Hart family and more talented than HHH, Nash, Hall, Waltman and probably on a level with HBK. When Bret Hart says he is the greatest wrestler he has ever wrestled with, and hes wrestled everyone that proclaims themselves to be 'the greatest', you know the boy's got talent. I dont agree with Bret. I dont think he was better than he was, but he was an outstanding wrestler.

Owen beats Waltman and Nash IMO. Watching a Kevin Nash match was horrible (except when he wrestled Bret). Waltman was pretty decent as the 123 Kid, but then after that he went into decline. Hall was decent when he has the right guy along with him (Bret, Hbk etc). Anvil was a pain to watch aswell, but he was one half of one of the greatest tag teams in history.

So when it comes right down to it. If you were Vince McMahon say. And you had Bret as a champion one of brand and HBK the champion of another brand, who would you want on your undercard? I would want Dynamite, Owen etc. Who you know will give you solid matches. Rather than Hall, HHH, Nash who would give you poor to average matches most nights.

So I would go with The Harts on this one. Just about though.

 

[Big Sexy]

I'd have to go with the Kliq.

When it comes to wrestling ability I'd give a slight edge to the Harts, but it's a lot closer then people think. Shawn Michaels is obviously one of the most talented wrestlers ever. Then you have Triple H who a lot of people don't like but you can't deny his talent. Scott Hall when he actually showed up was an amazing in ring performer. Sean Waltman was another guy who always put on entertaining matches. Kevin Nash is really the only weak link when it comes to the actual wrestling side of things.

With everything else the Kliq is far superior to the Harts. When it came to cutting promos every member of the Klique was very good, with the excpetion maybe being Sean Waltman. The Harts were ok, but none of them were amazing with the mic.

The final thing is drawing power, and with the exception of Bret Hart none of the other Harts really drew much. On the other hand, every member of the Kliq, again maybe with the exception of Waltman, was able to draw.

The Kliq was a lot more successful and they are all around better then the Harts.

 

[Monkey_Mania]

Like has been said before. It's a pretty tough decision. But in the end im going to have to go with the Kliq. Not just for the two main guys in Triple H and Shawn Michaels. That right there is pretty awesome itself. But they also had Nash and Hall? Pfft... The Kliq takes it, just barely. Waltman almost makes them lose becaus of his non talent. But the question is, who is more talented. Well based on statistics, the Kliq is better than Most of the Harts. The only exception being Bret Hart.

 

[gleamx]

i think its funny that this is even a conversation. the kliq was famous because mcmahon likes people with charisma and size. bret was held down due to his size while owen was geared up to be "the game" and be a stand out star. bret was an amazing wrestler, but lacked the charisma of his younger brother owen and shawn michaels. the size of kevin nash and scott hall was what kept them around, remember how well kevin nash did in his matches against bill goldberg? living proof that you can't polish a turd. also we neglected to mention how the kliq had a few not so well known people(ie: Sean Waltman, Justin Credible).

 

[Mighty NorCal]

i think its funny that this is even a conversation.

your right it IS funny, since its the Kliq by about ten miles. Lets see here, WHO exactly did the Hart Foundation have?? Bret Hart and a gaggle of nothing mid carders, and tag wrestlers?? true all of them were fine, sound technical wrestlers, but what did any of them acheive besides Bret?? Who in and of himself, was only on top of WWE during one of its least successfull periods. Nothing. Some tag titles here, some IC titles there, but nothing of note, and no remarkable runs. Shit, even the MOST memorable feuds they had were WITH EACH OTHER, and those were good...once again, becuase of Bret. Really, Owen, Bulldog, Neidhart, the lot of them, accomplished little to nothing, other than being ver fine, entertaining filler.

Then, you have the Kliq. Which is a who's who list of success.

HBK, Mr Wrestlemania, THE Icon, THE main event, and one of the greatest of our time. Kevin Nash, who up until now, was the only one year grand slam champion, and one of the catylsts of the biggest angle in the history of wrestling. Triple H, who is one of the, if not THE most dominant wrestler of the last 10 years, and Scott Hall, one of the top mid carders of all time. Regardless of what means they acheived them, they have 100X the drawing power of anythin in the Hart Foundation. Your talent in pro wrestling is based upon how well you draw money, and the Kliq, overall is leaps and bounds ahed of the Hart Foundation. Only the smarkiest of the smarks would even give this argument a second glance, or thought. Not even remotely debateable, its The Kliq.

 

[Remasked Kane]

I'm kind of confused here, for the few saying the most successful were the Kliq, yet the most talented were the Harts. Call me silly, but I always thought if you were more talented, you'd be more successful. I can't imagine McMahon would (to use a phrase many like) 'hold back' the Harts.

The Kliq are a great set of individuals, all extremely talented in their own way, and that's what led to their success. I'm not trying to say the Hart family weren't talented in the slightest, I'm a huge fan of them. But the Kliq were the most successful, and that's because they are more talented.

I don't understand the confusion. Talent and success don't have a 1:1 to ratio in any sport or walk of life, least of all wrestling. It's only 1 of many determining factors. Much of the success of the Kliq could just as easily be attributed to physical gifts given by nature (Nash/Hall) or knowing the right people (the entire group) or determination (Triple H), not factors individually linked to talent.

The same can go for why very talented people may never live up to their success. Dynamite Kid is an innovator who's influence is still being felt today... can we really say that personal demons and bad business choices are less relevant to the levels of success he achieved than pure talent? Even Bret, who went on to achieve levels of success Dynamite never tasted, said that Dynamite was the best wrestler he'd ever known.

Who's to say what Owen would have accomplished if he hadn't died in that tragic accident?

your right it IS funny, since its the Kliq by about ten miles. Lets see here, WHO exactly did the Hart Foundation have?? Bret Hart and a gaggle of nothing mid carders, and tag wrestlers?? true all of them were fine, sound technical wrestlers, but what did any of them acheive besides Bret?? Who in and of himself, was only on top of WWE during one of its least successfull periods. Nothing. Some tag titles here, some IC titles there, but nothing of note, and no remarkable runs. Shit, even the MOST memorable feuds they had were WITH EACH OTHER, and those were good...once again, becuase of Bret. Really, Owen, Bulldog, Neidhart, the lot of them, accomplished little to nothing, other than being ver fine, entertaining filler.

Then, you have the Kliq. Which is a who's who list of success.

HBK, Mr Wrestlemania, THE Icon, THE main event, and one of the greatest of our time. Kevin Nash, who up until now, was the only one year grand slam champion, and one of the catylsts of the biggest angle in the history of wrestling. Triple H, who is one of the, if not THE most dominant wrestler of the last 10 years, and Scott Hall, one of the top mid carders of all time. Regardless of what means they acheived them, they have 100X the drawing power of anythin in the Hart Foundation. Your talent in pro wrestling is based upon how well you draw money, and the Kliq, overall is leaps and bounds ahed of the Hart Foundation. Only the smarkiest of the smarks would even give this argument a second glance, or thought. Not even remotely debateable, its The Kliq.

Wow... so Shawn is 'Mr. WrestleMania' and 'THE Icon'... but Bret isn't equally deserving of the same hype? He was just on top during one of WWE's 'least successful periods'. (Shawn was on top for even LESS successful periods).

Scott Hall's never-won-a-world-title career is lauded as one of the 'top mid-carders of all-time', but the Hart Family members who hadn't climbed the mountain are just 'entertaining filler'? C'mon now...


As for the drawing power thing, the drawing power of the Klique is overrated. I'm not going to say that overall that the Klique isn't a bigger draw than the majority of the Hart Foundation (only Bret was a legit main-eventer, versus three guys in the Klique), but let's not kid ourselves like the Klique is this giant money maker.
Nobody in these two groups is ever going to compete with Hogan, Austin, or the Rock. Heck, they are never going to compete with Cena or Andre the Giant, either.
Shawn Michaels actually proved to be a lesser draw than Bret, and Shawn's easily the biggest draw of the Klique. Nash and Hall were part of one of the biggest pieces of business this sport has ever seen, but as individuals they never proved to do much.

 

[HBK-aholic]

I don't understand the confusion. Talent and success don't have a 1:1 to ratio in any sport or walk of life, least of all wrestling. It's only 1 of many determining factors. Much of the success of the Kliq could just as easily be attributed to physical gifts given by nature (Nash/Hall) or knowing the right people (the entire group) or determination (Triple H), not factors individually linked to talent.

The same can go for why very talented people may never live up to their success. Dynamite Kid is an innovator who's influence is still being felt today... can we really say that personal demons and bad business choices are less relevant to the levels of success he achieved than pure talent? Even Bret, who went on to achieve levels of success Dynamite never tasted, said that Dynamite was the best wrestler he'd ever known.

Who's to say what Owen would have accomplished if he hadn't died in that tragic accident?

Actually, I'd argue in professional wrestling especially, talent and success have an equal ratio. This isn't like a game of football, where one side could be more talented, but on the day they drop their guard, and are defeated. Sports entertainment is pre-defined; the wrestlers have success based on their talent. In this business, the talent isn't to be able to perform 500 different moves in a match, but to be able to get the audience to want to pay money to see them. If McMahon thought the Hart family were the most talented (Remember, talent is the ability to make money, not do moves), they would have been on top for longer.

Wow... so Shawn is 'Mr. WrestleMania' and 'THE Icon'... but Bret isn't equally deserving of the same hype? He was just on top during one of WWE's 'least successful periods'. (Shawn was on top for even LESS successful periods).

I'd say Shawn is better than Bret. But I think you have to watch out when discussing both of their times of being on top of the company, as their are factors which I believe to be outside of their control; WCW for example. Most wrestlers have never come across something so tough when being champion.

As for the drawing power thing, the drawing power of the Klique is overrated. I'm not going to say that overall that the Klique isn't a bigger draw than the majority of the Hart Foundation (only Bret was a legit main-eventer, versus three guys in the Klique), but let's not kid ourselves like the Klique is this giant money maker.

Nobody in these two groups is ever going to compete with Hogan, Austin, or the Rock. Heck, they are never going to compete with Cena or Andre the Giant, either.

Are we discussing the Kliq vs. Austin/Hogan etc? I didn't think so, therefore this is pointless.

Shawn Michaels actually proved to be a lesser draw than Bret, and Shawn's easily the biggest draw of the Klique. Nash and Hall were part of one of the biggest pieces of business this sport has ever seen, but as individuals they never proved to do much.

Well HHH is the biggest draw of the Kliq if you want to get technical. However, as I said above, when Shawn was campion it was at a time where they were facing the toughest competition they've ever had. Do you wonder why the ratings were less then, compared to today when the biggest competition is TNA?

 

[pyrusane]

The kliq gave us Degeneration X and the NWO, two of the top three factions of all time (I count the 4 Horsemen as the third). The kliq boasts 21 World titles and 12 IC titles.

The Harts gave us The Hart Foundation, The British Bulldogs, and...NWO 2000. Ehhrrmmm...moving on. The Harts boast 7 World Titles, and 5 IC titles.

The Harts definitely had a ton of in-ring ability, and their contribution to the wrestling world is immeasurable. But as far as overall success...the kliq wins this in a squash match.

 

[notorious102]

As far as raw talent --> Hart Foundation

Sucuess --> Kliq

& That's becuz The Kliq just had more clout than the Hart Foundation. They also ruined many other people's career's for their own gain.