Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2013 21:03:30 GMT -5
Hmm, I always thought it was going to be Razor/Kid. Must be getting my wires crossed here. I wonder what role Luger would have had if he had been around at this point. Actually... You might be right about Razor/Kid. I totally forgot about him interfering at the Rumble in Razor's match with Goldust and Razor returning the favor during the Rumble match.
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Nov 23, 2013 22:51:09 GMT -5
Hmm, I always thought it was going to be Razor/Kid. Must be getting my wires crossed here. I wonder what role Luger would have had if he had been around at this point. Actually... You might be right about Razor/Kid. I totally forgot about him interfering at the Rumble in Razor's match with Goldust and Razor returning the favor during the Rumble match. Razor Ramon and the 123 Kid already had their blow off match from the incident at the Rumble at the Feb. In Your House show. The Kid had to wear a diaper when he lost to Razor. Razor was indeed supposed to fight Goldust. Razor got busted for drugs in his system. I believe he talks about it in his shoot, cause he says something was fishy about it cause the agent already knew he tested positive before he himself did.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2013 23:41:12 GMT -5
Actually... You might be right about Razor/Kid. I totally forgot about him interfering at the Rumble in Razor's match with Goldust and Razor returning the favor during the Rumble match. Razor Ramon and the 123 Kid already had their blow off match from the incident at the Rumble at the Feb. In Your House show. The Kid had to wear a diaper when he lost to Razor. Razor was indeed supposed to fight Goldust. Razor got busted for drugs in his system. I believe he talks about it in his shoot, cause he says something was fishy about it cause the agent already knew he tested positive before he himself did. That is right. Forgot about the crybaby match.
|
|
BigEvilNerd
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 15, 2003 17:00:45 GMT -5
Posts: 4,659
|
Post by BigEvilNerd on Nov 30, 2013 14:52:25 GMT -5
I think it's interesting how the general public perception of the screwjob has changed over the years. Back around the time it happened and into the early 2000's it seemed like most people took Bret's side - he had never given anyone any reason not to trust his word. Meanwhile, Shawn was well-known for being a backstage politician and backstabber, so it made perfect sense that he would participate in a stunt like this, especially since it harmed his #1 enemy in the company, Bret Hart.
Then after a while I think people started to sour on Bret and he lost a lot of sympathy because of how often he talked about the screwjob. This, coupled with the fact that HBK appeared to be a 'new man' and was having an incredible second career in the WWE made people look at Bret more like a bitter old man who couldn't let go of the past.
Nowadays it seems like it's more nuanced, and a lot of people take the position of 'both sides were wrong' in the sense that Bret should have done business and lost to HBK, and Vince should have had more trust in Bret.
****
Call me old fashioned but I'm still in the 'Bret was right' camp. I never understand the people who play the "Bret should have done what his boss told him to do" card. They act like Hart was a guy who had been in the business only a couple years. Fact was he was one of the longest serving, hardest working WWF employees, and in my opinion had earned the right to dictate how he lost the belt one final time. It's not favoritism, it's respect for a guy being a stalwart employee and carrying the rock when the company was in the sh*tter.
Like people have said though, there are so many nuances and angles to this story, we're never going to know the whole truth. There are too many egos involved, even to this day.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2013 16:42:18 GMT -5
I think it's interesting how the general public perception of the screwjob has changed over the years. Back around the time it happened and into the early 2000's it seemed like most people took Bret's side - he had never given anyone any reason not to trust his word. Meanwhile, Shawn was well-known for being a backstage politician and backstabber, so it made perfect sense that he would participate in a stunt like this, especially since it harmed his #1 enemy in the company, Bret Hart. Then after a while I think people started to sour on Bret and he lost a lot of sympathy because of how often he talked about the screwjob. This, coupled with the fact that HBK appeared to be a 'new man' and was having an incredible second career in the WWE made people look at Bret more like a bitter old man who couldn't let go of the past. Nowadays it seems like it's more nuanced, and a lot of people take the position of 'both sides were wrong' in the sense that Bret should have done business and lost to HBK, and Vince should have had more trust in Bret. **** Call me old fashioned but I'm still in the 'Bret was right' camp. I never understand the people who play the "Bret should have done what his boss told him to do" card. They act like Hart was a guy who had been in the business only a couple years. Fact was he was one of the longest serving, hardest working WWF employees, and in my opinion had earned the right to dictate how he lost the belt one final time. It's not favoritism, it's respect for a guy being a stalwart employee and carrying the rock when the company was in the sh*tter. Like people have said though, there are so many nuances and angles to this story, we're never going to know the whole truth. There are too many egos involved, even to this day. I think a lot of it is WWE's revisionist bias. They DO have a lot of sway over the opinion's of casual fans. And they'll always attempt to paint Shawn as if he had no choice and Bret as the villain. They never come out and say "Bret still had a couple weeks to lose the belt before he had to appear in WCW and he'd offered to drop it to anyone but Michaels but we were being awkward and wanted to him on his way out".
|
|
BigEvilNerd
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 15, 2003 17:00:45 GMT -5
Posts: 4,659
|
Post by BigEvilNerd on Nov 30, 2013 22:27:48 GMT -5
I think it's interesting how the general public perception of the screwjob has changed over the years. Back around the time it happened and into the early 2000's it seemed like most people took Bret's side - he had never given anyone any reason not to trust his word. Meanwhile, Shawn was well-known for being a backstage politician and backstabber, so it made perfect sense that he would participate in a stunt like this, especially since it harmed his #1 enemy in the company, Bret Hart. Then after a while I think people started to sour on Bret and he lost a lot of sympathy because of how often he talked about the screwjob. This, coupled with the fact that HBK appeared to be a 'new man' and was having an incredible second career in the WWE made people look at Bret more like a bitter old man who couldn't let go of the past. Nowadays it seems like it's more nuanced, and a lot of people take the position of 'both sides were wrong' in the sense that Bret should have done business and lost to HBK, and Vince should have had more trust in Bret. **** Call me old fashioned but I'm still in the 'Bret was right' camp. I never understand the people who play the "Bret should have done what his boss told him to do" card. They act like Hart was a guy who had been in the business only a couple years. Fact was he was one of the longest serving, hardest working WWF employees, and in my opinion had earned the right to dictate how he lost the belt one final time. It's not favoritism, it's respect for a guy being a stalwart employee and carrying the rock when the company was in the sh*tter. Like people have said though, there are so many nuances and angles to this story, we're never going to know the whole truth. There are too many egos involved, even to this day. I think a lot of it is WWE's revisionist bias. They DO have a lot of sway over the opinion's of casual fans. And they'll always attempt to paint Shawn as if he had no choice and Bret as the villain. They never come out and say "Bret still had a couple weeks to lose the belt before he had to appear in WCW and he'd offered to drop it to anyone but Michaels but we were being awkward and wanted to him on his way out". There's no doubt about it. A huge portion of the fanbase that watches the current WWE product weren't watching in '97, so it becomes very easy for WWE programming to be the primary source of information on the subject. And there's no doubt that to this day, their main goal is to paint it as 'Shawn and Vince were right, Bret was being a sourpuss.'
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Nov 30, 2013 22:29:44 GMT -5
I love Bret. Easily in my top three of all time. Even named my son Owen after his brother. That being said... Vince was right. Couldn't let his champion go without losing the strap first. Maybe Bret would have dropped it to anyone else but Shawn. But that's not his decision to make is it?
|
|
|
Post by BrIaNMeRcY on Dec 1, 2013 0:49:09 GMT -5
While we are still on the subject of the Montreal Screwjob, Dave Meltzer and Steve Austin talked about this last week. Since I am not very good as paraphrasing, just listen to what was said here: podcastone.com/Steve-Austin-Show-Clean
|
|
gravedigger3
Main Eventer
Empire Wrestling Federation
Joined on: Apr 7, 2006 21:17:04 GMT -5
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by gravedigger3 on Dec 1, 2013 3:35:29 GMT -5
I just watched the Wrestling with Shadows and now a part of me believes it was fixed.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2013 6:32:53 GMT -5
I love Bret. Easily in my top three of all time. Even named my son Owen after his brother. That being said... Vince was right. Couldn't let his champion go without losing the strap first. Maybe Bret would have dropped it to anyone else but Shawn. But that's not his decision to make is it? Actually it was. As part of his contract he had creative control over his character for the last 60 days before it expired. Meaning he could legally decline to put someone over if Vince asked him to. He was fine with losing the strap, just not to the guy who told him that he'd never put him over and had faked an injury to avoid putting him over at WM13.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Dec 1, 2013 9:28:38 GMT -5
I love Bret. Easily in my top three of all time. Even named my son Owen after his brother. That being said... Vince was right. Couldn't let his champion go without losing the strap first. Maybe Bret would have dropped it to anyone else but Shawn. But that's not his decision to make is it? Actually it was. As part of his contract he had creative control over his character for the last 60 days before it expired. Meaning he could legally decline to put someone over if Vince asked him to. He was fine with losing the strap, just not to the guy who told him that he'd never put him over and had faked an injury to avoid putting him over at WM13. Creative control is never a good thing though.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2013 11:38:19 GMT -5
Actually it was. As part of his contract he had creative control over his character for the last 60 days before it expired. Meaning he could legally decline to put someone over if Vince asked him to. He was fine with losing the strap, just not to the guy who told him that he'd never put him over and had faked an injury to avoid putting him over at WM13. Creative control is never a good thing though. It is when you want to protect yourself. Vince would have destroyed him on his way out if he hadn't had it.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Dec 1, 2013 11:42:01 GMT -5
Creative control is never a good thing though. It is when you want to protect yourself. Vince would have destroyed him on his way out if he hadn't had it. I still believe more often than not.... Creative control screws the fans more than anyone.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2013 12:57:01 GMT -5
It is when you want to protect yourself. Vince would have destroyed him on his way out if he hadn't had it. I still believe more often than not.... Creative control screws the fans more than anyone. Depends who has creative control. Bret was using it, in part to protect the business.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Dec 1, 2013 18:13:05 GMT -5
I still believe more often than not.... Depends who has creative control. Bret was using it, in part to protect the business. You can't say that Bret handing the title over the next day rather than losing it clean on the big occasion on PPV at Survivor Series wouldn't have been screwing the fans at least partly. Its like if at WM14 HBK had beaten Austin then handed the title over the next day.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2013 3:24:38 GMT -5
Depends who has creative control. Bret was using it, in part to protect the business. You can't say that Bret handing the title over the next day rather than losing it clean on the big occasion on PPV at Survivor Series wouldn't have been screwing the fans at least partly. Its like if at WM14 HBK had beaten Austin then handed the title over the next day. Bret offered to put anyone over on Raw the next night. Hell he'd even offered to put Shawn over if Shawn agreed to lose at SS.
|
|
|
Post by Duck Holliday on Dec 2, 2013 4:20:02 GMT -5
Call me old fashioned but I'm still in the 'Bret was right' camp. I never understand the people who play the "Bret should have done what his boss told him to do" card. They act like Hart was a guy who had been in the business only a couple years. Fact was he was one of the longest serving, hardest working WWF employees, and in my opinion had earned the right to dictate how he lost the belt one final time. It's not favoritism, it's respect for a guy being a stalwart employee and carrying the rock when the company was in the sh*tter. This pretty much sums up how I feel about the situation. From what I feel like I know about Bret I truly believe he would have put Shawn over on RAW and he should have been allowed to do it that way. Especially given Bret put a # of guys over throughout his career (including Shawn) without ever reportedly having a problem, up till this event. I don't blame Shawn too much for the situation... even if he knew what was going to happen. (assuming the whole thing wasn't set up altogether)
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2013 5:06:25 GMT -5
handing the title over the next night on Raw was not an option for Vince.it would have devalued the title tremendously.
|
|
|
Post by Duck Holliday on Dec 2, 2013 6:51:41 GMT -5
I really don't see how the title change on RAW vs a PPV devalues the title itself. Especially compared to giving fans a half-assed finish (just a pitiful 13ish mins in) by ringing the bell before the match came to it's "intended" conclusion. Overall I give Vince a lot of credit, but there have been so many other events which have devalued the title more then having a title change on RAW over a PPV. If you choose to buy into the fantasy that the title means something I think most of those fans don't care whether the title changes on RAW or a PPV... we just expect more title changes at PPV's.
|
|
|
Post by mikey1974 on Dec 2, 2013 8:16:12 GMT -5
like Anvil Fan said,Bret was more than willing to put Shawn over the next night on Raw,if HBK did the favor at Survivor Series. but when that became a non-option,Bret was then willing to drop it to someone else before he left. he felt he could realistically drop it to either Taker or Austin. but when Vince kept pushing that he HAD to lose it at SS,that's when he decided to forfeit the Title on Raw,cause Vince absolutely wanted it off him that week (which in itself was stupid,considering he still had a few weeks left before he left),and with ni solution is sight with HBK refusing to job to Bret,and Bret refusing to job to HBK,and Vince wanting it off him RIGHT NOW and not be willing to set up another quick feud,he felt the only way to have the title taken away was to give it up.
you can say what you want about Bret,and in some circumstances he COULD be a pissy little bitch,but he WAS willing to drop the Title to Shawn,he WAS willing to drop the title to someone else on his way out,rather than forfeit it. but Vince's stubborness,and the machinations of the Cliq,would not allow this to happen. Bret was willing to give on his way out,but all vince and Shawn wanted to do was take,rather than give a little on their own side of things. this all could've been easily avoided.
|
|