|
Post by Bandalero on Mar 17, 2016 9:44:06 GMT -5
I actually spoke to Bret about this. He said he'd never do it, even if Eric asked. Bret's main reason more than anything is his dad. He said doing something like that would disgust Stu. There ya go, case closed. Yeah I would agree and that's straight from the horse's mouth. Bret Hart is a wrestling purest, believes in kayfabe and respects the business. He wouldn't no-show a commitment, and he wouldn't take the title and run.
|
|
|
Post by hbkjason on Mar 17, 2016 10:49:13 GMT -5
Thanks for all the input. Even if Bischoff did not have the threat of a lawsuit and asked Bret Hart to do this I do not think that he would have.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 11:26:06 GMT -5
No. Bret was a loyal company man to WWE. So he wouldn't have done it even if Bischoff asked him to. Bischoff was in heaps of crap for letting Blaze do it with the woman's title, no chance he would have OKd it even if Bret had wanted to. If he were as loyal as you say he would've done what Vince asked of him. Instead he played hard ball and he got screwed because of it.
|
|
jeffro2000
Main Eventer
Joined on: May 16, 2011 14:23:29 GMT -5
Posts: 1,858
|
Post by jeffro2000 on Mar 17, 2016 11:46:21 GMT -5
Thanks for all the input. Even if Bischoff did not have the threat of a lawsuit and asked Bret Hart to do this I do not think that he would have. Like others, I don't think Bret would've done it. Interestingly, as for the lawsuit, WWF does not own the design for the Winged Eagle belt. That is not technically their intellectual property. Persons in the know, who have asked the original makers of that belt say that WCW could've shown up with a winged eagle on TV legally. They couldn't refer to it as a WWF belt. I thought the logo would be an issue, but they say not, even though that could've been easily altered and nobody notice. If Bischoff wanted to have Bret come out with a belt, I think he could have without legal ramifications. Obtaining one would've been a matter of a phone call or Bret, Diesel, etc may have one. Fairly certain Bret does. I dont know every legal detail especially with the Logo, but they say it wouldn't have been an issue. Possibly because the belt would be property of Hart or some individual. Midwest has made hundreds with the logo, thousands without, and there is a lot of WWF used ones in private hands also. Just food for thought, obviously Bret wasn't champ anymore and WCw didn't want to do it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 12:14:42 GMT -5
No. Bret was a loyal company man to WWE. So he wouldn't have done it even if Bischoff asked him to. Bischoff was in heaps of crap for letting Blaze do it with the woman's title, no chance he would have OKd it even if Bret had wanted to. If he were as loyal as you say he would've done what Vince asked of him. Instead he played hard ball and he got screwed because of it. Read this: I think Bret would have not just taken it to WCW, but ECW, NJPW, the defunct AWA and even IWCCW. But seriously, from what I remember Bret had it in his contract that he was in the WWE until December, because he was going to wrestle on the December PPV, so even if he did hold onto the belt at Survivor Series, he wouldn't be going to WCW the following night. Once again, another reason as to why I feel the Montreal Screw Job was a work. This is true. a lot of people assume his last contracted day was the day after survivor Series, but it actually ran into December like you said. After the SS cluster caused by Michaels, Bret told Vince they still had time to come up with another solution, and was willing to drop it to Taker,Austin,even Shamrock or Mankind at a Raw or the next PPV. But Vince was the one absolutely insisting it had to be done that weekend,and when Bret refused to drop it to HBK, Vince came up with the idea of him surrendering the title on Raw the next night. For those who don't know the HBK cluster - Bret was set to drop the title to Michaels at Survivor Series. Bret had no issues with this, and had a locker room conversation with Michaels once this booking plan was made. Bret says that the Anvil and Shamrock were there with him to validate his claims. Bret told Michaels that Vince planned the title switch, and he had no issues with it, and despite their past issues he could trust Bret to be safe with him in the ring. Shawn said he appreciated that,but if the shoe was on the other foot, he would not return the favor and job out to Bret. This royally pissed Bret off, as he felt totally disrespected by Shawn,especially as he was going to be giving him the Title on his way out. Bret and Vince went back and forth for weeks about what to do. Bret had a counterproposal - he WOULD drop the Belt to Shawn, but on the Raw the night after Survivor Series. But only if Shawn would do the favor for Bret at the PPV itself. Bret said he felt this was fair, as it not only gave him some respect back (by winning his last WWF PPV match), but it also put Shawn in his place for openly refusing to lose matches. And Bret also argued that more people would see the Title switch on Raw than the PPV, giving Shawn more exposure in becoming the Champion. But Vince absolutely insisted it simply HAD to be at the PPV. And the logjam on both sides led to the Montreal Screwjob. Bret was a company man, a loyal man. He was also a proud man.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 12:41:08 GMT -5
If he were as loyal as you say he would've done what Vince asked of him. Instead he played hard ball and he got screwed because of it. Read this: This is true. a lot of people assume his last contracted day was the day after survivor Series, but it actually ran into December like you said. After the SS cluster caused by Michaels, Bret told Vince they still had time to come up with another solution, and was willing to drop it to Taker,Austin,even Shamrock or Mankind at a Raw or the next PPV. But Vince was the one absolutely insisting it had to be done that weekend,and when Bret refused to drop it to HBK, Vince came up with the idea of him surrendering the title on Raw the next night. For those who don't know the HBK cluster - Bret was set to drop the title to Michaels at Survivor Series. Bret had no issues with this, and had a locker room conversation with Michaels once this booking plan was made. Bret says that the Anvil and Shamrock were there with him to validate his claims. Bret told Michaels that Vince planned the title switch, and he had no issues with it, and despite their past issues he could trust Bret to be safe with him in the ring. Shawn said he appreciated that,but if the shoe was on the other foot, he would not return the favor and job out to Bret. This royally pissed Bret off, as he felt totally disrespected by Shawn,especially as he was going to be giving him the Title on his way out. Bret and Vince went back and forth for weeks about what to do. Bret had a counterproposal - he WOULD drop the Belt to Shawn, but on the Raw the night after Survivor Series. But only if Shawn would do the favor for Bret at the PPV itself. Bret said he felt this was fair, as it not only gave him some respect back (by winning his last WWF PPV match), but it also put Shawn in his place for openly refusing to lose matches. And Bret also argued that more people would see the Title switch on Raw than the PPV, giving Shawn more exposure in becoming the Champion. But Vince absolutely insisted it simply HAD to be at the PPV. And the logjam on both sides led to the Montreal Screwjob. Bret was a company man, a loyal man. He was also a proud man. If he was what you said he is, he would've done what Vince asked of him. I won't repeat myself again.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 12:59:14 GMT -5
Read this: Bret was a company man, a loyal man. He was also a proud man. If he was what you said he is, he would've done what Vince asked of him. I won't repeat myself again. You don't have to repeat yourself. Are you telling me that if Vince asked him to go and lie in the ring so Shawn could take a dump on his mouth that he should do it? Bret was, if anything selfless in his refusal to put Shawn over. Shawn had already just lead WWE to its lowest point in possibly history when he was champion, the problem: REFUSING TO WORK WITH AND PUT OTHER PEOPLE OVER. You make it sound like Bret wasn't being reasonable, when he was trying his best to find a way around the problem.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 13:07:09 GMT -5
If he was what you said he is, he would've done what Vince asked of him. I won't repeat myself again. You don't have to repeat yourself. Are you telling me that if Vince asked him to go and lie in the ring so Shawn could take a dump on his mouth that he should do it? Bret was, if anything selfless in his refusal to put Shawn over. Shawn had already just lead WWE to its lowest point in possibly history when he was champion, the problem: REFUSING TO WORK WITH AND PUT OTHER PEOPLE OVER. You make it sound like Bret wasn't being reasonable, when he was trying his best to find a way around the problem.You're taking this way too far in that dude. Lowest point? You must be thinking if Diesel. If Vince asked him to drop the belt to Shawn at Survivor Series then that's what he should've done. I said nothing about anyone defecating on another so.. And I don't know if you've read or seen much on the subject but there are a lot of people that say Michaels help hold the WWF together in 96. And not Joe Blow, people who actually worked for WWF at the time. Vince was the owner. He wrote the checks. He gave Bret his first big break. Bret was leaving anyway. If he was so loyal and such a company man, he would've said "Yes sir. I'll drop the belt to Shawn at Survivor Series." Instead, he got himself screwed and has spent the last twenty years being one of the most bitter people I've listened to in the wrestling business. I'm done here. Have a good'n
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 14:08:27 GMT -5
You don't have to repeat yourself. Are you telling me that if Vince asked him to go and lie in the ring so Shawn could take a dump on his mouth that he should do it? Bret was, if anything selfless in his refusal to put Shawn over. Shawn had already just lead WWE to its lowest point in possibly history when he was champion, the problem: REFUSING TO WORK WITH AND PUT OTHER PEOPLE OVER. You make it sound like Bret wasn't being reasonable, when he was trying his best to find a way around the problem.You're taking this way too far in that dude. Lowest point? You must be thinking if Diesel. The biggest PPV of the year in which Shawn and Diesel were both champions (SummerSlam) saw Shawn drawing less than Diesel. You don't have to repeat yourself. Are you telling me that if Vince asked him to go and lie in the ring so Shawn could take a dump on his mouth that he should do it? Bret was, if anything selfless in his refusal to put Shawn over. Shawn had already just lead WWE to its lowest point in possibly history when he was champion, the problem: REFUSING TO WORK WITH AND PUT OTHER PEOPLE OVER. You make it sound like Bret wasn't being reasonable, when he was trying his best to find a way around the problem.If Vince asked him to drop the belt to Shawn at Survivor Series then that's what he should've done. I said nothing about anyone defecating on another so.. And I don't know if you've read or seen much on the subject but there are a lot of people that say Michaels help hold the WWF together in 96. And not Joe Blow, people who actually worked for WWF at the time. Yeah... No. Shawn was a horrible person and did horrible business. He screwed over people he was supposed to fued with, refused to work with many guys, wanted to only work with his buddies, and was constantly threatening to quit. He did absolutely nothing to help the state of the company. You don't have to repeat yourself. Are you telling me that if Vince asked him to go and lie in the ring so Shawn could take a dump on his mouth that he should do it? Bret was, if anything selfless in his refusal to put Shawn over. Shawn had already just lead WWE to its lowest point in possibly history when he was champion, the problem: REFUSING TO WORK WITH AND PUT OTHER PEOPLE OVER. You make it sound like Bret wasn't being reasonable, when he was trying his best to find a way around the problem.Vince was the owner. He wrote the checks. He gave Bret his first big break. Bret was leaving anyway. If he was so loyal and such a company man, he would've said "Yes sir. I'll drop the belt to Shawn at Survivor Series." He also gave Bret creative control over his contract, meaning that he agreed to let Bret decline putting over certain individuals to protect his character. Bret was well within his rights in every way, legally and ethically. You don't have to repeat yourself. Are you telling me that if Vince asked him to go and lie in the ring so Shawn could take a dump on his mouth that he should do it? Bret was, if anything selfless in his refusal to put Shawn over. Shawn had already just lead WWE to its lowest point in possibly history when he was champion, the problem: REFUSING TO WORK WITH AND PUT OTHER PEOPLE OVER. You make it sound like Bret wasn't being reasonable, when he was trying his best to find a way around the problem.Instead, he got himself screwed and has spent the last twenty years being one of the most bitter people I've listened to in the wrestling business. Oh I see you're one of those people "bret is just bitter" people who doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. Fair enough. You don't have to repeat yourself. Are you telling me that if Vince asked him to go and lie in the ring so Shawn could take a dump on his mouth that he should do it? Bret was, if anything selfless in his refusal to put Shawn over. Shawn had already just lead WWE to its lowest point in possibly history when he was champion, the problem: REFUSING TO WORK WITH AND PUT OTHER PEOPLE OVER. You make it sound like Bret wasn't being reasonable, when he was trying his best to find a way around the problem.I'm done here. Have a good'n My thoughts exactly.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 14:25:01 GMT -5
Lol I know what I'm talking about. Just because we disagree doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. You blame everyone but Bret. Obviously you're a Bret fan so you're extremely biased but it's whatever.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 14:51:23 GMT -5
Lol I know what I'm talking about. Just because we disagree doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. You blame everyone but Bret. Obviously you're a Bret fan so you're extremely biased but it's whatever. The reason I'm a Bret fan is because of the way he conducts himself. I can't not respect a man with such a strong set of morals. It's so easy to let yourself get crap on in this life.
|
|
|
Post by mikey1974 on Mar 17, 2016 14:52:07 GMT -5
1) Bret was willing to do as Vince said. WAS! He was fine with it, and even told Shawn he'd make sure they had a safe match. Until HBK decided to open his mouth and totally disrespect the Champion who was going to put him over on his way out.
2) Bret had it in his contract he had creative control over the last 30 days. and Vince readily agreed to this. This was something Vince was fine with, UNTIL Bret decided to exercise it. And the only time he decided to exercise it was at Survivor Series. So, legally, Vince was wrong. He violated the terms of a legally binding contract.
3) Bret was always a company man. He took less money to stay with Vince in 1996 rather than get more guaranteed money per year with WCW because he felt loyalty to Vince and the company that he felt made him.
4) There is no question - none - that Shawn was a very troubled person during this time, and did such wonderful things as go completely off-script, consistently yell and degrade the backstage talent and agents, openly refuse to put people over, would intentionally start problems with talent to screw with them (see what he and hunter did to Rocky Maivia. They also complained loudly enough that Bret got reamed out for just making it to a show in Africa as the first match started - something he was allowed in his contract!).
Vince and Shawn caused this problem,period. Vince for breaching Bret's contract in the first place, and Shawn for saying what he did, when Bret was willing to put Shawn over any way they wanted him to.
|
|
MattelsRule
Main Eventer
JakksRule is dead! Long live MattelsRule!
Joined on: Mar 18, 2005 2:03:07 GMT -5
Posts: 2,468
|
Post by MattelsRule on Mar 17, 2016 15:02:09 GMT -5
Vince was stubborn like he always is.
He fell ass backward into success thanks to being a piece of work here.
Vince should never have screwed Bret. It was absolutely 100 percent the wrong and most vile thing to do. And Vince not only is revered for it, but his company was more successful than ever because of it. I am and always a WWE fan first but it proved one thing to me - Vince doesn't honestly give a flying fart about anybody who makes him money and works his ass off for him. Deny that.
|
|
|
Post by bad guy™ on Mar 17, 2016 15:36:46 GMT -5
If I were Bret, I would have. But I don't think he would have.
|
|
|
Post by mikey1974 on Mar 18, 2016 5:53:52 GMT -5
Thanks for all the input. Even if Bischoff did not have the threat of a lawsuit and asked Bret Hart to do this I do not think that he would have. Like others, I don't think Bret would've done it. Interestingly, as for the lawsuit, WWF does not own the design for the Winged Eagle belt. That is not technically their intellectual property. Persons in the know, who have asked the original makers of that belt say that WCW could've shown up with a winged eagle on TV legally. They couldn't refer to it as a WWF belt. I thought the logo would be an issue, but they say not, even though that could've been easily altered and nobody notice. If Bischoff wanted to have Bret come out with a belt, I think he could have without legal ramifications. Obtaining one would've been a matter of a phone call or Bret, Diesel, etc may have one. Fairly certain Bret does. I dont know every legal detail especially with the Logo, but they say it wouldn't have been an issue. Possibly because the belt would be property of Hart or some individual. Midwest has made hundreds with the logo, thousands without, and there is a lot of WWF used ones in private hands also. Just food for thought, obviously Bret wasn't champ anymore and WCw didn't want to do it. I think you're right about the Belt itself - ECW used the Classic IC and Winged Eagle designs for some of their Belts - but I think they're wrong about the logo. They would be displaying the WWF logo on their program without the consent of Titan Sports, the logo would be used in such a way to disparage/harm the WWF (doubt they were going to sing the praises of the WWF with it), and I think most damning would be that it could be perceived there would be monetary gain for WCW by showing the WWF logo. Basically, ratings would go up, therefore advertising dollars would go up, therefore more money in WCW's checkbook. I could be wrong, but I was always under the impression the Women's Title lawsuit was less about the Belt being shown on Nitro and more about the WWF brand being trashed (literally) and the WWF logo appearing on their show without permission, with the intent to disparage the logo, and for WCW's financial gain without any restitution towards Titan Sports. It would be akin to me showing up in a McDonald's commercial with a Whopper, saying the Whopper sucks, and with the cardboard box with the "Whopper" and/or "Burger King" logo's clearly visible, without BK'sconsent. If I'm just there saying "this sandwich" sucks without saying or specifically showing it's a Whopper, then there's not much BK can do, as they don't own the specific rights to a hamburger and all trademarks and such therein. But as soon as it's identified as a Whopper, either through speech or with trademarked logo's clearly visible, it's lawsuit time.
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Mar 18, 2016 6:26:27 GMT -5
No I don't think Bret would have taken the title to WCW.
|
|
jeffro2000
Main Eventer
Joined on: May 16, 2011 14:23:29 GMT -5
Posts: 1,858
|
Post by jeffro2000 on Mar 18, 2016 10:24:44 GMT -5
Like others, I don't think Bret would've done it. Interestingly, as for the lawsuit, WWF does not own the design for the Winged Eagle belt. That is not technically their intellectual property. Persons in the know, who have asked the original makers of that belt say that WCW could've shown up with a winged eagle on TV legally. They couldn't refer to it as a WWF belt. I thought the logo would be an issue, but they say not, even though that could've been easily altered and nobody notice. If Bischoff wanted to have Bret come out with a belt, I think he could have without legal ramifications. Obtaining one would've been a matter of a phone call or Bret, Diesel, etc may have one. Fairly certain Bret does. I dont know every legal detail especially with the Logo, but they say it wouldn't have been an issue. Possibly because the belt would be property of Hart or some individual. Midwest has made hundreds with the logo, thousands without, and there is a lot of WWF used ones in private hands also. Just food for thought, obviously Bret wasn't champ anymore and WCw didn't want to do it. I think you're right about the Belt itself - ECW used the Classic IC and Winged Eagle designs for some of their Belts - but I think they're wrong about the logo. They would be displaying the WWF logo on their program without the consent of Titan Sports, the logo would be used in such a way to disparage/harm the WWF (doubt they were going to sing the praises of the WWF with it), and I think most damning would be that it could be perceived there would be monetary gain for WCW by showing the WWF logo. Basically, ratings would go up, therefore advertising dollars would go up, therefore more money in WCW's checkbook. I could be wrong, but I was always under the impression the Women's Title lawsuit was less about the Belt being shown on Nitro and more about the WWF brand being trashed (literally) and the WWF logo appearing on their show without permission, with the intent to disparage the logo, and for WCW's financial gain without any restitution towards Titan Sports. It would be akin to me showing up in a McDonald's commercial with a Whopper, saying the Whopper sucks, and with the cardboard box with the "Whopper" and/or "Burger King" logo's clearly visible, without BK'sconsent. If I'm just there saying "this sandwich" sucks without saying or specifically showing it's a Whopper, then there's not much BK can do, as they don't own the specific rights to a hamburger and all trademarks and such therein. But as soon as it's identified as a Whopper, either through speech or with trademarked logo's clearly visible, it's lawsuit time. I agree, but people say they could as long as they didn't mention WWF. I am with you, I see it the same way that TV shows tape over drink Logos or have 1 letter different on boxes stuff like that. However, you do have some commercials like Samsung/Apple going against one another saying each other's name. No doubt that, they could've brought a Winged Eagle out there without the logo though or a very similar logo and nobody would've noticed and they did an angle. WWF would've still sued, probably get an injunction, lose the case but it would still stop the angle. Similar to what we saw with Flair/NWA belt. The suit would kill the angle regardless of outcome really.
|
|
MattelsRule
Main Eventer
JakksRule is dead! Long live MattelsRule!
Joined on: Mar 18, 2005 2:03:07 GMT -5
Posts: 2,468
|
Post by MattelsRule on Mar 18, 2016 11:25:02 GMT -5
The funny thing is - based on how everything happened, Bret would have had more reason to screw Vince than Vince screwing him. More motive, more interest in lining his pockets.... but Vince did it anyway. Makes me not feel bad when a guy like CM Punk walks away and legitimately put Vince in a bad spot.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Mar 18, 2016 17:06:00 GMT -5
No I don't. Bret was loyal for 14 years. He missed only 2 days during that whole time. Vince was the one who suggested he leave for WCW and ended up pushing him out. His friends and brother were in the WWF and taking the title with him would have screwed them. I don't think Bret would have taken the title with him.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 22:52:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2016 18:00:30 GMT -5
Didn't Bret threaten to take the IC belt to WCW in early 1992?
|
|