|
Post by tnafan17: The Total Package on Jul 8, 2009 22:25:46 GMT -5
Sting no doubt. Hart was great, I just feel that Sting carried WCW for so long and did so much more. Not saying Hart didn't carry the F' for a while just saying I think Sting was more successful.
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Bateman on Jul 8, 2009 22:29:43 GMT -5
Sting.
Overall better career, and twelve world titles to boot.
He managed to stay relevant through almost three decades now, and stayed over whether he was a charismatic surfer dude or a face-painted outsider looking for revenge. TNA may overblow and exaggerate things, but calling Sting an icon isn't one of them. He also was involved in big-match situations like Starrcade 1997, many times over in his career.
Bret Hart has had a great career, but fell apart in WCW. Coupled with an early retirement, I don't think he quite achieved what Sting did. His bitterness also unfortunately blemishes his overall career.
|
|
|
Post by shadyinc on Jul 8, 2009 22:36:20 GMT -5
Hitman all the way
|
|
Bret_Hart_Mark™
Main Eventer
Joined on: Apr 5, 2005 13:34:12 GMT -5
Posts: 2,272
|
Post by Bret_Hart_Mark™ on Jul 8, 2009 22:52:10 GMT -5
Bret Hart... Part of one of the greatest tag teams of all time Leader of one of the greatest stables of all time Involved in some of the greatest feuds of all time (HBK, Austin, Owen) Climbed the WWE ladder in traditional fashion from tag team to IC to World champion, leaving his mark in each division. WWE's top guy in the mid 90's Sting had a great career but he can't match those achievements to quite the same degree. ^^That's why I voted for Bret also However Sting is very close behind for making just as great an impact in the business, and never working for WWE. Had Sting gone to WWE, and had a long run, say 10 years, then it might be a different story.
|
|
|
Post by mnm213 on Jul 9, 2009 0:26:09 GMT -5
Bret Hart has worked in the biggest company in the world and is considered a legend there and would be more over to the younger audience because of that. Sting never gets mentioned on WWE TV, and TNA wouldn't have as much of a younger audience as them, so Bret Hart.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Oct 4, 2024 21:25:08 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2009 0:44:34 GMT -5
Had Sting gone to WWE, and had a long run, say 10 years, then it might be a different story. Its a GREAT thing that he DIDN'T go to WWE. Who knows how his career would have been tarnished there with the pathetic antics of the Mcmahons. Sting never sold out so that makes him THAT much better.
|
|
|
Post by mnm213 on Jul 9, 2009 0:46:35 GMT -5
Had Sting gone to WWE, and had a long run, say 10 years, then it might be a different story. Its a GREAT thing that he DIDN'T go to WWE. Who knows how his career would have been tarnished there with the pathetic antics of the Mcmahons. Sting never sold out so that makes him THAT much better. It's not about selling out, it's about adding one more GREAT thing to your legacy. He can always walk out if he's booked badly, but instead he's gonna be remembered as "that one icon who never worked for WWE" and probably will never even get remembered at all in 20 years time, considering the younger audience won't remember him.
|
|
|
Post by HugoOne on Jul 9, 2009 0:56:43 GMT -5
Its a GREAT thing that he DIDN'T go to WWE. Who knows how his career would have been tarnished there with the pathetic antics of the Mcmahons. Sting never sold out so that makes him THAT much better. It's not about selling out, it's about adding one more GREAT thing to your legacy. He can always walk out if he's booked badly, but instead he's gonna be remembered as "that one icon who never worked for WWE" and probably will never even get remembered at all in 20 years time, considering the younger audience won't remember him. Walking out on a contract is much more harmful to your legacy than never going to a company. I'd rather Sting never appear in a WWE ring than walk out because he's "being booked badly." It would be reminiscent of Austin walking out back in 2002. And yes, the booking wasn't smart, but it was a much worse thing to take your ball and go home. Sting will be remembered as a World Champion through and through. You say that the younger audience won't remember him because he never appeared in WWE. Well the younger audience won't know who Bret Hart is in a matter of years either because he never appears on WWE programming. The only way the current generation would know who he is, would be through DVDs.. WWE does own all the WCW footage of Sting as is, so they can see who he is through DVDs as well. Same with Bret. Eventually, it's going to get harder to remember anyone because they're not as current. Just like most fans today won't be able to pick Bruno Sammartino out of a line up, that's how it will eventually be for future generations. That's not to say Sting will never appear in WWE either. Just because he's in TNA now doesn't mean he'll always stay there. There were rumblings of Sting being in the HOF, I wouldn't be surprised to see that happen in a couple years.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Jul 9, 2009 1:28:39 GMT -5
Hart, and it's not even close.
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Jul 9, 2009 1:35:48 GMT -5
Its a GREAT thing that he DIDN'T go to WWE. Who knows how his career would have been tarnished there with the pathetic antics of the Mcmahons. Sting never sold out so that makes him THAT much better. It's not about selling out, it's about adding one more GREAT thing to your legacy. He can always walk out if he's booked badly, but instead he's gonna be remembered as "that one icon who never worked for WWE" and probably will never even get remembered at all in 20 years time, considering the younger audience won't remember him. Because the younger audience doesn't have the internet or the few WWE DVDs with matches of his? 10 years ago I had no clue who Stan Hansen was, 5 years ago the man's lariat became my favorite move of all time. Don't discount what people can learn. Sting's time in wrestling won't be forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by LAXxxx305 on Jul 9, 2009 1:52:51 GMT -5
Bret Hart
|
|
Mr. MMA
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
\m/ >.< \m/
Joined on: May 15, 2009 16:52:22 GMT -5
Posts: 392
|
Post by Mr. MMA on Jul 9, 2009 14:39:35 GMT -5
Bret Hart by far.
|
|
|
Post by The Mac on Jul 9, 2009 14:43:04 GMT -5
Sting for sure
|
|
|
Post by carly1988 on Jul 9, 2009 17:04:42 GMT -5
Its hard to compare the two really since they are so different company wise. NWA/WCW didnt do the same things WWF did. You cant compare who was better Flair vs Hogan cause Flair was a better wrestler but Hogan was a better entertainer.
The same goes with Sting/Hart except the roles were actually reversed. Hart was a better wrestler but Sting had much more entertainment value. All together I would probably vote Sting though. Taking nothing away from Bret, Sting got it done everywhere he went. Sure Bret was loyal which is a plus but the same strike I give HBK a lot is that Bret was the man during the down times of wrestling and really only had 1 big run as "the man" when business was booming
|
|
hbkrules
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
Joined on: Jun 18, 2002 11:49:32 GMT -5
Posts: 2,115
|
Post by hbkrules on Jul 9, 2009 23:08:57 GMT -5
Even though Sting has had a longer career I voted Bret. I think that history will look negatively on Sting for never working with wwe. 20-30 years from now wcw will be LONG forgotton. Vince essentially controlls wrestling history because he owns all the libraries and he will not push the legacy of a wrestler that never set foot in the wwe. Plus Bret Hart is just a better wrestler.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Oct 4, 2024 21:25:08 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2009 1:38:06 GMT -5
Sting
|
|
easy1986
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 4, 2007 20:27:41 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by easy1986 on Jul 10, 2009 6:42:57 GMT -5
STING and I ame the biggest Hart MARK ever.
|
|
Blackbird 13
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 6, 2005 3:32:41 GMT -5
Posts: 3,242
|
Post by Blackbird 13 on Jul 13, 2009 3:19:47 GMT -5
Sting, and this question should be pretty cut and dry. If you pulled 100 random (non-wrestling fan) people off the street, more of them would be able to identify Sting to his picture than Bret Hart to his, plain and simple. In the interest of fairness though, let's compare: *Sting has 12 (13 if you count WWA) World Heavyweight Titles, in three companies. WCW, NWA, and TNA (four if you count WWA) *Bret Hart is a 7 time World Heavyweight champion, in two companies, WCW and WWF. ADV: Sting *Both Sting and Bret are well liked by most of the wrestlers in the business, and both men are considered to be good people to have on the other side of the ring, so no one gets the edge there. *As far as secondary titles, Bret has held the WWF Tag Title twice, WCW Tag Title twice, WWF IC Title twice, and WCW US Title four times. *Sting has held the WCW US Title twice, WCW Tag Titles three times, and the NWA TV Title once. ADVANTAGE: Bret *Bret's main event career ran from October 12 1992 (his first world title) till Jan. 10 2000 (his last match) for an 8 year run. *Sting's main event career ran from July 7 1990 (his first world title) till March 26 2001 (last Nitro), then again from Jan 15 2006 (his debut in TNA as a main event talent) till now. ADVANTAGE: Sting, being at least 14 years into a main event career (plus a five year hiatus from main event status), to Bret's 8 (the last of which in WCW was barely as a main eventer). *As far as other accolades, Bret Hart is a 2 time King of the Ring, has won the Royal Rumble, is a WWE Hall of Famer, and has eight Pro Wrestling Illustrated awards to his name. Bret also has five Wrestling Observer awards, and is in their Hall of Fame. *Sting has won WCW's Battlebowl, is a Crockett Cup winner (with Lex Luger), won the King of Cable tournament, and won Starrcade 89's Iron Man tournament. Sting also has 9 Pro Wrestling Illustrated awards, and also has five Wrestling Observer awards. ADVANTAGE: Bret Hart, but just barely. *When it comes to being known by the average fan, Bret Hart is loved by many. He has had a retrospective DVD of his career produced by the WWE, and his name is brought up on occassion on WWE TV. He even appeared on a RAW in the past few years to give his opinion on Vince McMahon for an angle that was aborted. Previously, Bret was a mainstay on WWF Monday Night Raw, till he was forced out of that company, where he appeared on Nitro (but not as featured as he was on Raw) *Sting, however, was a mainstay of WCW Saturday Night, then WCW Nitro (in most every episode of it that aired). Sting currently wrestles for the second largest wrestling company in the United States, where he's consistantly both in the main event, and featured on it's program, TNA Impact. Sting's legacy is brought up only on rare occassions on WWE TV, but like Hart, he is featured on DVDs and on WWE 24/7. He has had two DVD's produced.. one career retrospective by TNA, and one self produced (or indy produced), that was more of a religious commercial than a biography. ADVANTAGE: Sting. They're both about even as far as how easy it is to hear about each person's past, but Sting can draw in new fans as he's still the focal point of a wrestling company. *Last but not least, big match situations. Bret Hart's was Wrestlemania, in the Iron Man match against Shawn Micheals. Sting's was Starrcade, against Hogan. The Sting-Hogan match had a better buildup, but Hart and HBK had a better match. So it has to be considered a push. It is worth mentioning that Bret Hart was involved in Sting's big match.. but it's generally acknowledged that his involvement brought it down a notch. The Montreal Screwjob, and Sting's series of matches with Ric Flair (culminating his match at the Great American Bash) are almost as "big" for the respective wrestlers' careers, but it helped Sting and hurt Hart. All in all... Sting's better in every single aspect except ring work, and even that is a very close call. Even when we look at accomplishments, Sting gets the win in more categories. And it's worth noting that the categories Sting wins are by a landslide, while the ones Bret wins are so close it's almost a coin flip.. So yeah.. if you're still planning on voting for Bret Hart, scroll back to the top of this message, read it, then click that box and vote for Sting, you'll be a better person for it!
|
|
|
Post by Emerald Enthusiast on Jul 18, 2009 2:12:55 GMT -5
Bret Hart. He had a period as the WWF's centerpiece. I still contend that Sting never had that with WCW. He was a key player but not "the" guy.
|
|
June
Main Eventer
High Fives All Around!!!
Joined on: May 31, 2009 10:54:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,457
|
Post by June on Jul 18, 2009 10:54:30 GMT -5
The Hitman was never my cup of tea, but he did something Sting never did and thats mainevent Wrestlemania. Sting was amazing, but he wasted the past decade of his career playing in the minors.
|
|