|
|
Post by warriorlynx on Dec 23, 2020 13:54:11 GMT -5
Wanted to share this concept on video:
What do you think? Would it have been a better outcome than what we ended up getting? I thought about Bret using political influence to keep him at the top because we know by having Bret and Shawn out of the picture would make a difference but I still feel Austin was already on his way to greatness.
|
|
|
|
Post by MKSavage on Dec 23, 2020 17:16:13 GMT -5
Not sure if it would have been better but, they could have had Bret drop the belt to Taker at Survivor Series, then have Taker drop the belt to Shawn at the Royal Rumble, then Shawn drops the belt to Austin at WM14. Personally, I think it would have been better for Bret to drop the title to Austin at WM14, it would have been a nice finish to their feud and it would have given Austin a big win over Bret - which I don't think he ever got. If they went this route, their may have never been a Mr. McMahon character. If that was the case, then having Bret drop the title to Austin would allow for Shawn to be Austin first big feud after winning the belt. Shawn and Taker could have finished their feud by the end of 1997, this way Kane and Taker could have happened at WM14. Shawn and Hunter could have faced Owen and Davey (since there was a DX vs Hart Foundation feud building before Survivor Series 97), giving Shawn the win which sets him up for the Austin feud after WM14.
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Dec 23, 2020 17:49:29 GMT -5
One of the big things about the whole "Montreal Screw Job" thing that still makes me question the reality of it is that Bret states in his own autobiography that his WWF contract was good up until the middle of December. He even states he was scheduled to wrestle on the December In Your House show, possibly defending the WWF Title against Ken Shamrock.
So if Bret was legally contracted to the WWF up until the middle of December (which seems legit since he didn't show up to WCW until the middle of December so the whole theory of him bringing the WWF Title to Nitro the following night of Survivor Series is ridiculous since it wouldn't be allowed with contract stipulation) why didn't they just have Bret go over HBK at Survivor Series and then drop the title in the weeks leading to the December In Your House or even at the December In Your House??
Instead, HBK vs. Bret feud finally ends, we get the heel character Mr. McMahon and we get Bret Hart being the baby face once again loved by everyone in the world because of the sympathy factor in what happened to him.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Dec 23, 2020 18:49:36 GMT -5
Not sure if it would have been better but, they could have had Bret drop the belt to Taker at Survivor Series, then have Taker drop the belt to Shawn at the Royal Rumble, then Shawn drops the belt to Austin at WM14. Personally, I think it would have been better for Bret to drop the title to Austin at WM14, it would have been a nice finish to their feud and it would have given Austin a big win over Bret - which I don't think he ever got. If they went this route, their may have never been a Mr. McMahon character. If that was the case, then having Bret drop the title to Austin would allow for Shawn to be Austin first big feud after winning the belt. Shawn and Taker could have finished their feud by the end of 1997, this way Kane and Taker could have happened at WM14. Shawn and Hunter could have faced Owen and Davey (since there was a DX vs Hart Foundation feud building before Survivor Series 97), giving Shawn the win which sets him up for the Austin feud after WM14. Hell yes to Bret/Austin at WM XIV. I mentioned this in the past here but makes me wonder what Vince would've done if this whole thing never happened. Do we eventual get his heel character or does he just remain in the booth? As great as the Austin/Vince feud was I wouldnt of minded if he stayed in the booth. Him,JR and King were an underrated team IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by MKSavage on Dec 23, 2020 19:07:12 GMT -5
Not sure if it would have been better but, they could have had Bret drop the belt to Taker at Survivor Series, then have Taker drop the belt to Shawn at the Royal Rumble, then Shawn drops the belt to Austin at WM14. Personally, I think it would have been better for Bret to drop the title to Austin at WM14, it would have been a nice finish to their feud and it would have given Austin a big win over Bret - which I don't think he ever got. If they went this route, their may have never been a Mr. McMahon character. If that was the case, then having Bret drop the title to Austin would allow for Shawn to be Austin first big feud after winning the belt. Shawn and Taker could have finished their feud by the end of 1997, this way Kane and Taker could have happened at WM14. Shawn and Hunter could have faced Owen and Davey (since there was a DX vs Hart Foundation feud building before Survivor Series 97), giving Shawn the win which sets him up for the Austin feud after WM14. Hell yes to Bret/Austin at WM XIV. I mentioned this in the past here but makes me wonder what Vince would've done if this whole thing never happened. Do we eventual get his heel character or does he just remain in the booth? As great as the Austin/Vince feud was I wouldn't of minded if he stayed in the booth. Him, JR and King were an underrated team IMO. It seems they were thinking of Vince becoming more involved, he was doing more interviews in the ring and he already had two incidents with Bret (Bret pushing him on is a$$ and he and Bret fighting at the announce table when Shawn was announced as the special guest ref for the Summer Slam match). Even if they didn't do the screwjob, I could see Vince getting more involved. Had he continued going against Austin in interviews, the fans would definitely have not been a fan of his. However, without the screwjob, I'm not sure if the character would have gotten over as big if they didn't have him screwing Bret (at that time his longest in ring employee). Doing to Bret what they did, gave fans the believe that he would definitely do it to Austin - or anyone, for that matter. It is an interesting thing to think about. I guess another thing to wonder about is, would the WWF won the ratings war without the Austin/McMahon feud? |
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Dec 23, 2020 19:16:12 GMT -5
Hell yes to Bret/Austin at WM XIV. I mentioned this in the past here but makes me wonder what Vince would've done if this whole thing never happened. Do we eventual get his heel character or does he just remain in the booth? As great as the Austin/Vince feud was I wouldn't of minded if he stayed in the booth. Him, JR and King were an underrated team IMO. It seems they were thinking of Vince becoming more involved, he was doing more interviews in the ring and he already had two incidents with Bret (Bret pushing him on is a$$ and he and Bret fighting at the announce table when Shawn was announced as the special guest ref for the Summer Slam match). Even if they didn't do the screwjob, I could see Vince getting more involved. Had he continued going against Austin in interviews, the fans would definitely have not been a fan of his. However, without the screwjob, I'm not sure if the character would have gotten over as big if they didn't have him screwing Bret (at that time his longest in ring employee). Doing to Bret what they did, gave fans the believe that he would definitely do it to Austin - or anyone, for that matter. It is an interesting thing to think about. I guess another thing to wonder about is, would the WWF won the ratings war without the Austin/McMahon feud? I think it still couldve worked. Have em finally snap one show and get in the ring and rip on the fans for cheering a rebel like Austin.They first mentioned him as owner in 96 so it would be no secret. He can be like if nobody will stop em then ''damnit I will!'' A good starting point would be the whole Tyson stuff in early 98. And that is a hell of a question as far if they wouldve won the war. Very interesting to ponder about. |
|
|
|
Post by jason88cubs on Dec 23, 2020 19:28:00 GMT -5
Not sure if it would have been better but, they could have had Bret drop the belt to Taker at Survivor Series, then have Taker drop the belt to Shawn at the Royal Rumble, then Shawn drops the belt to Austin at WM14. Personally, I think it would have been better for Bret to drop the title to Austin at WM14, it would have been a nice finish to their feud and it would have given Austin a big win over Bret - which I don't think he ever got. If they went this route, their may have never been a Mr. McMahon character. If that was the case, then having Bret drop the title to Austin would allow for Shawn to be Austin first big feud after winning the belt. Shawn and Taker could have finished their feud by the end of 1997, this way Kane and Taker could have happened at WM14. Shawn and Hunter could have faced Owen and Davey (since there was a DX vs Hart Foundation feud building before Survivor Series 97), giving Shawn the win which sets him up for the Austin feud after WM14. I really like this
Also if Michaels/Taker doesnt happen at the Rumble Michaels doesnt hurt his back, though with how his lifestyle wa sits probably good that happened
|
|
|
|
Post by warriorlynx on Dec 24, 2020 9:49:30 GMT -5
Not sure if it would have been better but, they could have had Bret drop the belt to Taker at Survivor Series, then have Taker drop the belt to Shawn at the Royal Rumble, then Shawn drops the belt to Austin at WM14. Personally, I think it would have been better for Bret to drop the title to Austin at WM14, it would have been a nice finish to their feud and it would have given Austin a big win over Bret - which I don't think he ever got. If they went this route, their may have never been a Mr. McMahon character. If that was the case, then having Bret drop the title to Austin would allow for Shawn to be Austin first big feud after winning the belt. Shawn and Taker could have finished their feud by the end of 1997, this way Kane and Taker could have happened at WM14. Shawn and Hunter could have faced Owen and Davey (since there was a DX vs Hart Foundation feud building before Survivor Series 97), giving Shawn the win which sets him up for the Austin feud after WM14. Taker is an obvious one but don't think Vince wanted to give him the strap again even temporarily. They should've just had him beat Bret before SS on RAW. Bret just wanted to refuse to lose the belt in Canada and I bet he probably would've said the same with Taker since in Bret's mind he retires with the title. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorlynx on Dec 24, 2020 9:53:30 GMT -5
One of the big things about the whole "Montreal Screw Job" thing that still makes me question the reality of it is that Bret states in his own autobiography that his WWF contract was good up until the middle of December. He even states he was scheduled to wrestle on the December In Your House show, possibly defending the WWF Title against Ken Shamrock. So if Bret was legally contracted to the WWF up until the middle of December (which seems legit since he didn't show up to WCW until the middle of December so the whole theory of him bringing the WWF Title to Nitro the following night of Survivor Series is ridiculous since it wouldn't be allowed with contract stipulation) why didn't they just have Bret go over HBK at Survivor Series and then drop the title in the weeks leading to the December In Your House or even at the December In Your House?? Instead, HBK vs. Bret feud finally ends, we get the heel character Mr. McMahon and we get Bret Hart being the baby face once again loved by everyone in the world because of the sympathy factor in what happened to him. I've heard this too that he had another month. Vince gave him a 20 year deal in '96 and so I don't even know how the contract worked this case or if it was verbal from Vince or just that they agreed to part ways and signed it for it to end in December. |
|
nibs92
Main Eventer
Joined on: May 29, 2008 5:47:21 GMT -5
Posts: 2,240
|
Post by nibs92 on Dec 24, 2020 15:31:06 GMT -5
Hell yes to Bret/Austin at WM XIV. I mentioned this in the past here but makes me wonder what Vince would've done if this whole thing never happened. Do we eventual get his heel character or does he just remain in the booth? As great as the Austin/Vince feud was I wouldn't of minded if he stayed in the booth. Him, JR and King were an underrated team IMO. It seems they were thinking of Vince becoming more involved, he was doing more interviews in the ring and he already had two incidents with Bret (Bret pushing him on is a$$ and he and Bret fighting at the announce table when Shawn was announced as the special guest ref for the Summer Slam match). Even if they didn't do the screwjob, I could see Vince getting more involved. Had he continued going against Austin in interviews, the fans would definitely have not been a fan of his. However, without the screwjob, I'm not sure if the character would have gotten over as big if they didn't have him screwing Bret (at that time his longest in ring employee). Doing to Bret what they did, gave fans the believe that he would definitely do it to Austin - or anyone, for that matter. It is an interesting thing to think about. I guess another thing to wonder about is, would the WWF won the ratings war without the Austin/McMahon feud? Without the screw job, I see Vince’s character becoming more like Jack Tunney’s. As he was already acknowledged as the owner, he would be easily accepted as an authority figure. And much like Tunney, he would be neither good nor bad. His role would be to make some decisions to move the storylines on, sometimes to the fans approval and sometimes not. But I don’t think the fans would have been as emotionally invested in this version of McMahon. |
|
|
|
Post by MKSavage on Dec 24, 2020 18:18:19 GMT -5
Not sure if it would have been better but, they could have had Bret drop the belt to Taker at Survivor Series, then have Taker drop the belt to Shawn at the Royal Rumble, then Shawn drops the belt to Austin at WM14. Personally, I think it would have been better for Bret to drop the title to Austin at WM14, it would have been a nice finish to their feud and it would have given Austin a big win over Bret - which I don't think he ever got. If they went this route, their may have never been a Mr. McMahon character. If that was the case, then having Bret drop the title to Austin would allow for Shawn to be Austin first big feud after winning the belt. Shawn and Taker could have finished their feud by the end of 1997, this way Kane and Taker could have happened at WM14. Shawn and Hunter could have faced Owen and Davey (since there was a DX vs Hart Foundation feud building before Survivor Series 97), giving Shawn the win which sets him up for the Austin feud after WM14. Taker is an obvious one but don't think Vince wanted to give him the strap again even temporarily. They should've just had him beat Bret before SS on RAW. Bret just wanted to refuse to lose the belt in Canada and I bet he probably would've said the same with Taker since in Bret's mind he retires with the title. Actually, he has said in a few of interviews that losing in Canada wasn't that big of an issue, what he wanted was for Shawn to put him over first before he would do the favor for him since prior to this Shawn said that he would refuse to ever put Bret over again, this apparently happened before Bret was set to leave the company. This made Bret angry because he just told Shawn that he was willing to put him over at the Survivor Series, even with all the things that had happened between them over the last year. So Bret held fast and told the office that he wouldn't put Shawn over until Shawn did it for him first, before the PPV. Bret has said for a long time that he had agree to lose the title to anyone other than Shawn, he even mentioned Taker, Austin, Foley and Shamrock as possible people to lose the title to prior to the event at a house show - I believe the WWF was in Toronto a few days before the PPV where Bret could have put the belt on anyone else at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorlynx on Dec 25, 2020 14:17:54 GMT -5
Taker is an obvious one but don't think Vince wanted to give him the strap again even temporarily. They should've just had him beat Bret before SS on RAW. Bret just wanted to refuse to lose the belt in Canada and I bet he probably would've said the same with Taker since in Bret's mind he retires with the title. Actually, he has said in a few of interviews that losing in Canada wasn't that big of an issue, what he wanted was for Shawn to put him over first before he would do the favor for him since prior to this Shawn said that he would refuse to ever put Bret over again, this apparently happened before Bret was set to leave the company. This made Bret angry because he just told Shawn that he was willing to put him over at the Survivor Series, even with all the things that had happened between them over the last year. So Bret held fast and told the office that he wouldn't put Shawn over until Shawn did it for him first, before the PPV. Bret has said for a long time that he had agree to lose the title to anyone other than Shawn, he even mentioned Taker, Austin, Foley and Shamrock as possible people to lose the title to prior to the event at a house show - I believe the WWF was in Toronto a few days before the PPV where Bret could have put the belt on anyone else at the time. In a sense his hatred of Shawn (not to say Shawn didn't deserve it for being a jacka##) got the best of him? |
|
|
|
Post by MKSavage on Dec 25, 2020 14:57:35 GMT -5
Actually, he has said in a few of interviews that losing in Canada wasn't that big of an issue, what he wanted was for Shawn to put him over first before he would do the favor for him since prior to this Shawn said that he would refuse to ever put Bret over again, this apparently happened before Bret was set to leave the company. This made Bret angry because he just told Shawn that he was willing to put him over at the Survivor Series, even with all the things that had happened between them over the last year. So Bret held fast and told the office that he wouldn't put Shawn over until Shawn did it for him first, before the PPV. Bret has said for a long time that he had agree to lose the title to anyone other than Shawn, he even mentioned Taker, Austin, Foley and Shamrock as possible people to lose the title to prior to the event at a house show - I believe the WWF was in Toronto a few days before the PPV where Bret could have put the belt on anyone else at the time. In a sense his hatred of Shawn (not to say Shawn didn't deserve it for being a jacka##) got the best of him? Yeah, I would say that too. I think Shawn really got under his skin that year. Starting with him refusing to lose the belt to him at WM13, then making the "sunny days" comment on live TV which got him in trouble with his wife, and finally saying that he would not put Bret over ever again after Bret said he was willing to put Shawn over at the Survivor Series (even after all the conflict they had). |
|
|
|
Post by warriorlynx on Dec 25, 2020 17:32:36 GMT -5
In a sense his hatred of Shawn (not to say Shawn didn't deserve it for being a jacka##) got the best of him? Yeah, I would say that too. I think Shawn really got under his skin that year. Starting with him refusing to lose the belt to him at WM13, then making the "sunny days" comment on live TV which got him in trouble with his wife, and finally saying that he would not put Bret over ever again after Bret said he was willing to put Shawn over at the Survivor Series (even after all the conflict they had). The thing is I always saw Wrestlemania 12 as a passing of the torch moment between Bret and Shawn, it fit so well, I actually agree with Shawn that it makes no sense for him to drop the title back to Bret. Besides we got Bret vs. Austin which is one of the top WM matches in history. I know Shawn was a punk but there was obvious egos clashing and I bet Bret couldn't stand that someone was taking his spot. He even tried so hard to show Vince in his match with Bulldog at IHY Dec 1995 that he still had it and the rest of 1997 as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkster2001 on Dec 25, 2020 20:29:35 GMT -5
That was a great watch, I whole heartedly agree with you point about the McMahon character. I felt like it was going to happen regardless of Montreal, as you mentioned McMemphis and the night Bret shoved Vince and when Austin stunned him on RAW.
|
|
|
|
Post by warriorlynx on Dec 26, 2020 11:02:08 GMT -5
That was a great watch, I whole heartedly agree with you point about the McMahon character. I felt like it was going to happen regardless of Montreal, as you mentioned McMemphis and the night Bret shoved Vince and when Austin stunned him on RAW. Thanks, even if it was delayed it just had to be I can't buy the idea that fans would continue liking him as a face commentator. |
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Dec 26, 2020 11:07:00 GMT -5
That was a great watch, I whole heartedly agree with you point about the McMahon character. I felt like it was going to happen regardless of Montreal, as you mentioned McMemphis and the night Bret shoved Vince and when Austin stunned him on RAW. Thanks, even if it was delayed it just had to be I can't buy the idea that fans would continue liking him as a face commentator. You mean to tell me you didnt like when he yelled ''WHAT A MANEUVER!''  All seriousness though I didnt mind em in the booth. He was best with Jesse. |
|
|
|
Post by JokerFC on Dec 26, 2020 12:30:46 GMT -5
Crucially We don't get the Mr McMahon character (and no it wasn't coming anyway) & a crucial element of Austin's rise is absent. MSJ had huge far reaching consequences for both companies.
|
|
|
|
Post by warriorlynx on Dec 26, 2020 20:26:42 GMT -5
Thanks, even if it was delayed it just had to be I can't buy the idea that fans would continue liking him as a face commentator. You mean to tell me you didnt like when he yelled ''WHAT A MANEUVER!'' All seriousness though I didnt mind em in the booth. He was best with Jesse. LOL ya it's memorable but definitely he was great with Jesse as a team after that nah was boring as heck. |
|
