Unpopular Wrestling Opinions
- Thread starter c9777666
- Start date
DitchMarner
TheGlitchintheSwitch
I don't know if this is unpopular, but Bret Hart seems to have a really hard time letting things go.
I was on YT and came across this video:
Isn't he supposed to be on good terms with Michaels now? Or did something happen?
He seems to constantly run this guy down still. Like... I get that Shawn was a douchebag and unprofessional, but he's basically admitted he was an asshole and seems to have moved on. Sure, I've heard people say that the reborn Christian thing is basically an act or gimmick, but nonetheless I don't get the impression that he obsesses over things that happened over 25 years ago. He seems to have moved on with his life.
Hart was one of my favorite wrestlers and I still like watching his matches. I'm not saying he didn't have bad and unfortunate things happen to him, but he might be happier if he stopped hating on certain guys (Hogan, Goldberg, HHH) every chance he gets. Some of the things he says can be funny/entertaining, but the promo Michaels did on him in '97 where he calls him "Mark man" and says he obsesses over things comes to mind...
I was on YT and came across this video:
Isn't he supposed to be on good terms with Michaels now? Or did something happen?
He seems to constantly run this guy down still. Like... I get that Shawn was a douchebag and unprofessional, but he's basically admitted he was an asshole and seems to have moved on. Sure, I've heard people say that the reborn Christian thing is basically an act or gimmick, but nonetheless I don't get the impression that he obsesses over things that happened over 25 years ago. He seems to have moved on with his life.
Hart was one of my favorite wrestlers and I still like watching his matches. I'm not saying he didn't have bad and unfortunate things happen to him, but he might be happier if he stopped hating on certain guys (Hogan, Goldberg, HHH) every chance he gets. Some of the things he says can be funny/entertaining, but the promo Michaels did on him in '97 where he calls him "Mark man" and says he obsesses over things comes to mind...
Bret is my all time favourite wrestler so maybe I'm biased, but name some wrestlers that got done wrong anywhere near the level that Bret Hart did and which of them isn't bitter? I'm not sure if there is one
dahrougem2
Registered User
How exactly was Bret done wrong? Because he refused to drop the title to Shawn anywhere in Canada so Vince couldn't chance it and forced it off of him?
Because Goldberg recklessly but accidentally hurt him?
Bret got paid very well for his career, was a main event talent for two different companies and got to live his "best there ever will be" monikor for a long time.
I don't see how he was done wrong.
The answer to your first two questions is: yes.
Vince had no reason to believe Bret was taking the title to WCW.
The last two paragraphs of your post would have happened without the montreal screw job and the Goldberg incident.
Undertaker is very overrated. I respect his legacy and think he's one of the greats. But he's been very protected and for the most part could only have good matches if there was a ring general on the other side.
f***ing finally somebody says it. I would argue the first 2/3rds of Taker's career were the drizzling shits with a couple very notable exceptions (Hell in a Cell with Michaels, his title match with Austin at Summerslam 98, legit my favorite title match) with the rest being boring at best and offensive at worse.
The corporate ministry sucked because he was the figurehead which means he was crammed in the main event where he was out of shape, slow and awful to watch.
Even bikertaker wasn't that good outside of the couple matches he had with Lesnar.
Taker from 2005-2012 though was legit. Multiple banger mania matches, good feuds (Orton in 2005, Edge in 2007-2008, the Michaels feud, etc)
Taker himself says the Undertaker Kane storyline is the greatest storyline in wrestling history. What? It was full of goofy shit and the people that praise are just being nostalgic about their childhood. Even in terms of ring work, there wasn't one good taker-kane match.
Taker didn't exist before 2001 in my head.
dahrougem2
Registered User
That doesn't mean he was "done wrong."
Bret wanted to just drop the belt. The most significant belt in the company and waltz on in to WCW live television like it was nothing. Of course Vince had to do what he did - Bret was being a stubborn prick and wouldn't play ball.
The Goldberg incident was accidental. Could have happened to anyone in the ring with Goldberg, just so happened to be Bret.
Bret has always been a whiny nerd who takes wrestling way too seriously.
Hard to not take it seriously when he was essentially programmed from birth to treat it as the most important thing on earth given the family he was born into.
I feel like there should be a happy medium though; Yeah, the business brought him a lot of fame and fortune, but it also took away a lot with pretty much all of his friends and family either dying indirectly from the business (guys like Davey Boy, Neidhart, etc) or directly in Owen's case. The way your WWE run ended sucked and then the subsequent WCW run basically wasted what was left of your prime and then actually ended your career.
But at the same time; man, look at all the shit you did accomplish. You were essentially a god in your home country, have one of the most decorated resumes in wrestling history and even to this day, the younger generations have watched your work and consider you among the best of all time (or actually the GOAT in some cases)
I can understand being bitter but like, what do you want? Goldberg for example has apologized multiple times for the kick. Everyone acknowledges you were right and WCW didn't train him properly. Even a good chunk of people take your side on the screwjob when that was probably kinda your fault. Maybe Bret should just once and a while look at all the good rather than the bad.
Such a good feud yet i can't remember anything other than the parts where Austin got shoehorned into it because they had no other legitimate challengers for his title. How fitting for the "greatest storyline ever"
I'd rather watch Triple H and Shawn Michaels' 350 year long feud then any of that. Because as obnoxious and dragged out that was, there was at least a couple really good matches in there.
sabremike
#1 Tageaholic
Bret actually told Vince he would happily drop the belt to Brooklyn Brawler at MSG (He was to get a title shot on the next MSG show for winning a battle royal) if that's what he wanted. Why do people STILL believe Vince's lies over 25 years later when they have been thoroughly debunked?
dahrougem2
Registered User
Come on, now. The Brooklyn Brawler? THAT's who Bret was willing to do the job for?
Do you not see how in that scenario Bret is still being awful to deal with?
sabremike
#1 Tageaholic
You completely missed the point: He was telling Vince he would be ABSOLUTELY willing to drop the title to anyone except Shawn (who among other things caused problems with Bret and his wife with his "Sunny days" promo). Clearly he wasn't going to drop the title to Brawler but the idea he was unwilling to drop the title is a complete lie.
If I remember right the outcome Hart was pushing for was coming into Raw the next night (not under contract no less) and dropping the title to Shamrock.
dahrougem2
Registered User
And again, who the f*** is Bret Hart to get to decide who he drops the title to? Do you not realize the level of ego a person has to have to say "I'm not dropping this title which you chose to give me unless I get a say in who it is."
Vince did the right thing screwing him. Vince is a horrible scumbag of a human being, but he did the right thing.
Masked
(Super/star)
Bret Hart got to decide because he had a contract that allowed him to decide. Your whining about his ego doesn't work for me, brother.
JuJu Mobb
Registered User
- Dec 9, 2009
- 2,987
- 3,388
Politics is part of wrestling.
Plenty wrestlers refuse to job or drop their championships.
dahrougem2
Registered User
So we know with 100% certainty that Bret had complete creative control at the time and could make all the decisions?
Not all the decisions, but iirc he did have a similar "reasonable creative control" clause that Hogan had in WCW. Only difference is Bret didn't abuse it to keep himself on top and as far as we know that's the only time he actually enacted that clause in such a way. Vince is the one who gave him that, that's on him.
That's why the screwjob is only partially his fault. Bret didn't want to drop the title because he initially tried to play nice with Shawn, saying he would make sure he made him look good and work safe, which Shawn replied he wouldn't do the same for Bret. I can see why he went full "nah f*** this guy"
At the same time if I was Bret I would have just said the hell with it, dropped the belt to him and be done with it knowing I wouldn't have to work with the prick again.
dahrougem2
Registered User
This is basically where I stand. Just do it and be done with, you're already in WCW the next night AND it's been almost 30 years now - let it go.
The Marquis
Moderator
Jussi
Registered User
From the comments: "This is a very very old interview that this channel keep putting out in clips as if they are new"
Bret was seen literally on video helping out on the Mania(?) main event match, I want to say last year(?), with HBK and HHH and other legends. Some comments saying this might be from 2019 or even older. Bret has commented recently how he and Shawn have patched things up and are friends now.
Troublesome 85
TOP RANKED GIRL DAD
Jussi
Registered User
Again, that video is not new nor present how he currently feels about HBK and HHH, as I mentioned in my previous post.
