Paid Members Duke Posted July 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 19, 2011 its at least inspiring some decent debate, in the end it doesn matter what I think because short of Bret and Vince admitting it was a work we'll have to just assume it wasnt but I cant help but think it was. doesnt it strike you as odd though that Vince would screw Bret like this knowing he was going WCW and give him the perfect debut angle? We have to remember the Madusa title angle, the near thefts of Luger, Hall, Waltman and Nash and the on air results reading to remember that Bischoff wasnt afraid to openly address WWE on TV in order to maintain the gap in ratings.... so why would Vince gift wrap them something like this unless he knew they were doomed to fail by hiring Bret? How is "he's been screwed" a more perfect debut than "he's the champion with the belt"?  You've not answered my questions. What business benefits would Vince gain from this being a work, considering they were getting hammered by nitro at the time? And secondly, if it was a work, why did it take him until 2010 to capitalise on  Occam's Razor dictates that the simplest answer is usually the correct one. Your version of events needlessly complicates everything for 0 business benefit for Vince, Bret, or the WWE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted July 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 19, 2011 Also people forget, WWF werent in a position to let one of there big stars leave with the intention of bringing him back. The way business was at the time, if the Bret Hart thing with WCW had worked, they'd could have been out of business. WWF was only a private company then and the post Survivor Series buyrate was well lower than the previous one. WCW was a monster then. They looked untouchable with Sting now becoming the biggest draw in the business at Starrcade. In 1998, WCW looked like a cant miss product. Hogan vs Hart, Hart vs Sting, Sting vs DDP, Hogan vs DDP, Hart vs DDP, Nash vs Hogan, Savage vs Hart all big money matches people wanted to see. Shame it all fucked up and most of these were given away on TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smeg_&_The_Heads Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 And secondly, if it was a work, why did it take him until 2010 to capitalise on  1st off I don't think it was a work at all but just say it was the Goldberg kick and Bret's stroke could of ruined what was supposed to be a planned come back and it's only now Bret is feeling up to anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted July 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 19, 2011 1st off I don't think it was a work at all but just say it was the Goldberg kick and Bret's stroke could of ruined what was supposed to be a planned come back and it's only now Bret is feeling up to anything He could have refereed the Triple H vs Chris Jericho match in Canada at WrestleMania 18, but refused. That would have been perfect. Especially with the brand split. Bret left coming back way to late to mean anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Duke Posted July 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 19, 2011 Also people forget, WWF werent in a position to let one of there big stars leave with the intention of bringing him back. The way business was at the time, if the Bret Hart thing with WCW had worked, they'd could have been out of business. WWF was only a private company then and the post Survivor Series buyrate was well lower than the previous one. WCW was a monster then. They looked untouchable with Sting now becoming the biggest draw in the business at Starrcade. In 1998, WCW looked like a cant miss product. Hogan vs Hart, Hart vs Sting, Sting vs DDP, Hogan vs DDP, Hart vs DDP, Nash vs Hogan, Savage vs Hart all big money matches people wanted to see. Shame it all fucked up and most of these were given away on TV. I've been saying that all argument. He seems to be ignoring it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members WWFChilli Posted July 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 19, 2011 I've been saying that all argument. He seems to be ignoring it. Â I told him he was talking shit but then he convinced me of not just the screwjob but also the Manhattan Project and the Lihndberg Baby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members unfitfinlay Posted July 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 19, 2011 Firstly the finish - Bulldog, Owen and Anvil were supposed to run down to the ring when Shawn locked the Sharpshooter on and interfere making the match a DQ so Bret kept the belt. If this was meant to happen, where were they at the end? I know the bell was being rung as soon as the move was put on but they would of been half way down the aisle while Shawn was locking it in under those circumstances, yet the only other wrestler near by was Hunter. Â Actually, the agreed finish was Shawn would get Bret in the Sharpshooter, Bret would reverse it (which he did) and Triple H and Chyna would run in for the DQ. The rest of the Hart Foundation were supposed to run in for the save afterwards. Â Secondly - Bret 'punches' Vince. Vince McMahon emerges from a locker room on camera selling a punch that no one sees.... if thats not an obvious clue I dont know what is. Â People did see Bret smacking Vince. Granted. Shane McMahon might have good reason to keep the truth to himself but Davey Boy Smith certainly didn't, especially near the end of his life when he was done with wrestling and openly talking about what a bunch of nutters the Harts were. Â That's another thing, actually. If Montreal was a work to let Bret go to WCW, why would they let Bulldog buy himself out of his contract so he could go as well? He was terrible there, granted, but he was a legit star in the WWF and a huge part of their ability to draw over here. Â Thirdly - Vince and Bret had already aknowledged Bret was leaving. Pretty self-explanatory. Â I thought the deal was that they both agreed not to acknowledge it but Vince leaked it to make it appear that Bret was leaving for the money to try and keep the fans sympathy with the WWF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Duke Posted July 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 19, 2011 I told him he was talking shit but then he convinced me of not just the screwjob but also the Manhattan Project and the Lihndberg Baby ...He convinced you that Atomic bombs were dropped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrington Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 In the JR interview, Vince says that Bret didnt show the proper respect when leaving. Basically he didnt want to drop the belt to HBK, but couldnt say it like that on Raw. He wasn't willing to pay the amount Bret wanted because he couldnt justify it. Then Bret wanted to do the DQ thing and he was given alot of creative freedom in his last 30 days IIRC to send him out happy. Vince wanted him to drop the belt but he wouldnt in his home town, then Shawn locked on the sharpshooter and mcmahon had the bell rung. I think the screw job was planned on the night. Because it was Hebner that told the time keeper to ring the bell as soon as HBK turned Bret over. What better way than sticking it to Bret, who wouldnt drop the belt to WWF's top guy, than being able to put down in history, Bret submitted to his own submission hold to lose the belt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Worsthorne Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 In the JR interview, Vince says that Bret didnt show the proper respect when leaving. Basically he didnt want to drop the belt to HBK, but couldnt say it like that on Raw. He wasn't willing to pay the amount Bret wanted because he couldnt justify it. Then Bret wanted to do the DQ thing and he was given alot of creative freedom in his last 30 days IIRC to send him out happy. Vince wanted him to drop the belt but he wouldnt in his home town, then Shawn locked on the sharpshooter and mcmahon had the bell rung. I think the screw job was planned on the night. Because it was Hebner that told the time keeper to ring the bell as soon as HBK turned Bret over. What better way than sticking it to Bret, who wouldnt drop the belt to WWF's top guy, than being able to put down in history, Bret submitted to his own submission hold to lose the belt. Â Â Thank you for this groundbreaking new info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey_Jim Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 Sorry, still not convinced. The business benefit Vince got was getting Bret off his wage bill for a starters, in a similar way to the way he had gotten Hogan and Savage off his wage bill a few years earlier. They were also the biggest stars in the company at the time but it paid off getting rid of them. Vince was better at creating new stars than WCW were and having Bret out of the way gave space for Triple H and Rock to step up. They both drew trumendous money. Another point I got at was the potential that it may not have been strictly business aimed, and maybe out of spite towards WCW. Letting them have a top star and seeing them fail must have been pretty sweet for Vince even more so when you consider he had said it would happen all along. To be fair, Im probably wrong but Im seeing enough variables in this for me, at least, to cast serious doubt over it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted July 20, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 20, 2011 They were also the biggest stars in the company at the time but it paid off getting rid of them. No it didnt. Years of dwindling buyrates, attendance and merchandise sales showed that he was better off with Hogan and Savage main eventing. WWF was on its arse for years post Hogan and Savage. After Hogan left, they didnt sell out Madison Square Garden (the home of WWF/WWE) for years. Â Vince was better at creating new stars than WCW were and having Bret out of the way gave space for Triple H and Rock to step up. They both drew trumendous money. Yes three years later and on the back of Steve Austin's initial success. They'd have done that whether Bret Hart was on the roster or not. Â Another point I got at was the potential that it may not have been strictly business aimed, and maybe out of spite towards WCW. Letting them have a top star and seeing them fail must have been pretty sweet for Vince even more so when you consider he had said it would happen all along. Vince also said that Hogan, Savage, Flair, Luger, Hall and Nash would fail. He was wrong on all of these. Its easy to say you know something after the fact. In December of 1997 (one month after Bret left) WCW drew the largest PPV in wrestling history and WWF's house show business and PPV business hit a horrible low. To say it was all some big master plan is giving McMahon more credit than he deserves. Signing Mike Tyson and putting him with Steve Austin is what dragged WWF out of the shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted July 21, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 21, 2011 Signing Mike Tyson and putting him with Steve Austin is what dragged WWF out of the shit. Â No, it wasn't. It was the return of the Bossman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Halitosis Romantic Posted July 21, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 21, 2011 Best thing about Screwdrivergate is that it was just plain made up as a joke on the former Wrestlecrap (now FAN) forums, much like Danielson having been fired from WWE for making HHH's daughter cry, only to get picked up by desperate newz sites and fed back to the internet as legit speculation. Â I've always wanted to ask Cornette about a snippet in that massive sleaze thread that implies an aging Swede Hansen once fucked up New Jack - he would have been about 60, but he was a shit brickhouse, and I'd like to think that it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Duke Posted July 21, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 21, 2011 Sorry, still not convinced. The business benefit Vince got was getting Bret off his wage bill for a starters, in a similar way to the way he had gotten Hogan and Savage off his wage bill a few years earlier. They were also the biggest stars in the company at the time but it paid off getting rid of them. Vince was better at creating new stars than WCW were and having Bret out of the way gave space for Triple H and Rock to step up. They both drew trumendous money. Another point I got at was the potential that it may not have been strictly business aimed, and maybe out of spite towards WCW. Letting them have a top star and seeing them fail must have been pretty sweet for Vince even more so when you consider he had said it would happen all along. To be fair, Im probably wrong but Im seeing enough variables in this for me, at least, to cast serious doubt over it all. I was going to split this up, but actually I don't need to, as it can all be answered in one sentence: Â All of that explains why he let bret go, not why montreal happened. None of it gives ANY explanation for Montreal being a work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.