DS Forums

 
 

World Wrestling Entertainment Discussion 41 (Spoilers)


Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27-02-2016, 23:55
dellzincht
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,636
You say it like they did the business in the knowledge that over a year later they couldn't honour it anymore. Unless that is what happened?
I suggest you watch Wrestling With Shadows if you haven't already, it's an excellent documentary about Bret's final year in the WWF, leading up to Survivor Series. All from his point of view (but of course at the time, it's the only point of view we had as Vince McMahon stayed quiet about the whole affair.)

What basically happened was Bret became disillusioned with WWF's move towards the Attitude Era and WCW offered him a large contract to jump ship. Hart ultimately remained loyal to the WWF and signed a huge 20 year contract. When WWF started to lose money due to getting stomped in the ratings, Vince told Bret to go to WCW as they couldn't actually afford his contract.

Bret didn't want to go to WCW and rightfully wanted to go out on his own terms. He certainly didn't want to drop the title to Michaels, who he had major heat with in real life.
dellzincht is offline  
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 27-02-2016, 23:59
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,706
Bret's contract was 20 years, 3 years as a wrestler and 17 as office staff IIRC. It's possible in 1997 he was single-handedly drawing more money for WWF in Canada than they were paying him, but there's no real way to know.

Off topic but Big Damo won the ICW belt tonight, so congrats to him.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 28-02-2016, 01:19
FMKK
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 26,161
Where is Raw this Monday? I know Taker is back and Cena posted a pic of him on Instagram, but Cena also posted a pic of Punk and there's a Raw in Chicago so I'm thinking that's a hit that he returns there as Shane's man.
FMKK is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 01:45
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,706
Where is Raw this Monday? I know Taker is back and Cena posted a pic of him on Instagram, but Cena also posted a pic of Punk and there's a Raw in Chicago so I'm thinking that's a hit that he returns there as Shane's man.
He didn't post a picture of Punk, he posted a picture of Paul Newman in the movie Slap Shot (actually a really good movie, it's on UK netflix), which is also Punk's twitter profile picture.

Cena be trolling, most likely.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 28-02-2016, 09:26
dave_windows
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,353
Absolutely. If Vince refused to honour a contract, Bret should have sued him.

I still don't believe anybody would allow their top champion out of that building holding their belt knowing he was signing with WCW. And I'd say exactly the same thing if somebody refused to job to anybody the company wanted him to in their final match. If Bischoff, Heyman or even Dixie Carter (who am I kidding, she'd have gift wrapped the title and paid for the airfare to Raw) had done the same thing.
Bret's & Vince's relationship with WWE had been going since he debuted in the 1980s and you'd think he would have trusted Bret by then. Shawn just seemed the wrong choice and the way Shamrock had been bigged up around this time making Bret & Shawn tap out he should have won the belt around this time. Yes Bret refused to job to Shawn but Vince should have either changed the match or gone to a situation where both sides were happy.

Id have been more happier Bret putting Austin over at Mania to end their feud that had been established since 1996.

You'd have allowed Eric Bischoff announce on Nitro an hour before Raw even went on the air that the current WWF Champion was coming to WCW?
Pretty sure he hadent signed yet. Out of all the guys there theres other people Id have released before Bret.
dave_windows is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 09:30
dave_windows
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,353
And if you were Vince McMahon you wouldn't have wanted an outgoing Bret Hart holding your title on his way out.
But he wasent on his way out. He still had months left on his contract, it was Vince who decided he didnt want Bret there which just seems odd, he was the longest WWE wrestler there I think. Very fishy to Vince acting the way he did trusting more a guy who had a habit of refusing jobs and just walking out when he didnt get his way. If it had been me knowing the problems I would not have had Bret/Shawn on PPV.
dave_windows is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 09:37
dave_windows
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,353
I suggest you watch Wrestling With Shadows if you haven't already, it's an excellent documentary about Bret's final year in the WWF, leading up to Survivor Series. All from his point of view (but of course at the time, it's the only point of view we had as Vince McMahon stayed quiet about the whole affair.)

What basically happened was Bret became disillusioned with WWF's move towards the Attitude Era and WCW offered him a large contract to jump ship. Hart ultimately remained loyal to the WWF and signed a huge 20 year contract. When WWF started to lose money due to getting stomped in the ratings, Vince told Bret to go to WCW as they couldn't actually afford his contract.

Bret didn't want to go to WCW and rightfully wanted to go out on his own terms. He certainly didn't want to drop the title to Michaels, who he had major heat with in real life.
I wouldnt want to drop the belt to Shawn either after he had been a dick the past year refusing to put me over, that match was scheduelled to be at Mania which didnt happen and King of the Ring didnt happen either. Vince was nuts for doing it at Survivor Series, even back then I wasent all that interested in the match, I wanted Taker/Bret part 2.

But the DVD is fantastic and wonderful, the special edition is even better cos it has a Owen documentary.
dave_windows is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 10:22
BFGArmy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 14,316
Shiny new thread.

Cue mass mark-out lol.

Prepare for WWE to once again ruin something those on the internet like.

Rumor is that it will be a triple threat HHH vs Lesnar vs Wyatt.

Wyatt undoubtedly there to take the pin of course
What a random match if true, And a waste of a Lesnar appearance - they really are burning through those at the moment.

Also - as is thread tradition - post counts from the previous thread:

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/misc....sted&t=2109523
BFGArmy is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 10:53
orangeballoon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: london-essex
Posts: 8,811
if it wasn't for the shock return of Shane there would not be a single reason to watch wrestlemania.... and as he is not doing a one off, there isnt still.
orangeballoon is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 11:38
cris182
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 4,837
Where is Raw this Monday? I know Taker is back and Cena posted a pic of him on Instagram, but Cena also posted a pic of Punk and there's a Raw in Chicago so I'm thinking that's a hit that he returns there as Shane's man.
Isn't Punk under contract elsewhere so probably can't fight in WWE, Plus he just had back surgery so not likely
cris182 is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 11:40
Hollie_Louise
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 31,653
Could we see a situation tonight where Taker refuses to fight for Vince and instead sides with Shane leading McMahon to bring in a club of the Bullet variety?
Hollie_Louise is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 12:06
Lee_Smith2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,925
Could we see a situation tonight where Taker refuses to fight for Vince and instead sides with Shane leading McMahon to bring in a club of the Bullet variety?
Possible, but it would be a bit unusual for them to use wrestlers unknown to casuals in a setup which seems like a homage to the late 90s. Austin, Rock are more likely to make cameos on Shane's part.

As it is, I reckon Taker will initially refuse and Vince will mention he's upped the stakes/forgot to mention the career of The Undertaker is on the line also. Many have been under the assumption it was his last match, which it still could be. Like the WWE to play on that.

It would be fitting in a way if it's a McMahon who ends the gimmick onscreen/offscreen as it was a McMahon who created it.
Lee_Smith2 is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 12:10
DejaVoodoo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,669
Meltzer posted this on the observer board last year about Montreal.

Getting the belt off Bret was not an issue in Montreal or ever an issue.

Bret's position was that he would lose the title to anyone at any time after November 11th.

He felt the way the Michaels-Hart angle was scripted, that him coming in without the belt would weaken the show and he wasn't going to lose the title in Canada.

He was under contract through Nov. 30, and Bischoff agreed to give him until after the the following PPV to drop the title. It was agreed to all he'd lose Dec. 7 in Springfield, MA at the next PPV before Montreal in a four-way with he, Shawn, Shamrock & Taker.

They wanted to beat him in Canada to hurt his drawing power in Canada because they were still ahead in that market while behind in the U.S., and Bret was the biggest draw at the time in Canada.

He had a clause in his contract that stated all booking in his last 30 days would have to be mutually agreed upon. Vince had no legal right to say I'm the boss, they had to both sign off on anything at that point.

Bret turned down every idea that involved losing it in Canada or before Montreal. And agreed to anything after, although in a letter his lawyer sent where he specifically stated he was willing to lose the title any time, anywhere to anyone, he suggested losing to Austin and asked to do so, but it was clear that wasn't a demand.

So yeah, not only was getting the belt off him not an issue, but he asked to lose the belt to Austin.
DejaVoodoo is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 12:57
ags_rule
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,401
Bret should have dropped it before Montreal.
ags_rule is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 13:47
Harris_07
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: London
Posts: 23,152
Possible, but it would be a bit unusual for them to use wrestlers unknown to casuals in a setup which seems like a homage to the late 90s. Austin, Rock are more likely to make cameos on Shane's part.

As it is, I reckon Taker will initially refuse and Vince will mention he's upped the stakes/forgot to mention the career of The Undertaker is on the line also. Many have been under the assumption it was his last match, which it still could be. Like the WWE to play on that.

It would be fitting in a way if it's a McMahon who ends the gimmick onscreen/offscreen as it was a McMahon who created it.
I didn't think of a career threatening match for Taker. It would be the right time and place to do it, but I'd rather it not be against Shane. Also, Taker on the side of a heel McMahon is very weird. I'm sure that we won't actually get Shane vs Taker at WM. Unless...an Undertaker heel turn? Is that even possible?
Harris_07 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 28-02-2016, 13:53
Harris_07
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: London
Posts: 23,152
I think I've mentioned this before, but I'd really like to see Lesnar doing more moves. The only moves he does these days are suplexes, Kimoura Locks and F5s. I'd like to see him do more submissions, spinebusters, DDTs, powerslams and powerbombs. Anything to freshen up his moveset rather than brawling, suplexing and F5ing.
Harris_07 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 28-02-2016, 14:02
FMKK
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 26,161
Isn't Punk under contract elsewhere so probably can't fight in WWE, Plus he just had back surgery so not likely
I didn't say Punk would be there, I said Cena was teasing his own return on the Chicago Raw.
FMKK is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 14:04
FMKK
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 26,161
Also, Meltzer was tweeting something earlier in the week about a guest referee so I think Austin will be involved in Mania in that capacity.
FMKK is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 14:31
Sinister2010
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,444
Shiny new thread.



Cue mass mark-out lol.

Prepare for WWE to once again ruin something those on the internet like.



What a random match if true, And a waste of a Lesnar appearance - they really are burning through those at the moment.

Also - as is thread tradition - post counts from the previous thread:

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/misc....sted&t=2109523
Ah the good old thread count no surprise that Hollie was the queen bee of the previous thread think we all need to up our game cause it's what's best for business.
Sinister2010 is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 16:10
dellzincht
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,636
I think I've mentioned this before, but I'd really like to see Lesnar doing more moves. The only moves he does these days are suplexes, Kimoura Locks and F5s. I'd like to see him do more submissions, spinebusters, DDTs, powerslams and powerbombs. Anything to freshen up his moveset rather than brawling, suplexing and F5ing.
But that's his character, an angry beast of a wrecking machine. He doesn't NEED to be able to do more moves to be over, so why bother?
dellzincht is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 16:20
stu64
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Manchester
Posts: 3,178
I think I've mentioned this before, but I'd really like to see Lesnar doing more moves. The only moves he does these days are suplexes, Kimoura Locks and F5s. I'd like to see him do more submissions, spinebusters, DDTs, powerslams and powerbombs. Anything to freshen up his moveset rather than brawling, suplexing and F5ing.
He was doing more before his match with Reigns at WM when the whole Suplex City started. He is capable of a hell of a lot more and with his power he should indeed be doing more stuff like powerbombs ect.
stu64 is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 16:21
Rich_Allen
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Sheffield, England
Posts: 733
Isn't Punk under contract elsewhere so probably can't fight in WWE, Plus he just had back surgery so not likely
For the absolute final time as I am sick of telling people this, CM Punk back in WWE? Won't happen, he QUIT 2 years ago, took his ball and went home, resigned, walked out.

I realise that if he came back on Raw in Chicago, the IWC would literally shit themselves, but it's not happening.
Rich_Allen is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 28-02-2016, 16:57
Hollie_Louise
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 31,653
For the absolute final time as I am sick of telling people this, CM Punk back in WWE? Won't happen, he QUIT 2 years ago, took his ball and went home, resigned, walked out.

I realise that if he came back on Raw in Chicago, the IWC would literally shit themselves, but it's not happening.
People hAve done your gimmick before, only much better.
Hollie_Louise is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 17:01
Lee_Smith2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,925
I didn't think of a career threatening match for Taker. It would be the right time and place to do it, but I'd rather it not be against Shane. Also, Taker on the side of a heel McMahon is very weird. I'm sure that we won't actually get Shane vs Taker at WM. Unless...an Undertaker heel turn? Is that even possible?
It would all depend on how they play it, even though in all honesty I have little faith in modern day WWE. Generally, it would be Taker having to fight for his career vs. Shane fighting to ensure the future of the company. Babyface vs babyface, with an arguably increasingly deluded 'genius?' Vince in the background. A 'reality era' segment between Taker and Vince could be brilliant - the one on Raw was 95% superb.

If in kayfabe Shane did win (albeit help from someone) and take control of WWE, it would be quite symbolic if to do he had to retire one of his dad's era's greatest creations.

Like you I'm not keen on his career threatening match being against a middle aged non wrestler. But then I can't think of a better scenario running in the background. Only a career match against a heel Cena would top it, IMO.
Lee_Smith2 is offline  
Old 28-02-2016, 17:09
dave_windows
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,353
Bret should have dropped it before Montreal.
No he shouldn't. He had only won the belt at Summerslam. What would be the point in him losing before November. Alough I guess they could have done Shamrock winning the belt on Raw the week before as a shocker and then Bret/Shawn is a regular singles match.
dave_windows is offline  
 
Closed Thread




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:27.