AGREE OR DISAGREE (#1) - Bret Hart is overrated.

[James Steele]

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: Bret Hart is overrated.

Discuss.

[Juan]

I disagree. There are people that kiss his ass way too much though.

[thedamndest]

Everybody tell me your opinion of Bret Hart.

[Blue Demon]

I disagree....he was an excellent wrestler. I always liked good, solid technical wrestlers.

[thedamndest]

Are you talking about on this board or what?

[BobBitchen]

I agree. While he is one of the great ones, He has a fucked up attitude.(as does most wrestlers.)


but He is the best there is, the best there was , and the best there ever will be.:n::shifty:

[Xero]

Great in the ring, shit everywhere else.

[CSL]

Michaels > Hart

Bret's 'up there' though and isn't 'over rated'

Unless you're talking to The Hitman himself

[Nark Order]

I disagree. There are people that kiss his ass way too much though.

I agree with Juan. Some Hart fans are just absolutely fucking ridiculous and really make me hate Hart. However, Hart was very good at what he did.

[.44 Magdalene]

He's a damn good wrestler and I don't hear from overenthusiastic fans as much as I hear bitching about overenthusiastic fans.

I used to say it about... I don't know, CM Punk maybe? But now I'm saying it about Bret: Bret being overrated is overrated.

[thedamndest]

I would say he's appropriately rated. The over zealousness and the unnecessary loathing balance each other out, but when you get down to it Bret will go down as one of the best, but not THE best.

[Lock Jaw]

I agree.

With Juan.

[Mercury Bullet]

I agree that he's overrated. He was good but never great and really hasn't left a lasting impact on the industry.

[Xero]

....and really hasn't left a lasting impact on the industry.

Well, that's not entirely true. He was indirectly responsible for the Attitude Era. Without Bret there would be no Vince McMahon character.

[Mercury Bullet]

indirectly responsible for the Attitude Era.

He wasn't really apart of it. Other people (Austin, HBK, etc.) were the ones actually involved.

[Theo Dious]

Great technical wrestler, not the best by any means but among them. Pretty one-dimensional as a character. As a man he's basically a good guy though his ego, in particular his belief that he is the best evarz, tend to tarnish who he is.

[Theo Dious]

And he definitely contributed to the sparking of the Attitude Era. He undeniably helped get Austin over, the stuff he did as part of the Hart Foundation v2 was some of the groundbreaking of the Era, and yeah, the Montreal bit was damn important.

[Vastardikai]

Diagree.

He was no Ric Flair or Rock on the mic, but he was one of the most solid workers the business has ever seen. During the downtime before the Attitude era, he was their top draw. Especially overseas.

[XL]

He wasn't really apart of it. Other people (Austin, HBK, etc.) were the ones actually involved.
HBK is hardly a good example of someone that was involved in the Attitude Era.

When do we consider the Attitude Era to have started? If it was sparked at Survivor Series 97 then Michaels was only involved for the following 5 months. If it kicked in when Austin won the strap then Michaels was only involved as a part time Commissioner. It was dead and buried by the time he returned in 2002.

Austin, Taker, Mankind, Rock are probably the best answers to who lead the Attitude Era.

[XL]

Oh, and on topic...

I don't consider Bret to be overrated. He was my favourite wrestler as a kid and although now I can see that HBK was/is a better all round package Bret still brought it in the ring and could cut a half decent promo. His only down side is that he can come off as a bit of a cry baby.

[Fabien Barthez]

I think Bret is one of the best. I wouldn't have liked to see someone who works like Bret does come out to a different gimmick or promo style than he did. It was like a blend between intense and laid back. He had, in my mind the best look in wrestling history. Everyone seems united these days that Shawn Michaels is the better of the two, and even the best of all. But nobody was really saying that before 2002. I think Bret is starting to climb out of reach for most wrestling fans. I'm pretty sure, 12 years after Montreal it is now. So most of the people on here and the average modern wrestling fan, never watched many Bret Hart matches. I like and admire old school wrestling as much if not more than todays model. And Bret was the better man in the WM Iron man match.


And a little bit on the screwjob, although it seems quite sad to alot of people that he still is somewhat bitter about the whole thing, the promoter confirmed the finish with the talent, and then went out and changed it. It kills the 'do the right thing' idea that Vince seems to have injected everyone with.

[RatedGSuperstar]

I'll agree that he's probably appropriately rated at this point. I think he may have been overrated at some point due to the initial sympathy over Montreal, but as time went on those feelings died down a bit. The fact that he hasn't wrestled since late 2000 and won't ever wrestle again has probably contributed to the "overrated" factor dying down a bit -- like Fabien said, the majority of average fans at this point haven't seen a Hart match, or at least don't remember them that well.

[Blue Demon]

He's been involved in several 5 star matches though...Bret Vs. Bulldog Summerslam 92 (my fave match of all time) and Bret Vs. Stone Cold at WrestleMania 13 just being 2 examples. Also, a lot of the matches he had with Mr. Perfect in the early to mid 90s were awesome.

[Jordan]

Bret Hart is the shit. When he was on tv, he always went all out (in Calgary and WWE at least). He was the small guy who was so good he could kick anybodys ass, Diesel, Undertaker, Yokozuna, he was always an even match for everyone because he was so good, and such a bad ass.

His character was simple, we all know the line Best there is best the was .... it was simple, not some made up far stretched bullshit. If you didn't enjoy him I really don't care, obviously a lot of people did as he was at the top for a good 4 or 5 years, so he was bringing in money and putting people in seats.

Bret Hart compared to some workers now, maybe didn't have the longevity (due to an injury of course) that some top names have had like HBK, Triple H, Undertaker, but he deffinatley entertained me and I wish he was still wrestling.

[dablackguy]

I agree that he's overrated. He was good but never great and really hasn't left a lasting impact on the industry.


Well, that's not entirely true. He was indirectly responsible for the Attitude Era. Without Bret there would be no Vince McMahon character.


I agree to overrated. I also agree with no lasting impact on the industry. The reality of Bret Hart is that Montreal did more for his legacy than anything he ever did in any ring.

I don't think its fair to give him credit for the McMahon character, I think that would have eventually happened anyway. (People knew he was the owner of the company) To give him credit for something that started out as real and then became a character (which he was a victim of) is silly. Especially, when Vince -depending on which story you believe - wanted the blame to fall on himself completely

[XL]

I'd be interested to know which guys "left a lasting impact on the industry".

Beyond Hogan, Flair, Austin, Taker and maybe The Rock and Michaels there can't be too many guys that redefined wrestling.

[BigDaddyCool]

I never liked Bret Hart.

[Blue Demon]

In terms of "lasting impact" there probably aren't too many names beyond Hulk Hogan.

[Jamstar]

How can the greatest of all time be classified as overrated ?

Craziness!

[Hanso Amore]

Without Montreal he would not be nearly as big as he was.

He was a huge name, no doubt.

But I think of him as a top name of a down era.

He will go down in history on par with the Kliq. Which is still great.

But he does not belong with Flair, Hogan, Austin or the Rock.

[BigDaddyCool]

He is like a Canadian national hero which says a lot about how boring he is.

[The MAC]

Some of you need to go back and watch his matches. He was the best. Shawn is the best because Bret aint wrestling.

[Xero]

Nothing wrong with Bret's matches, he's easily top five for in-ring performance. Outside the ring, though, he was sub-par at best, and that really pulls him down in my eyes.

[addy2hotty]

A few weeks ago, I would have probably said yes.

I've watched some of his stuff recently and think that his feud with Owen (up until their Summerslam match anyway) was one of the best done that I can remember. Their promo pre-1994 Rumble was particularly funny knowing what was going to happen. He has plenty of performances that you could describe as defining. The feud with Lawler was vastly under-rated in general. I loved that stuff when I was younger. When Lawler stood and abused his parents while Hart wrestled Bigelow. (Anyone finds that on youtube, let me know). His KotR performance, he was probably the original Mr Wrestlemania.

I don't think Hart is over-rated in the industry - he is a HoFer, just think the way he's hailed as a messiah by Hart lovers is just plain wrong.

He'll be in any 'top' list, but I think the way he's described by some (and I think he still describes himself) as 'best there is blah blah blah' isn't correct. Had he been the company man, the adult, the better person in Montreal, he would have done the right thing and cemented his legacy for something other than what he is. He could have then been the man some more when he was inducted into the HoF, but wasn't.

Sadly, all the things he accused Michaels of being in the past - in his book, in Shadows and various interviews etc, he ended up being himself.

[Hanso Amore]

He is probably the BEST Technical Wrestler ever.

He is in the top 5 workers ever too.

But he is top 15 at best on the mic, his character and legacy are probably top 15 too.

But he is Not the overall best ever.

[IC Champion]

Bret is truly great.

[Zen v.W.o.]

I agree to overrated. I also agree with no lasting impact on the industry. The reality of Bret Hart is that Montreal did more for his legacy than anything he ever did in any ring.

I don't think its fair to give him credit for the McMahon character, I think that would have eventually happened anyway. (People knew he was the owner of the company) To give him credit for something that started out as real and then became a character (which he was a victim of) is silly. Especially, when Vince -depending on which story you believe - wanted the blame to fall on himself completely

A lasting legacy is whatever you deem it to be. Bret's influence is all over the industry. That alone is a lasting legacy. When future stars want to become wrestlers, and do great things because of a guy like Hart.
To be honest, Hogan and Austin are the ONLY two guys that have done so much that they shifted the industry into new territories. You can exclude guys like The Rock, HBK and others, such as laughingly, HHH from such a list.

[Jeritron]

Ladies and Gentlemen, Zen.

[Jeritron]

Gotta say he is neither overrated or underrated. He's just what he is. Some people blindly overrate him as God, while others underrate him.

If you put him as the best of all time, I think that's overrating. If you put him in the top 5, I think that's more than reasonable.
It's all opinion, since theres no real concrete way to "rate" these guys. It's about enjoyment. Accomplishment and impact on the business and fans are the strongest criteria to measure with.
It's much more subjective than rating the greatest baseball player of all-time, or something like that. But that's also a crapshoot too in many ways, so there you have it.
It's all choice.

[.44 Magdalene]

Yeah. I wouldn't say he's the best, nor would most people. He's damn good, though.

I don't think that two scoops of smarks thinking he's the greatest makes him overrated, to be honest. Look hard enough and you can find someone, somewhere voicing that opinion about nearly anybody.

[Xero]

Gotta say he is neither overrated or underrated. He's just what he is. Some people blindly overrate him as God, while others underrate him.

If you put him as the best of all time, I think that's overrating. If you put him in the top 5, I think that's more than reasonable.
It's all opinion, since theres no real concrete way to "rate" these guys. It's about enjoyment. Accomplishment and impact on the business and fans are the strongest criteria to measure with.
It's much more subjective than rating the greatest baseball player of all-time, or something like that. But that's also a crapshoot too in many ways, so there you have it.
It's all choice.

Oh shit, you've ruined this thread. We need CONCRETE FACTS, not OPINIONS. :roll:

[Jeritron]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JVuwnOJ9Oro&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JVuwnOJ9Oro&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[thedamndest]

Hands off the merchandise.

<img src="http://timberlyforhire.com/_images/muscles.jpg">

[Theo Dious]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JVuwnOJ9Oro&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JVuwnOJ9Oro&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

What in the blazing fucking hell was that?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

[Xero]

HBK's theme, don't you recognize it?

:shifty:

[Jeritron]

HBM

[Fabien Barthez]

Sounds kind of like Vince.

[Jeritron]

lol