Thread: Bret Hart's response to Flairs comments
View Single Post
Old 07-12-2004, 09:57 PM   #37
loopydate
FIT Challenge Slag People
 
loopydate's Avatar
 
Posts: 13,816
loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)loopydate makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen v.W.o.
..Is it bret's fault vince authorized it? Agreed to it? If vince didn't think Bret was loyal and worked hard enough for it, he never would have gave it. Vince put himself in this spot.
I'm not saying Vince shouldn't have agreed to it, because he really had no reason to believe that Bret would walk out on him (good call, Vince ). In a world of Creative Control clauses, that one made sense.

I'm saying that Creative Control clauses are the devil's handiwork and shouldn't exist at all, because they give wrestlers a sense of entitlement that, frankly, they don't deserve. Bret shouldn't have had one, Michaels shouldn't have one, Triple H shouldn't have one, no one should have Creative Control clauses in their contracts.

Because of situations like this.
loopydate is offline   Reply With Quote