TPWW Forums - View Single Post

**Batsu** · 07-14-2004, 10:52 PM

Disagree.

Bret used those last days and his last year in the WWF putting others over. I'll say that SS97 was the only exception. The reason why it was the exception was obvious... and anyway, the finish of this match was already determined. The match was already set to go. No one told Bret about anything, and you just knew he was going to job the belt before leaving for WCW, period. He -could- have done the easy thing and dropped the belt at the PPV, but as Bret said, there were other factors that led to his refusal to use that event as his goodbye. This is one time, only one time. Your argument is valid, but the way you put it makes him seem no better than Hulk Hogan, whose backstage politics have done more to hurt wrestling than to help it. Creative control clauses are bullshit, but Bret could have done a lot worse than what he had done in his last days. Fact is, that he didn't. He routinely did things he didn't really like (the Nation vs Foundation feud, the "snapping" promo, which is a personal favorite). I think Bret reserved the right (that was granted to him) not to do something he had what seems like moral objection to doing. It may seem frivolous on the surface, but who really wants to deal with a less-than-professional, less than cooperative worker that got by for all the wrong reasons?

Got a little long-winded there.

In short, the facts are WWE gave Bret power he didn't even really use, the night's finish was determined, and they reneged on it without informing everyone. Vince and the screwjob architects continue to bring it up. Canadian fans never let WWE forget. Bret actually brings it up less than anyone else. They just keep taking it to him and he has to respond.

The difference between Bret and HHH, Hogan, and the like is that Bret was willing to put over people, no matter how crappy (think of when Bret ruled in WWE for example). He wasn't exactly a model citizen at times, but he certainly wasn't on Warrior-levels of delusion, or bought his own hype as much as say Hogan was. In fact, when it comes down to it, I can't really even blame HHH for everything that's pushed him to the top. It's obviously, there's other links in the chain causing the trouble, because he certainly can't have creative control on the levels of Hogan and other problem cases. What went on with HHH is probably the same thing that was going on with HBK (who was a beneficiary of Hogan's exit from WWE as it was).

07-14-2004, 10:52 PM	#257
Batsu Capcom's Corporate Champ Posts: 2,571	Disagree. Bret used those last days and his last year in the WWF putting others over. I'll say that SS97 was the only exception. The reason why it was the exception was obvious... and anyway, the finish of this match was already determined. The match was already set to go. No one told Bret about anything, and you just knew he was going to job the belt before leaving for WCW, period. He -could- have done the easy thing and dropped the belt at the PPV, but as Bret said, there were other factors that led to his refusal to use that event as his goodbye. This is one time, only one time. Your argument is valid, but the way you put it makes him seem no better than Hulk Hogan, whose backstage politics have done more to hurt wrestling than to help it. Creative control clauses are bullshit, but Bret could have done a lot worse than what he had done in his last days. Fact is, that he didn't. He routinely did things he didn't really like (the Nation vs Foundation feud, the "snapping" promo, which is a personal favorite). I think Bret reserved the right (that was granted to him) not to do something he had what seems like moral objection to doing. It may seem frivolous on the surface, but who really wants to deal with a less-than-professional, less than cooperative worker that got by for all the wrong reasons? Got a little long-winded there. In short, the facts are WWE gave Bret power he didn't even really use, the night's finish was determined, and they reneged on it without informing everyone. Vince and the screwjob architects continue to bring it up. Canadian fans never let WWE forget. Bret actually brings it up less than anyone else. They just keep taking it to him and he has to respond. The difference between Bret and HHH, Hogan, and the like is that Bret was willing to put over people, no matter how crappy (think of when Bret ruled in WWE for example). He wasn't exactly a model citizen at times, but he certainly wasn't on Warrior-levels of delusion, or bought his own hype as much as say Hogan was. In fact, when it comes down to it, I can't really even blame HHH for everything that's pushed him to the top. It's obviously, there's other links in the chain causing the trouble, because he certainly can't have creative control on the levels of Hogan and other problem cases. What went on with HHH is probably the same thing that was going on with HBK (who was a beneficiary of Hogan's exit from WWE as it was).