The thread where we get CyNick to defend maligned storylines, and tell us how we don't understand...

[CSL]

Originally Posted by The CyNick Care to elaborate? Keep in mind I've only listed to about 10 minutes. Which isn't "doing my thing", unless my thing is being busy at the time.

to be quick, you left out:

-Bret had a certain level of creative control over the final 30 days of his contract, something Vince agreed to when they signed the 20 year deal

-Bret had a month left on his contract after Montreal, his final scheduled date was the following PPV or the RAW after, something they specifically negotiated with Bischoff/WCW to allow Bret to drop the belt

-Due to the ongoing lawsuits between WWE and WCW stemming from the likeness/copyright/intellectual property with Hall and co, there isn't a chance WCW would ever have had Bret show up with the belt on their TV show. They'd have been sued into oblivion

-Bret was willing to put anybody else over before or after Montreal/the Canada trip. He even was willing to put Shawn over at the following PPV despite the fact that...

-Shawn (then at the height of his "off the rails" period) point blank told Bret to his face he wasn't willing to ever put him over, which led to the initial hesitance on Bret's part (as well as admittedly taking the whole Canada schtick a bit too seriously) to drop the belt to Shawn at all

[Corporate CockSnogger]

Originally Posted by SlickyTrickyDamon How I would have handled Montreal Austin/Owen have their match as it went down and Bret cuts a promo on Owen saying how he let his entire family and country down. Owen tells him to fuck off and challenges him to put the belt on the line against him right now! Owen wins clean and is the WWE Champion. HBK and Bret then have their match without the title. HBK wins the title on Raw from Owen. Giving Owen a deserved title reign and respect. If Bret wouldn't job to Owen then he should be the one who died.

Hey guys, this post happened as well you know...

[drave]

Originally Posted by Corporate CockSnogger Hey guys, this post happened as well you know...

We tend to just look past the majority of STD's posts anymore. It's kinda like he gets a Dana Brooke pat to the head for doing a good job.

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by CSL to be quick, you left out: -Bret had a certain level of creative control over the final 30 days of his contract, something Vince agreed to when they signed the 20 year deal -Bret had a month left on his contract after Montreal, his final scheduled date was the following PPV or the RAW after, something they specifically negotiated with Bischoff/WCW to allow Bret to drop the belt -Due to the ongoing lawsuits between WWE and WCW stemming from the likeness/copyright/intellectual property with Hall and co, there isn't a chance WCW would ever have had Bret show up with the belt on their TV show. They'd have been sued into oblivion -Bret was willing to put anybody else over before or after Montreal/the Canada trip. He even was willing to put Shawn over at the following PPV despite the fact that... -Shawn (then at the height of his "off the rails" period) point blank told Bret to his face he wasn't willing to ever put him over, which led to the initial hesitance on Bret's part (as well as admittedly taking the whole Canada schtick a bit too seriously) to drop the belt to Shawn at all

Sorry I thought you were talking about the New Day convo.

Trust me my man, I know every painful detail about this story from everyone who was there (well at least what they said publically).

I understand that Bret had "reasonable creative control". To me its reasonable and professional to JOB to one guy of the company's choosing prior to leaving.

Bret to me last all credibility in his documentary when he said losing in Montreal would be like the character blowing his brains out in the middle of the ring. Theres no other way to describe that line of thinking than batshit crazy. Imagine if Nash had said the same about putting over Taker clean at 12.

The issue about showing up with the title was moot. It wouldn't matter if he showed up with the physical belt, he would have already announced he was leaving on TV (that was Bret's idea), so as a fan, and subsequent loss would have looked phony.

There's no doubt Vince created an issue by signing the deal he did, but if I were Vince, I would have thought asking Bret to put over ONE top talent was within reason. And it's impossible to argue it wasn't reasonable. If Vince would have asked Bret to drop the strap to Chyna in Montreal, I could see a beef with that. But this was Shawn, Bret should have been a pro and just put over Shawn and walked into the sunset. His ego got in the way of good business.

[CSL]

Originally Posted by The CyNick To me, you couldnt let Bret walk out of Survivor Series as champion. I'm sure we have all heard interviews with Bret, and realize he takes the business and his character really seriously. Maybe too seriously. As a result, it clouded his judgment and he acted selfishly and refusing to drop to Shawn in Montreal. From Vince's POV, you have Bret going to Turner, and you have this big grudge match booked. Standard wrestling booking is when a guy is leaving a territory, he does the favours. It was perfectly reasonable for Vince to EXPECT Bret to put over someone of his choosing. Bret and Shawn were rivals, and if Bret is leaving, you want Shawn to look like the superior talent. Bret acted childish, and refused, so Vince was backed into a corner.

Originally Posted by The CyNick He was backed into a corner You have your champion leaving and refusing to put over the guy you want to be the heir apparent. Nash put over HBK and Taker on his way out. Why couldn't Bret put over HBK? Bret left Vince with no choice. Well, no good choice anyway.

Originally Posted by The CyNick I understand that Bret had "reasonable creative control". To me its reasonable and professional to JOB to one guy of the company's choosing prior to leaving. Bret to me last all credibility in his documentary when he said losing in Montreal would be like the character blowing his brains out in the middle of the ring. Theres no other way to describe that line of thinking than batshit crazy. Imagine if Nash had said the same about putting over Taker clean at 12. The issue about showing up with the title was moot. It wouldn't matter if he showed up with the physical belt, he would have already announced he was leaving on TV (that was Bret's idea), so as a fan, and subsequent loss would have looked phony. There's no doubt Vince created an issue by signing the deal he did, but if I were Vince, I would have thought asking Bret to put over ONE top talent was within reason. And it's impossible to argue it wasn't reasonable. If Vince would have asked Bret to drop the strap to Chyna in Montreal, I could see a beef with that. But this was Shawn, Bret should have been a pro and just put over Shawn and walked into the sunset. His ego got in the way of good business.

Cynick, buddy, pal, sweetums, these 3 posts say pretty much the exact same thing whilst ignoring logic and the majority of my response. So there is still nothing to actually respond to or "counterpoint".

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by CSL Cynick, buddy, pal, sweetums, these 3 posts say pretty much the exact same thing whilst ignoring logic and the majority of my response. So there is still nothing to actually respond to or "counterpoint".

Sorry, apple of my eye, what logic am I ignoring?

[hb2k]

Originally Posted by The CyNick I understand that Bret had "reasonable creative control". To me its reasonable and professional to JOB to one guy of the company's choosing prior to leaving. The issue about showing up with the title was moot. It wouldn't matter if he showed up with the physical belt, he would have already announced he was leaving on TV (that was Bret's idea), so as a fan, and subsequent loss would have looked phony. There's no doubt Vince created an issue by signing the deal he did, but if I were Vince, I would have thought asking Bret to put over ONE top talent was within reason. And it's impossible to argue it wasn't reasonable. If Vince would have asked Bret to drop the strap to Chyna in Montreal, I could see a beef with that. But this was Shawn, Bret should have been a pro and just put over Shawn and walked into the sunset. His ego got in the way of good business.

Bret proposed losing to anybody, including Shawn, once that two day period in Canada was over with. Bret handing the belt over was a suggestion that Vince agreed to, not an order, Vince had the same right to veto that Bret did, they could have worked out a better plan if he wanted to. Bret suggested it because his leaving got out in newspapers, hotlines and the internet anyway, and Vince agreed that since people knew anyway, it didn't matter if Bischoff announced it. I don't see how any of this is Vince backed into a corner.

Originally Posted by The CyNick Bret to me last all credibility in his documentary when he said losing in Montreal would be like the character blowing his brains out in the middle of the ring. Theres no other way to describe that line of thinking than batshit crazy. Imagine if Nash had said the same about putting over Taker clean at 12.

This is an absolutely absurd comparison. It's not even remotely the same thing. Bret signed a huge deal because his value to his new employer was largely based on his strength in the Canadian market, which WCW had historically never done well in. Nash's value at Mania 12 is a wrestler on a wrestling show. Bret's value in Canada was his entire selling point from a negotiating perspective, and since he added reasonable creative control to specifically avoid being devalued on the way out, Bret saw dropping the belt in Canada to the guy who picked his nose with and fucked the Canadian flag as potentially damaging to his value. Anybody that argues against it using the "well what if I don't job in America" is either a complete idiot, or so badly want to be anti-Bret that they are flagrantly ignoring the obvious. Bret put that creative control clause in so he couldn't be downgraded. They put him in a position to be potentially downgraded. He suggested losing elsewhere where it wouldn't be so damaging.

And of all the fucking people to make a comparison to, Nash, a guy who refused to job tons of times for no rhyme or reason other than he didn't want to.

[KIRA]

Originally Posted by hb2k And of all the fucking people to make a comparison to, Nash, a guy who refused to job tons of times for no rhyme or reason other than he didn't want to.

And when he did job it was for his own benefit.

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by KIRA And when he did job it was for his own benefit.

Yeah losing to Taker and Shawn really helped his value on his way to WCW.

Oh wait, it's a work and everyone knows it. He still drew fine because he's talented.

When the chips were down, Nash was a pro.

But I know, the dirt sheets say he killed WCW, so we gotta all hate him.

[Big Vic]

Originally Posted by The CyNick Yeah losing to Taker and Shawn really helped his value on his way to WCW.

Didn't hurt, his contract was already signed and he was at the top of the card when he arrived.

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by Big Vic Didn't hurt, his contract was already signed and he was at the top of the card when he arrived.

Bret was going to be on top as well. What's the difference?

[Ol Dirty Dastard]

Originally Posted by The CyNick Yeah losing to Taker and Shawn really helped his value on his way to WCW. Oh wait, it's a work and everyone knows it. He still drew fine because he's talented. When the chips were down, Nash was a pro. But I know, the dirt sheets say he killed WCW, so we gotta all hate him.

There is literally a thread called nashvember in here. You dong nut. Most people here love nash. What unmerciful shit are you talking?

[Ol Dirty Dastard]

Tho for you to highlight cesaros holes and almost act as tho Nash has none comes as no surprise since you talk nonsense

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by hb2k Bret proposed losing to anybody, including Shawn, once that two day period in Canada was over with. Bret handing the belt over was a suggestion that Vince agreed to, not an order, Vince had the same right to veto that Bret did, they could have worked out a better plan if he wanted to. Bret suggested it because his leaving got out in newspapers, hotlines and the internet anyway, and Vince agreed that since people knew anyway, it didn't matter if Bischoff announced it. I don't see how any of this is Vince backed into a corner. This is an absolutely absurd comparison. It's not even remotely the same thing. Bret signed a huge deal because his value to his new employer was largely based on his strength in the Canadian market, which WCW had historically never done well in. Nash's value at Mania 12 is a wrestler on a wrestling show. Bret's value in Canada was his entire selling point from a negotiating perspective, and since he added reasonable creative control to specifically avoid being devalued on the way out, Bret saw dropping the belt in Canada to the guy who picked his nose with and fucked the Canadian flag as potentially damaging to his value. Anybody that argues against it using the "well what if I don't job in America" is either a complete idiot, or so badly want to be anti-Bret that they are flagrantly ignoring the obvious. Bret put that creative control clause in so he couldn't be downgraded. They put him in a position to be potentially downgraded. He suggested losing elsewhere where it wouldn't be so damaging. And of all the fucking people to make a comparison to, Nash, a guy who refused to job tons of times for no rhyme or reason other than he didn't want to.

To me, this isnt a debate about what was legally acceptable. Essentially they both entered into a stupid agreement in which the most likely outcome would be a stalemate. The issue to me is whether Vince felt like he had to do what he did. To me, listening to the position of both parties, I feel like Vince's position was far more logical. The story of Bret leaving was already out. Fans at the house shows prior to Survivor Series knew he was leaving. Eric already had a track record, and its hard to imagine he would not have went on TV the Monday following Survivor Series and said "I just signed their champion". He didnt need Bret to be there. He didnt need Bret to dump the title in the trash. The damage would have been done with one promo - WCW is where the elite talent are, as evidence by their champion coming over here. So Bret's amazing suggestions, were worthless. The title had to be moved to Shawn at Survivor Series.

The idea that Bret was signed by WCW only because he was Canadian is absurd. The idea that Bret losing one match in Canada would result in him being any less of a draw in Canada is absurb. The idea that WCW had some grand scheme to open up Canada is absurd. How many events did WCW end up running in Canada? Bret was a MUCH bigger star thanks to what Vince did at Survivor Series, you would think WCW would have used Bret to sell out every city in Canada. They didnt, because WWE was always #1 in Canada. Bret leaving wasn't going to change that.

From what I've read over the years, Bret was one of the biggest headaches to deal with because he was such a master of the political game. But he never gets accused of it like guys like Hogan and Nash do. Bret is an egomaniac who thought the country would shut down if he lost a fucking worked fight in his home country. He's delusional.

As I said before, Nash did the right thing on his way out and Bret didnt. Nash was asked to put over two top guys multiple times on his way out. He did it, and did it with a smile on his face. Bret was asked to lose ONE match, and refused because he didnt like the guy across the ring from him. What a baby!