Is Bret Hart under-appreciated?

[spagett]

Dec 15, 2018 18:42:33 GMT -5 Cranjis McBasketball said:

Dec 15, 2018 18:35:16 GMT -5 spagett said:

I don't think it's that outrageous a statement to be honest.

Before that Bret feud Austin was doing nothing, people think winning the King of the Ring was the catalyst to the big push but it wasn't really. He didn't even make the main Summerslam card that year. He was spinning his wheels before the build to Survivor Series 1996.

Saying Bret made Austin may be a bit too strong, it's more that Bret gave Austin the platform to make himself.

I don’t think saying Bret made Austin is a bit strong, I think it’s dead on.

Austin was doing well against guys like Jake, but a broken down, visibility radically different Jake wasn’t gonna put Austin on the next level.

Bret was the first guy Austin really went against the audience had strong feelings for, was relevant and collided into Bret being turned on by the audience while Austin was becoming the cool thing.

Austin went to the next level working with Bret no doubt about it.

In fact when you look back Bret wanted to work with Austin and The Rock has said on numerous occasions Bret looked out for him when he first arrived in the company and became a bit of a mentor to him.

Bret clearly had an eye for talent and was willing to help other wrestlers, when other guys from that era were busy trying to sabotage other guys careers and hold them back.

[Deleted]

The feud with Bret was a milestone in the creation of the Stone Cold character, there's absolutely no question about that. Which really brings me to my original point that Bret's role should have been a stable upper-midcarder whose ultimate job was to prepare those up and coming to go on to the next level and be their stepping stone to the main event. I'm really not buying the idea that his limited promo skills or charisma inside or outside of the ring meant nothing and that he didn't become the top draw compared to what preceded or proceeded him because someone else was at fault.

[spagett]

Dec 15, 2018 18:45:19 GMT -5 @thehairydrunk said:

Dec 15, 2018 18:24:07 GMT -5 2coldMack is even more baffled said:

I....don't think I've ever disagreed with anything harder in my life. Bret Hart was an absolute main event level talent, who was hobbled, not because of HIS limitations, but because the lunatic he worked for was obsessed with finding the "next Hulk Hogan" instead of trying to promote the "First Bret Hart". First with Lex, then with Diesel. It's worth noting that WWF didn't pull itself out of it's mid-90's slump until they stopped looking for another Hogan, and started embracing the first Steve Austin. If they'd done that a couple years earlier with Bret, who knows what might have been accomplished.

Austin was charastmatic, could pop a crowd and talk people into the building. Different characters but fundamentally there are many similarities between Austin and Hogan if you look at the bread and butter of what a top draw is supposed to do to business metrics and the core skills used to aid that. 

Gift of gab, gift of shilling merchandise, gift of selling tickets. However you package that - this is the job of the top baby face in the company. Austin managed it, Hogan managed it. Bret struggled and that isn't entirely the fault of someone else.

So you have to be as over as Hogan and Austin to be the top babyface?

Because aside from The Rock and to a lesser extent Cena they haven't had any other babyface as over as those two.

In the mid 90s Vince went with other guys Luger, Diesel, Shawn Michaels. All of them failed, Bret was a bigger draw than all of them.

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Dec 15, 2018 18:51:33 GMT -5 @thehairydrunk said:

The feud with Bret was a milestone in the creation of the Stone Cold character, there's absolutely no question about that. Which really brings me to my original point that Bret's role should have been a stable upper-midcarder whose ultimate job was to prepare those up and coming to go on to the next level and be their stepping stone to the main event. I'm really not buying the idea that his limited promo skills or charisma inside or outside of the ring meant nothing and that he didn't become the top draw compared to what preceded or proceeded him because someone else was at fault.

That’s the job of a bumping heel like Rude or Perfect or a guy so over, they can do anything, like Piper did for Bret.

His promos were perfect for his character, what different ought to he have done, changing nothing else about the character?

[2coldMack is even more baffled]

Dec 15, 2018 18:56:16 GMT -5 Cranjis McBasketball said:

Dec 15, 2018 18:51:33 GMT -5 @thehairydrunk said:

The feud with Bret was a milestone in the creation of the Stone Cold character, there's absolutely no question about that. Which really brings me to my original point that Bret's role should have been a stable upper-midcarder whose ultimate job was to prepare those up and coming to go on to the next level and be their stepping stone to the main event. I'm really not buying the idea that his limited promo skills or charisma inside or outside of the ring meant nothing and that he didn't become the top draw compared to what preceded or proceeded him because someone else was at fault.

That’s the job of a bumping heel like Rude or Perfect or a guy so over, they can do anything, like Piper did for Bret.

His promos were perfect for his character, what different ought to he have done, changing nothing else about the character?

Also, let's go ahead and bust this myth right now: "Limited charisma inside the ring". Non-sense. Damn few could tell a story between the ropes and get the crowd hanging on his every move like Bret. Damn few.

[rnrk supports BLM]

Between the mental hoops people will jump through to blame the decline in interest in WWF during the New Generation on Nash/the Kliq in general despite Bret being more heavily pushed and featured than any of them, the baffling insistence that the '97 Hart Foundation was some sort of revolutionary tweener stable on par with the nWo in significance while downplaying Degeneration-X as crass gimmickry, and the impassioned defenses of his right to refuse to "lose" a fake match, I'd say Bret's always been pretty overrated among smarkdom, tbh.

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Dec 15, 2018 19:05:11 GMT -5 rnrk supports BLM said:

Between the mental hoops people will jump through to blame the decline in interest in WWF during the New Generation on Nash/the Kliq in general despite Bret being more heavily pushed and featured than any of them, the baffling insistence that the '97 Hart Foundation was some sort of revolutionary tweener stable on par with the nWo in significance while downplaying Degeneration-X as crass gimmickry, and the impassioned defenses of his right to refuse to "lose" a fake match, I'd say Bret's always been pretty overrated among smarkdom, tbh.

I’ve literally never heard anyone make any of those arguments besides his right “lose” a fake a match, and that argument is based upon agreed upon facts of what his contract said.

[spagett]

Dec 15, 2018 19:05:11 GMT -5 rnrk supports BLM said:

Between the mental hoops people will jump through to blame the decline in interest in WWF during the New Generation on Nash/the Kliq in general despite Bret being more heavily pushed and featured than any of them, the baffling insistence that the '97 Hart Foundation was some sort of revolutionary tweener stable on par with the nWo in significance while downplaying Degeneration-X as crass gimmickry, and the impassioned defenses of his right to refuse to "lose" a fake match, I'd say Bret's always been pretty overrated among smarkdom, tbh.

I disagree with all of that.

Having a heel stable that was babyface to the rest of the world but heel in America was pretty damn unique I'd say. And having Bret turn heel because the fans changed, which was true, was also pretty rare.

I also disagree about Bret being more featured than the kliq. Go back and watch some 1995 shows for example, Nash Michaels and Hall pretty much dominate all three title scenes whilst for most of the year Bret is feuding with evil dentists, pirates that stole his jacket and other stupid midcard shit.

It's only when Vince gives up on Nash that the belt goes back to Bret.

[2coldMack is even more baffled]

Dec 15, 2018 19:09:38 GMT -5 spagett said:

Dec 15, 2018 19:05:11 GMT -5 rnrk supports BLM said:

Between the mental hoops people will jump through to blame the decline in interest in WWF during the New Generation on Nash/the Kliq in general despite Bret being more heavily pushed and featured than any of them, the baffling insistence that the '97 Hart Foundation was some sort of revolutionary tweener stable on par with the nWo in significance while downplaying Degeneration-X as crass gimmickry, and the impassioned defenses of his right to refuse to "lose" a fake match, I'd say Bret's always been pretty overrated among smarkdom, tbh.

I disagree with all of that.

Having a heel stable that was babyface to the rest of the world but heel in America was pretty damn unique I'd say. And having Bret turn heel because the fans changed, which was true, was also pretty rare.

I also disagree about Bret being more featured than the kliq. Go back and watch some 1995 shows for example, Nash Michaels and Hall pretty much dominate all three title scenes whilst for most of the year Bret is feuding with evil dentists, pirates that stole his jacket and other stupid midcard shit.

It's only when Vince gives up on Nash that the belt goes back to Bret.

<iframe style="position: absolute; width: 22.200000000000045px; height: 8.360000000000014px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_60962748" scrolling="no" width="22.200000000000045" height="8.360000000000014"></iframe>

<iframe style="position: absolute; width: 22.2px; height: 8.36px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1051px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_98937585" scrolling="no" width="22.200000000000045" height="8.360000000000014"></iframe>

<iframe style="position: absolute; width: 22.2px; height: 8.36px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 354px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_41996395" scrolling="no" width="22.200000000000045" height="8.360000000000014"></iframe>

<iframe style="position: absolute; width: 22.2px; height: 8.36px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1051px; top: 354px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_63059027" scrolling="no" width="22.200000000000045" height="8.360000000000014"></iframe>

Hell, go even further back. After his hot Wrestlemania X win, the very next PPV, King of The Ring. Who's in the main event? Piper and Lawler. Where's your world champion? Dead middle of the card, losing by DQ. "More heavily pushed and featured than the Klique" my ass.

[The Rick Jericho]

People say Bret Hart 1998 wouldn't fit through wwf. Are they ribbing us?

He trained Edge, Val, Christian, Test it would've been amazing in the ring helping them learn their craft.

"Who are you to doubt Val Venis!"

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Dec 15, 2018 19:09:38 GMT -5 spagett said:

Dec 15, 2018 19:05:11 GMT -5 rnrk supports BLM said:

Between the mental hoops people will jump through to blame the decline in interest in WWF during the New Generation on Nash/the Kliq in general despite Bret being more heavily pushed and featured than any of them, the baffling insistence that the '97 Hart Foundation was some sort of revolutionary tweener stable on par with the nWo in significance while downplaying Degeneration-X as crass gimmickry, and the impassioned defenses of his right to refuse to "lose" a fake match, I'd say Bret's always been pretty overrated among smarkdom, tbh.

I disagree with all of that.

Having a heel stable that was babyface to the rest of the world but heel in America was pretty damn unique I'd say. And having Bret turn heel because the fans changed, which was true, was also pretty rare.

I also disagree about Bret being more featured than the kliq. Go back and watch some 1995 shows for example, Nash Michaels and Hall pretty much dominate all three title scenes whilst for most of the year Bret is feuding with evil dentists, pirates that stole his jacket and other stupid midcard shit.

It's only when Vince gives up on Nash that the belt goes back to Bret.

Well, I think we can all agree at least Shawn always was a pro and dropped the titles in the ring, unlike Bret in Montreal, except the IC, tag, and World titles.

[spagett]

Dec 15, 2018 19:17:29 GMT -5 Cranjis McBasketball said:

Dec 15, 2018 19:09:38 GMT -5 spagett said:

I disagree with all of that.

Having a heel stable that was babyface to the rest of the world but heel in America was pretty damn unique I'd say. And having Bret turn heel because the fans changed, which was true, was also pretty rare.

I also disagree about Bret being more featured than the kliq. Go back and watch some 1995 shows for example, Nash Michaels and Hall pretty much dominate all three title scenes whilst for most of the year Bret is feuding with evil dentists, pirates that stole his jacket and other stupid midcard shit.

It's only when Vince gives up on Nash that the belt goes back to Bret.

Well, I think we can all agree at least Shawn always was a pro and dropped the titles in the ring, unlike Bret in Montreal, except the IC, tag, and World titles.

Oh definitely. I'm sure it was just really bad luck that Shawn Michaels had to vacate the IC title twice, the World Title and the tag team titles twice in the space of just over 3 years.

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Dec 15, 2018 19:21:40 GMT -5 spagett said:

Dec 15, 2018 19:17:29 GMT -5 Cranjis McBasketball said:

Well, I think we can all agree at least Shawn always was a pro and dropped the titles in the ring, unlike Bret in Montreal, except the IC, tag, and World titles.

Oh definitely. I'm sure it was just really bad luck that Shawn Michaels had to vacate the IC title twice, the World Title and the tag team titles twice in the space of just over 3 years.

It only made sense for his character to never, ever drop a title in the ring.

[2coldMack is even more baffled]

Dec 15, 2018 19:21:40 GMT -5 spagett said:

Dec 15, 2018 19:17:29 GMT -5 Cranjis McBasketball said:

Well, I think we can all agree at least Shawn always was a pro and dropped the titles in the ring, unlike Bret in Montreal, except the IC, tag, and World titles.

Oh definitely. I'm sure it was just really bad luck that Shawn Michaels had to vacate the IC title twice, the World Title and the tag team titles twice in the space of just over 3 years.

Hey, listen, man, YOU get beat up by the entire population of the Parris Island Marine Boot Camp, and you tell if YOU can lug 12 pounds of gold around.

[rnrk supports BLM]

Dec 15, 2018 19:09:38 GMT -5 spagett said:

I also disagree about Bret being more featured than the kliq. Go back and watch some 1995 shows for example, Nash Michaels and Hall pretty much dominate all three title scenes whilst for most of the year Bret is feuding with evil dentists, pirates that stole his jacket and other stupid midcard shit.

The "look at Bret's shit feuds in '95" point gets brought up a lot, and I really don't agree with it. Everyone had shit feuds in '95. The same event where Bret's wrestling the evil dentist, Diesel is fueding with a fat man in purple pajamas with a girl's name who was part of a comedy dancing tag team only a couple months earlier and changed basically nothing with his act after suddenly getting promoted to a monster heel. Undertaker spent most of the year going after Kama for melting his urn into bling. Shawn and Razor got to save themselves by feuding with each other, but that was still surrounded by them going up against crap like Dean Douglas and Jarrett's third-rate Honky Tonk Man knockoff gimmick.

Meanwhile, what never gets brought up is that they cut Diesel off at the knees to keep Bret protected. He couldn't beat him for the title in '94 without winning it off a transitional champ, he couldn't beat him at the '95 Rumble, they built up Survivor Series '95 with Bret pointing out that Diesel could never beat him and had been going through weak challengers, which was completely true and just made Diesel look like an even bigger loser when he had no good response, and capped it off with Bret beating him for the title.

Seriously, take just about any complaint on here from 2012 about Punk being made to look second-rate to Cena during his 400+ day title reign and it's just as valid to Diesel and Bret in '95.

[nisidhe]

In a word, yes. Bret is definitely underappreciated by just about everyone for whom wrestling fandom began in the Attitude Era.

Bret was the guy to go with for WWE after Hogan left in early 1992 and very few on the roster then were in a position to succeed him. Wrestling as a business was on a global downturn and Vince was up against the wall in the steroid trial. The last thing McMahon was going to want to do was put in Hogan's place another bodybuilder-type whose body was a) no longer fashionably appealing and b) a walking rebuttal to any arguments Vince was having to make in court. Michaels and even Undertaker weren't there yet; Mr. Perfect was too injury-prone; Savage was seen as too old and too valuable to the announce table. None of the heels in place at the time were anywhere near a face turn (I don't think, anyway.) And the Face of the Company than was required to be a face.

Bret in 1992 was engaging the fans in ways not even Savage and Flair could. The run-ups to his Wrestlemania and especially Summerslam matches were some of the most emotionally-compelling WWE has conceived. He was the right man for the job in the sense that a)fans felt safe with him at the top, and that his build was only reinforcing their faith in him; b) he was stylish enough that his merchandise was a regular top-seller in those years before Austin 3:16 shirts came into vogue, and c) for the 1990s, he was an appropriate step back in terms of size and character after the over-the-top characters of the 1980s, a naturally charismatic individual with decent looks, a self-deprecating sense of humour and as much about intelligence and basic decency as raw physical strength. While we tend to think of the Attitude Era when we think 1990s wrestling, and poopoo the sillier gimmicks, we often forget that it was Bret who was largely holding down the fort during that period between 1991 and 1995-6. He was the firmament around which everything was shifting and swirling.

[stevec484]

I actually hated him at the time but appreciate him now. Especially his 97 heel run

[bcdx97]

Well this thread has brought out some real a-holes.

[Deleted]

Dec 15, 2018 17:53:25 GMT -5 Bub (BLM) said:

Honestly, yes. I understand that he can turn people off by being a bit egotistical, but the truth is that most of what he says about himself is true. He was a better storyteller than most. He was a better technician than most. He did work harder than most. Just because the way he says it is obnoxious doesn't make it less true. Bret is the GOAT as far as I'm concerned.

I feel like Bret's egotistical in a lovable kinda way, though. That may just be me though, because I've always been a Hitman fan.

[Mighty Attack Tribble]

Dec 15, 2018 19:03:42 GMT -5 2coldMack is even more baffled said:

Dec 15, 2018 18:56:16 GMT -5 Cranjis McBasketball said:

That’s the job of a bumping heel like Rude or Perfect or a guy so over, they can do anything, like Piper did for Bret.

His promos were perfect for his character, what different ought to he have done, changing nothing else about the character?

Also, let's go ahead and bust this myth right now: "Limited charisma inside the ring". Non-sense. Damn few could tell a story between the ropes and get the crowd hanging on his every move like Bret. Damn few.

Or even out of the ring. Bret's promos in '97 were as good as anything Austin did. '97 proved that if you gave Bret promo material he could sink his teeth into, as opposed to the humble white meat babyface stuff he'd done since '91, he could knock it out the park as well as anybody.