mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Nov 14, 2013 20:01:55 GMT -5
I was never under the impression Owen wasn't world title material So the guy who had never been in any main event, major feud or even singles match at a PPV before (other than a 3 minute match to Skinner at WM8, excluding matches wrestled under another gimmick) you thought he could have been world champion? The leeway that's being taken because it's Bret and Owen is extraordinary. Replace the name 'Bret' with 'Hogan' and 'Owen' with 'insert-Hoga-ass-kisser-here' it's almost inconceivable that anyone would view the outcome of WM10 as a complete outrage. yep. 90% that was on TV then was squash matches. That was almost all Owen had done. He wrestled tag team matches. He had no major losses to his resume, unlike Brutus. There was nothing to hold against him when judging where to place him on the card. Brutus had failed to beat Mr. Perfect and Honky Tonk man for the IC title repeatedly. Owen's biggest losses were one tag title match against Money Inc, a loss to Bam Bam Bigelow where he legit hurt himself and a rollup by Shawn Michaels that happened after he collided with Bret on the ring apron.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2013 20:08:18 GMT -5
The roster was pretty damn thin at the time. And they knew they could work off of Bret's popularity by using one of his brothers. They wanted to use Bruce Hart in the spot (not the Mania match, but in Owen's role of the brother Bret had a falling out with), but Bret wanted it to be Owen because he was moree talented and not a jealous dick.
The opening match being as good as it was, and how well Owen performed for the rest of his career, showed that it he was worthy of the spot.
|
|
|
Post by Manute Bol on Nov 14, 2013 21:13:14 GMT -5
WWE were thinking ahead by letting Owen go over. They made him look like a serious player But why? Was anyone seriously under the impression Owen was 'world champion' material? It just made the belt look weak and only happened because it was Bret's brother.As I said if Hogan did that for one of his brown-nosers I bet $100 that nearly 20 years later nobody would be saying "it made sense because it made Brutus look like a serious player" Well of course it only happened because it was Bret's brother; that was the point. That was the storyline. The legendary Hart family torn apart. Vince originally suggested Bruce for the angle, but Bret said he preferred Owen. Owen going over was setting up Bret's post-Mania feud. The angle was the family conflict. It had nothing to do with nepotism. How is this complicated?
|
|
PrimeTyme
Dennis Stamp
Be Good. Or Be Good At It
Posts: 4,927
|
Post by PrimeTyme on Nov 14, 2013 21:41:57 GMT -5
Just my two cents on this, but, the whole Hart family angle worked wonderfully. The seeds for which were planted at Survivor Series the previous November. Owen turns on Bret and then beats him CLEAN at WrestleMania, though some would view it as a sort of fluke win but fact is he beat him fair. Bret goes on to face Yokozuna who had faced Lex Luger earlier on in the show, monster or not a 20 minute match and a steel plate to the head would have more effect on a 505 pounder than a 20 minute match for the smaller more fit Bret Hart. Of course after Bret pins Yoko (falling off the rope finish aside) the faces come out and celebrate that Bret defeated the mighty Yokozuna as Owen stands in the aisle way glaring at Bret knowing that he beat him and can do it again.
I don't think its a matter of nepotism or not, and the whole if it was Hogan argument is moot. Vince wanted Owen vs. Bret to be his top feud of 1994 and got exactly that in a well played out way. As a child watching that I feared that the dastardly Owen Hart could in fact take the title from Bret since he had pinned him once before. I didn't think there was ever a problem with that at all.
|
|
|
Post by doinkmark on Nov 15, 2013 9:37:23 GMT -5
This feud was pretty perfect. Even back then I hated Owen for kicking Bret's leg out from under his leg. I didn't think Owen stood a chance going into 'Mania, so when he won I was shocked and had doubt about Bret winning going forward, just like I was supposed to. Besides, we got heel Owen ripping up the sunglasses in kids' faces. Gotta love that.
|
|
|
Post by RowdyRobbyPiper on Nov 15, 2013 12:24:52 GMT -5
Think of the WM 10 show itself as a story arc. Bret, in kayfabe, reluctantly agrees to wrestle his brother. Watch the match because Bret plays the role of the reluctant fighter to perfection. Because of that hesitation, Owen manages to sneak out a victory. With Luger out of the picture, you head to the main event genuinely concerned if Bret can pull off the upset. You wonder if he can shake off the (pardon the pun) heartbreaking loss to Owen. When he does manage to pull Excalibur out of the stone by pinning Yokozuna, the audience is thrilled. The entire locker room that suffered the wrath of Yoko's Reign of Terror greets Bret like a conquering hero. But in the aisle glares a triumphant Owen Hart. Yeah, you beat Yoko for that belt. But I beat you earlier tonight and I can do it again! The fact that Owen was younger and a superior worker than their older brother Bruce (who was Vince's first choice for the role of the "jealous brother") meant that a great feud between two great wrestlers can look like a legitimate main event.
That is pro wrestling storytelling at its finest.
|
|
Scott Parker
Trap-Jaw
some wrestler you've never heard of
Posts: 264
|
Post by Scott Parker on Nov 15, 2013 17:26:26 GMT -5
WWE were thinking ahead by letting Owen go over. They made him look like a serious player But why? Was anyone seriously under the impression Owen was 'world champion' material? It just made the belt look weak and only happened because it was Bret's brother.As I said if Hogan did that for one of his brown-nosers I bet $100 that nearly 20 years later nobody would be saying "it made sense because it made Brutus look like a serious player" The WrestleMania X story just wouldn't work with Hogan, at all. Hogan was too much of the larger than life superhero to pull off losing in the opener and winning the belt in the end. Bret Hart was sold to fans more as a common man. It wasn't like he said "I quit" while locked in the Sharpshooter or some other form of finishing move. He had a solid back and forth 10-15 minute match with Owen, with Owen catching him off guard for a second to get a quick pin. It didn't make him look weak or kill any momentum, because Bret was a human being, like the most of the rest of us. He overcame the lose and won the belt at the end of the night. He did what a lot of us want to do, comeback from a minor failure to succeed at something even better. Hogan getting pinned in such a manner would just look silly. We had seen the Hulkster beat most foes relatively easily. The ones who did get there good shots in(and he could make them look like they just might get the job done, btw) were powerless to the Superman comeback he would pull off. When Hogan did lose, it was a big deal. Take, his loses to Yokozuna or the Undertaker. If something put Hogan down for the three-count, it would have to take him down for at least the rest of the night.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 42,401
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Nov 16, 2013 1:43:05 GMT -5
I was never under the impression Owen wasn't world title material So the guy who had never been in any main event, major feud or even singles match at a PPV before (other than a 3 minute match to Skinner at WM8, excluding matches wrestled under another gimmick) you thought he could have been world champion? The leeway that's being taken because it's Bret and Owen is extraordinary. Replace the name 'Bret' with 'Hogan' and 'Owen' with 'insert-Hoga-ass-kisser-here' it's almost inconceivable that anyone would view the outcome of WM10 as a complete outrage. It has nothing to do with that. Owen pinned Bret clean. Later, Bret carries on to win the title. Owen was claiming to be in Bret's shadow, but he now had a pinfall win over Bret, clean as a sheet. Makes Owen look like a threat.
|
|
|
Post by highfivessteve on Nov 18, 2013 12:31:35 GMT -5
I love it and looking back it's pretty perfect.
The match was even and Owen rolled him up, not knocked him out and it created the belief that Bret may be so shaken up he may not win the title and win he did, like some mentioned, he had a feud ready to go!
|
|
|
Post by molson5 on Nov 18, 2013 13:23:42 GMT -5
It's kind of an early example of modern WWE thinking when it comes to booking. Since Bret was going to be walking out of the biggest show of the year as the champion, he could afford a loss, even earlier on the same show. I think it's definitely an example of how that kind of booking can actually make sense in the right spot.
|
|
TGM
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,073
|
Post by TGM on Nov 18, 2013 13:59:38 GMT -5
How dare they make the next challenger to their top title seem like a legit threat!!
|
|
RedDevil
Don Corleone
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 1,692
|
Post by RedDevil on Nov 18, 2013 15:25:45 GMT -5
I remember being stunned when Owen beat Bret.
Going into the PPV as a total Hitman mark (some things never change...) I absolutely hated Owen at that time. I never, ever thought Bret would lose that match - it never entered my little mind that Owen could beat Bret. No way it could possibly happen. No chance. And then it did, and most importantly it was a clean win - no excuses, Owen beat Bret. I was gutted.
At least until the end of the show - then I was a delighted mark again, and couldn't wait for the re-match between Bret and Owen. At SummerSlam? Cool. For the WWF championship? Cool. In a steel cage? Cool. With the British Bulldog in the front-row after an absence of two years? Now you're just toying with me...
|
|
|
Post by evilone on Nov 18, 2013 20:43:56 GMT -5
I never liked the idea that the man who'd end the show as WWE champion - the man who you would seek to launch the 'new generation' on the back off - jerked the curtain by losing, clean, in the opening match to someone who up until that point had been almost literally nothing but a lower-mid carder. In my view nepotism played a huge part. I think had Vince gone to Bret and said "we want to do an angle where in the opening match you lose to Doink" Bret would have, rightly, told him where to go. As much as the match itself made sense in terms of the storylines to have the would-be-champ lose just undermined the position of the belt. Have it a double count our or a time-limit draw if you're that desperate to make Owen look like a million bucks but for god sake don't end the show with the WWE Champion having been beaten by someone so far down the card as Owen was, clean in the middle of the ring. I also think it made Yokozuna look terrible. Bret was able to beat him having already wrestled 20 minute match that night. The guy who was supposedly the biggest monster in the company. Imagine if Hogan did that. Imagine if Hogan jobbed to his buddy in the opening match and then came out and then beat the then WWE champ clean to win the belt. The word 'apoplectic' wouldn't go far enough in describing people's rage. As it was, because it was Bret who has always been a darling of the smarks, an entirely different logic is applied. Well wrestling or any sports for that matter is not about the belt or ring but about the person winning it and holding on to it. I don not agree with the notion that future champion or champion have to win every match to justify that they are the best. Such thing never ever happens in any sports so it shouldn't happen in wrestling. Its not about loosing, its how you loose. Bret lost to evenly matched opponent and it was an upset. Its not like he was squashed. Match was a fair and square fight, a very tough fight indeed, and you cant tell that either one of them was weak. I don't see how that impacts the idea that he looks weak going into a championship battle. I love the idea when champion looses from time to time but also when he wins when it matters and that's when he is defending the actual title. It makes it unpredictable and it makes you appreciate the champion even more as a hero. You don't go around saying "yeah he lost on last RAW so he is making that belt look weak" People who expect the champion to have a winning streak of more than five fights in a row have simply been watching way too many Power Rangers. Constant winning also makes upcoming challengers just a feeding frenzy until or the right challenger shows up one day and you know it so there better be some other storyline on that PPV that will make you pay for it. Sometimes hot shooting the title is actually a good thing if opponents are evenly matched. Events after WM-X could have been really a chance to hotshot the title between Bret, Yoko and Luger and have Owen win it in the end by sneaking in the title picture and using, lets say, Yoko's fatigue to capture it. Then you setup Bret vs Owen for WM11.
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Nov 18, 2013 22:35:59 GMT -5
I think WrestleMania X is one of the best booked PPV's ever.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 42,401
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Nov 19, 2013 3:49:17 GMT -5
Let's explore the alternative. Bret mops the floor with Owen, then wins the belt.
So Bret is just the big, mean brother Owen always professed him to be, which could easily turn Bret heel when that's not what they wanted. Later on, Bret told them to cool it with the angle a bit, since Owen, Jim, Diana, I think Bruce sided with Owen too, matches with Bulldog the year before. Bret was worried people would conclude me must be the ass they say he is, no one in the family appears to get along with him.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,447
Member is Online
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Nov 19, 2013 10:41:43 GMT -5
How is it not a plus? You've got a ready-made main event feud between your new top babyface and a guy who you want to see get his ass kicked but who looks like he has a real shot at being able to beat the champ. Because it was Owen Hart. A guy who before the feud with Bret was in balloon pants dancing with Koko B Ware. It's not as if they took a guy who had risen through the card, had some notable midcard feuds and as reward for that promoted him to the main event. He'd only been around a year at that point, not counting the Blue Blazer, so he was still the young up and coming brother. As has been said, he didn't have any notable losses, he was just in the lower card, until Survivor Series 1993. At the point they put a spotlight on him, elevated him by cutting promos on Bret, teaming with him and ultimately hurting him. He wasn't some scrub who'd been losing all the time. Wrestlemania X was him being given the only thing he'd asked for, an opportunity, which he'd never had until that point. His first big match he wins. It'd be the same today if they suddenly pushed say, Cesaro. Sure he's not a big name, but he's fresh, new, with no reason for people not to buy into him, if he beat the champion non title and was presented as a threat, people would buy into it. Except Owen had more charisma.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Nov 19, 2013 11:12:21 GMT -5
Because it was Owen Hart. A guy who before the feud with Bret was in balloon pants dancing with Koko B Ware. It's not as if they took a guy who had risen through the card, had some notable midcard feuds and as reward for that promoted him to the main event. He'd only been around a year at that point, not counting the Blue Blazer, so he was still the young up and coming brother. As has been said, he didn't have any notable losses, he was just in the lower card, until Survivor Series 1993. At the point they put a spotlight on him, elevated him by cutting promos on Bret, teaming with him and ultimately hurting him. He wasn't some scrub who'd been losing all the time. Wrestlemania X was him being given the only thing he'd asked for, an opportunity, which he'd never had until that point. His first big match he wins. It'd be the same today if they suddenly pushed say, Cesaro. Sure he's not a big name, but he's fresh, new, with no reason for people not to buy into him, if he beat the champion non title and was presented as a threat, people would buy into it. Except Owen had more charisma. But do people get their 'first big chance' by being in a feud with the WWF Champion unless that WWF champ is their brother? I just think Bret gets cut a lot of slack others wouldn't for the same reason. If HBK had a brother that pottered around the low-cards but then he decided he'd wanted to work a programme with him then we all know what the reaction would be. I understand that the Bret/Owen feud started off in the midcard and that by WM10 it was ongoing outside of the title scene but I still think Bret would not have laid down for anyone else under any other circumstance unless it was to his brother. Because it would't make sense. Bret and Lawler had been feuding since before the Owen/Bret feud and to that date hadn't faced each other at a PPV (with the exception of the Summerslam 93 farce). Now imagine if Vince went to Bret the morning of Wm10 and said "I want you to put Lawler over in the opening match because you've got a programme coming up in the summer" - what precisely would you think the reaction would or even should have been? Regardless of what feud existed before or where you're going to go with it afterwards you don't pin your WWF champion clean in the middle of the ring at the biggest show of the year because what does it say about him? Here's a guy (Owen) who until then had been dancing in MC Hammer pants. If Owen wasn't Bret's brother then the first match would have had a dusty finish. A DQ, a draw, a count out - something. But Bret wanted to put his brother over. In some ways that's commendable in other ways it was incredibly stupid. Interest in the feud didn't even peak to a point where McMahon was happy for it to be the focal point of the next PPV. Instead it 'jobbed out' to Undertaker vs Undertaker. Now was that all because after Bret lost to Owen in the first match the night he won the WWF title the audience thought "Well, their champ can get beat by a guy who used to dance with a midget with a parrot", probably not but that's possibly a contribution to it. Owen's rise was great when it was originally intended to be a mid-card feud as was the intention. But as soon as it got to the point where Bret had again become main event the plans should have changed. Regardless of who you are losing clean at WM the night you win the title does damage you momentum and we all know the reason why it was allowed to happen was because of the personal relationship between the two. As I said, Lawler wouldn't have got to pin Bret clean in the ring the night he won his title under similar circumstances, nor would HBK, Ramon, Bam Bam or anyone.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,447
Member is Online
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Nov 19, 2013 11:35:04 GMT -5
He'd only been around a year at that point, not counting the Blue Blazer, so he was still the young up and coming brother. As has been said, he didn't have any notable losses, he was just in the lower card, until Survivor Series 1993. At the point they put a spotlight on him, elevated him by cutting promos on Bret, teaming with him and ultimately hurting him. He wasn't some scrub who'd been losing all the time. Wrestlemania X was him being given the only thing he'd asked for, an opportunity, which he'd never had until that point. His first big match he wins. It'd be the same today if they suddenly pushed say, Cesaro. Sure he's not a big name, but he's fresh, new, with no reason for people not to buy into him, if he beat the champion non title and was presented as a threat, people would buy into it. Except Owen had more charisma. But do people get their 'first big chance' by being in a feud with the WWF Champion unless that WWF champ is their brother? I just think Bret gets cut a lot of slack others wouldn't for the same reason. If HBK had a brother that pottered around the low-cards but then he decided he'd wanted to work a programme with him then we all know what the reaction would be. I understand that the Bret/Owen feud started off in the midcard and that by WM10 it was ongoing outside of the title scene but I still think Bret would not have laid down for anyone else under any other circumstance unless it was to his brother. Because it would't make sense. Bret and Lawler had been feuding since before the Owen/Bret feud and to that date hadn't faced each other at a PPV (with the exception of the Summerslam 93 farce). Now imagine if Vince went to Bret the morning of Wm10 and said "I want you to put Lawler over in the opening match because you've got a programme coming up in the summer" - what precisely would you think the reaction would or even should have been? Regardless of what feud existed before or where you're going to go with it afterwards you don't pin your WWF champion clean in the middle of the ring at the biggest show of the year because what does it say about him? Here's a guy (Owen) who until then had been dancing in MC Hammer pants. If Owen wasn't Bret's brother then the first match would have had a dusty finish. A DQ, a draw, a count out - something. But Bret wanted to put his brother over. In some ways that's commendable in other ways it was incredibly stupid. Interest in the feud didn't even peak to a point where McMahon was happy for it to be the focal point of the next PPV. Instead it 'jobbed out' to Undertaker vs Undertaker. Now was that all because after Bret lost to Owen in the first match the night he won the WWF title the audience thought "Well, their champ can get beat by a guy who used to dance with a midget with a parrot", probably not but that's possibly a contribution to it. Owen's rise was great when it was originally intended to be a mid-card feud as was the intention. But as soon as it got to the point where Bret had again become main event the plans should have changed. Regardless of who you are losing clean at WM the night you win the title does damage you momentum and we all know the reason why it was allowed to happen was because of the personal relationship between the two. As I said, Lawler wouldn't have got to pin Bret clean in the ring the night he won his title under similar circumstances, nor would HBK, Ramon, Bam Bam or anyone. If the guy was a good wrestler, then people would be fine. It's Owen Hart, not David Flair we're talking about. As for it doesn't matter about the story, yeah, it does matter about the story, that's the whole medium. Lawler was old ground, he'd been a coward and weak and beaten months ago. Owen was a different matter, he was young, hungry, fresh and aggresive who had never had his chance till then. If it was the 123 Kid, HBK or Razor, then I think Bret would have laid down if it lead to a similar story as the Owen one. A young guy wants a shot to prove himself. Also, Owen didn't dance in the hammer pants, he wore them and did exciting high flying moves, it's not like they were integral to his character. He hadn't worn them since spring of 1993 anyway.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Nov 19, 2013 11:50:45 GMT -5
But do people get their 'first big chance' by being in a feud with the WWF Champion unless that WWF champ is their brother? I just think Bret gets cut a lot of slack others wouldn't for the same reason. If HBK had a brother that pottered around the low-cards but then he decided he'd wanted to work a programme with him then we all know what the reaction would be. I understand that the Bret/Owen feud started off in the midcard and that by WM10 it was ongoing outside of the title scene but I still think Bret would not have laid down for anyone else under any other circumstance unless it was to his brother. Because it would't make sense. Bret and Lawler had been feuding since before the Owen/Bret feud and to that date hadn't faced each other at a PPV (with the exception of the Summerslam 93 farce). Now imagine if Vince went to Bret the morning of Wm10 and said "I want you to put Lawler over in the opening match because you've got a programme coming up in the summer" - what precisely would you think the reaction would or even should have been? Regardless of what feud existed before or where you're going to go with it afterwards you don't pin your WWF champion clean in the middle of the ring at the biggest show of the year because what does it say about him? Here's a guy (Owen) who until then had been dancing in MC Hammer pants. If Owen wasn't Bret's brother then the first match would have had a dusty finish. A DQ, a draw, a count out - something. But Bret wanted to put his brother over. In some ways that's commendable in other ways it was incredibly stupid. Interest in the feud didn't even peak to a point where McMahon was happy for it to be the focal point of the next PPV. Instead it 'jobbed out' to Undertaker vs Undertaker. Now was that all because after Bret lost to Owen in the first match the night he won the WWF title the audience thought "Well, their champ can get beat by a guy who used to dance with a midget with a parrot", probably not but that's possibly a contribution to it. Owen's rise was great when it was originally intended to be a mid-card feud as was the intention. But as soon as it got to the point where Bret had again become main event the plans should have changed. Regardless of who you are losing clean at WM the night you win the title does damage you momentum and we all know the reason why it was allowed to happen was because of the personal relationship between the two. As I said, Lawler wouldn't have got to pin Bret clean in the ring the night he won his title under similar circumstances, nor would HBK, Ramon, Bam Bam or anyone. If the guy was a good wrestler, then people would be fine. It's Owen Hart, not David Flair we're talking about. As for it doesn't matter about the story, yeah, it does matter about the story, that's the whole medium. Lawler was old ground, he'd been a coward and weak and beaten months ago. Owen was a different matter, he was young, hungry, fresh and aggresive who had never had his chance till then. If it was the 123 Kid, HBK or Razor, then I think Bret would have laid down if it lead to a similar story as the Owen one. A young guy wants a shot to prove himself. Also, Owen didn't dance in the hammer pants, he wore them and did exciting high flying moves, it's not like they were integral to his character. He hadn't worn them since spring of 1993 anyway. When Bryan was champion and he had two matches on a PPV and in the first he jobbed clean to a 'young guy who wats a shot to prove himself' Want to take a guess at the reaction?
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,447
Member is Online
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Nov 19, 2013 17:27:54 GMT -5
If the guy was a good wrestler, then people would be fine. It's Owen Hart, not David Flair we're talking about. As for it doesn't matter about the story, yeah, it does matter about the story, that's the whole medium. Lawler was old ground, he'd been a coward and weak and beaten months ago. Owen was a different matter, he was young, hungry, fresh and aggresive who had never had his chance till then. If it was the 123 Kid, HBK or Razor, then I think Bret would have laid down if it lead to a similar story as the Owen one. A young guy wants a shot to prove himself. Also, Owen didn't dance in the hammer pants, he wore them and did exciting high flying moves, it's not like they were integral to his character. He hadn't worn them since spring of 1993 anyway. When Bryan was champion and he had two matches on a PPV and in the first he jobbed clean to a 'young guy who wats a shot to prove himself' Want to take a guess at the reaction? Ok, I'm blanking on this, I can't find him having 2 matches on 1 card while World Champion or WWE champion. What I will say though, is that you can't just plug current wrestlers into that situation, each case is different. Daniel Bryan isn't Bret Hart, neither of them is Hulk Hogan. All of them have different characters, strengths and their positions on the card are different. Bret had been WWE champion for months. After he lost it, he was the focal point of King of The Ring, they based a new PPV on his popularity. He was presented from late 1992, so a year and a half before Wrestlemania, as a top guy. That's different to Bryan who still hasn't had a run on top as 'the man'. Bret could afford a loss. Hell, Owen is the best person to elevate that way, because he was always being talked up as a high flyer, a great wrestler, even in lower card matches. He can take Bret because he knows him literally better than anyone on the roster, so it makes sense and gives him a massive rub in the process. As for Summerslam 1994 ending with Taker v Taker instead, The Undertaker for most of his career has been a special attraction outside the main WWF storylines. He was off fighting Kamala, Giant Gonzalez etc. He was the last match, but he wasn't THE main event, a co- one sure but he was in his own little universe.
|
|