In Honour of the Tenth Anniversary of the Screwjob

[The Thread Barbi]

Let's debate this ONCE AGAIN!

I am, was, and always will be, pro-Bret. I will side with Bret on this.

Bret was:
1) a long-time, dependable, and respected employee.
2) contracted for more money than Vince could afford to pay him.
3) given a creative control clause in his contract for his final 30 days of employment
4) was coaxed by Vince himself to go to WCW, as Vince couldn't afford to pay him.

Bret was asked by the boss to lose the WWF championship in Montreal, Canada, to Shawn Michaels.

In previous years, Bret told Michaels that he had no problem putting him over. Michaels retorted that he couldn't say the same thing. Michaels 'lost his smile' to enforce this.

If I was given the option to elevate someone's position in the company which I was leaving, I wouldn't do it to the most unprofessional prick in the workplace. I'd do it for someone who deserved it.

Wrestling with Shadows clearly documents Vince and Bret agreeing to a 'Schmozz' ending, and Bret giving up the title the next night on RAW. This is what, in business, is called a compromise.

The boss wanted the belt to be dropped. The employee, who had a contractual clause that allowed him to deflect the boss' wish, instead chose to make both wrestling parties look good/bad (depending on your opinion) by instantiating a no-contest ending. Even with his hatred of HBK, this ending would have kept both mens' credibility. The boss and the employee agree to this work-around, and shake hands on it.

The boss does not keep his word, and legally breaks a contractual clause, IMO. The model employee, who sacrificed everything for 14 years, is left disillusioned and bitter, at the betrayal. For some reason, the employee is seen as a 'whiner', and the boss as 'protecting the company interests'.

[Push R Truth]

coksf said:

Let's debate this ONCE AGAIN!

I am, was, and always will be, pro-Bret. I will side with Bret on this.

.

Then why even try to debate it?

[The Ichi]

I just want to say, although I'm not a mod or anything, can we please try to debate this in a civil and well-educated manner? It's a topic I still enjoy talking about.

[The Thread Barbi]

pushvalvenis said:

coksf said:

Let's debate this ONCE AGAIN!

I am, was, and always will be, pro-Bret. I will side with Bret on this.

.

Then why even try to debate it?

That's my point of view. I interested in your similar and/or opposing view.

[BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps]

curryman said:

I just want to say, although I'm not a mod or anything, can we please try to debate this in a civil and well-educated manner? It's a topic I still enjoy talking about.

Agreed. This may be the one topic aside from the Benoit murders that has the most potential to go wrong. Let's stay cool.

[Loki]

Vince screwed Bret.

He ignored the creative control clause and he took his word back, just to put over one of the most selfish and unprofessional Superstars ever to step in a WWF ring (and I like HBK...)

Vince WANTED controversy, so he went for that. Bret appearing on WCW with the belt was a poor excuse, as he offered to drop the belt to anybody the next day, and Bret didn't even ask to WIN the match at SS...

I don't think a DQ finish would have been a disgrace. The screwjob was.

But we're still talking about that 10 years later, so Vince made his maths right.

[Push R Truth]

coksf said:

pushvalvenis said:

Then why even try to debate it?

That's my point of view. I interested in your similar and/or opposing view.

Fair enough...




My opinion was always that Bret and Vince had something worked for the next nights RAW.

But on the day of SS Vince started to worry. Could WCW give Bret additional money at the last minute to have him screw over Vince? (By taking the title to NITRO, or who knows what)


Rather then have to worry about last minute stuff, Vince just decided to get this over with the quick and dirty way.


Huge amounts of money can influence anything especially when it's connected to a decision that has to be made quickly. I think Vince just wanted to avoid that possibility.


Who was in the right? I dunno. Both sides have valid reasons for what they did.


Business wise, Vince was correct in what he did. On a personal basis and professionally, it was pretty crappy.


One thing I've always wanted to know was this:

Bret knew he was leaving, but he wanted to hold the title until the last possible second. Most wrestlers would get destroyed for doing this. But in Bret's case, people just kinda ignored this fact.



My final opinion on this? The only winner in the whole deal was the WWE Title. Because it didn't get trashed, and it at least was given to a credible champ.

[HMARK Center]

Yeah, I'll try to keep tabs on this thread; it's good so far, let's keep it that way.

Anyway, I'm pro-Bret, as well, and the OP sums it up pretty well. Whatever benefits came from what Vince did, the fact is that he hurt a long-time buddy and borderline broke the law by violating the terms of a contract.

Now, as for Bret holding the title 'til the "last possible second", let's not forget that Bret was all for coming back to the WWF until basically "the last possible second", when Vince told him that they couldn't afford his 20 year deal. If I recall right, Vince made that call not too long before Survivor Series.

Also, booking plans are what they are; there hasn't been any sign that Bret lobbied to hold the belt for a length of time longer than what he had been booked to have.

[The Thread Barbi]

pushvalvenis said:

coksf said:

That's my point of view. I interested in your similar and/or opposing view.

Fair enough...




My opinion was always that Bret and Vince had something worked for the next nights RAW.

But on the day of SS Vince started to worry. Could WCW give Bret additional money at the last minute to have him screw over Vince? (By taking the title to NITRO, or who knows what)


Rather then have to worry about last minute stuff, Vince just decided to get this over with the quick and dirty way.


Huge amounts of money can influence anything especially when it's connected to a decision that has to be made quickly. I think Vince just wanted to avoid that possibility.


Who was in the right? I dunno. Both sides have valid reasons for what they did.


Business wise, Vince was correct in what he did. On a personal basis and professionally, it was pretty crappy.


One thing I've always wanted to know was this:

Bret knew he was leaving, but he wanted to hold the title until the last possible second. Most wrestlers would get destroyed for doing this. But in Bret's case, people just kinda ignored this fact.



My final opinion on this? The only winner in the whole deal was the WWE Title. Because it didn't get trashed, and it at least was given to a credible champ.

That's an interesting viewpoint. But if we recall 1996, Bret turned down $9 million from WCW to stay loyal to Vince. While his WWF contract was much longer, it resulted in less money over 20 years, than what WCW were offering. A loyal man like Bret, I doubt a few extra hundred thou, or even a million, would cause him to screw over a man he viewed as a father-figure.

[Tyfo]

Im a big fan of Bret and I wish that wouldnt have happened, BUT I agree with Vince McMahon. He had to do it.

If he let Bret leave Survivor Series still the champion, how did he know Bret would really show up for Raw the next night to give up the belt like he said he would. As far as I know, he wasnt contractualy obligated to appear after Survivor Series. He was going to WCW. Vince knew it, Bret knew it, most of the fans knew it. So whos to say Bret wouldnt just say, smurf it im not coming to Raw, sorry, and then show up the next week on Nitro with the WWF title in his hands.

It was during a critical period in the Monday Night Wars. The Womens title was one thing, but the WWF WORLD CHAMPION appearing on Nitro and dropping the belt in the trash or something could be a huge blow to the WWF and a huge angle for WCW.

If it was today or in the last few years, I would 100% agree with Bret Hart. But because of the situation in the wrestling war at that time, and the lenghts WCW had already gone, I dont blame Vince AT ALL for what he did. It was the right thing to do as the owner of the WWF at that time IMO.

[The Thread Barbi]

tyfo85 said:

Im a big fan of Bret and I wish that wouldnt have happened, BUT I agree with Vince McMahon. He had to do it.

If he let Bret leave Survivor Series still the champion, how did he know Bret would really show up for Raw the next night to give up the belt like he said he would. As far as I know, he wasnt contractualy obligated to appear after Survivor Series. He was going to WCW. Vince knew it, Bret knew it, most of the fans knew it. So whos to say Bret wouldnt just say, smurf it im not coming to Raw, sorry, and then show up the next week on Nitro with the WWF title in his hands.

It was during a critical period in the Monday Night Wars. The Womens title was one thing, but the WWF WORLD CHAMPION appearing on Nitro and dropping the belt in the trash or something could be a huge blow to the WWF and a huge angle for WCW.

If it was today or in the last few years, I would 100% agree with Bret Hart. But because of the situation in the wrestling war at that time, and the lenghts WCW had already gone, I dont blame Vince AT ALL for what he did. It was the right thing to do as the owner of the WWF at that time IMO.

I certainly see where you're coming from, but lets also factor in other things, that are non-work related -

- Bret's family members was still employed by WWF, even if he was leaving. Trashing the company title would jeopardise and harm their careers.
- Bret had many good friends, like Undertaker, Vader, Austin. He wouldn't show up on Nitro and take away their livelihood by causing his former employee to crash and burn
- As I said before, Bret viewed McMahon only second to his father, in terms of respect. Why would he want to do that? Besides, it wasn't like Bret wanted to leave, but the financial situation and circumstances, and pressure by Vince forced him to leave.

[amsiraK]

I've always been on the fence about it.

On the one hand, it's a crappy thing to do to a guy who was so loyal to your company, loyal enough and good enough for you to want to wave a fat 20-year contract at him to keep him out of enemy hands. He's willing to leave in a way that makes everyone look good and on reasonably amicable terms. And since wrestling is the way it is, there's nothing saying he won't be back later anyway.

On the other hand... Vince watched his women's title get tossed in a trashcan on TV. There's no way he'd want to watch his Big Belt get the same treatment. And there's nothing saying that it wouldn't happen except for Bret's word. Can you blame a guy for not wanting to leave it up to chance?

It's one for the ages - who was right? In the end, I can't say for sure.









And I'm still leaving my chips on the square that says "it was all a work"... just in case. ;D I'd hate to be around the 25th anniversary and watch Bret and Shawn hug each other and not have said this. LOL! As unlikely as it is.

[odor31]

I am Pro-McMahon...Bret screwed Bret. Listen to your boss and what he wants you to do. You can't override his decisions as an employee and do whatever the hell you want to do. Vince was right in what he did.

[Big Daddy Bad Booking]

I'm just going to cut and paste what I said in the wwe.com thread:

Screw Bret and Shawn in this position. There is one fact and one fact alone that seals this case for me: Vince McMahon had a company to run. Imagine if your world champion was going to the competition in mere DAYS, and still had the title around his waist. As wrong as it sounds, Vince had to protect the foundation his grandfather and father built, and so he put the title on Shawn, though it was not the most popular thing to do.

[The Thread Barbi]

katievick said:

I'm just going to cut and paste what I said in the wwe.com thread:

Screw Bret and Shawn in this position. There is one fact and one fact alone that seals this case for me: Vince McMahon had a company to run. Imagine if your world champion was going to the competition in mere DAYS, and still had the title around his waist. As wrong as it sounds, Vince had to protect the foundation his grandfather and father built, and so he put the title on Shawn, though it was not the most popular thing to do.

He didn't HAVE to put it on Shawn though. In a normal workplace, if the employer sees two employees having a grudge, he/she will ask them to patch up differences, or try and distance them as much as possible, for the sake of the working environment, and themselves. Austin, Taker, Mankind, Shamrock, Owen...anyone of these could have become World champion.

[Brain Of F'n J]

coksf said:

tyfo85 said:

Im a big fan of Bret and I wish that wouldnt have happened, BUT I agree with Vince McMahon. He had to do it.

If he let Bret leave Survivor Series still the champion, how did he know Bret would really show up for Raw the next night to give up the belt like he said he would. As far as I know, he wasnt contractualy obligated to appear after Survivor Series. He was going to WCW. Vince knew it, Bret knew it, most of the fans knew it. So whos to say Bret wouldnt just say, smurf it im not coming to Raw, sorry, and then show up the next week on Nitro with the WWF title in his hands.

It was during a critical period in the Monday Night Wars. The Womens title was one thing, but the WWF WORLD CHAMPION appearing on Nitro and dropping the belt in the trash or something could be a huge blow to the WWF and a huge angle for WCW.

If it was today or in the last few years, I would 100% agree with Bret Hart. But because of the situation in the wrestling war at that time, and the lenghts WCW had already gone, I dont blame Vince AT ALL for what he did. It was the right thing to do as the owner of the WWF at that time IMO.

I certainly see where you're coming from, but lets also factor in other things, that are non-work related -

- Bret's family members was still employed by WWF, even if he was leaving. Trashing the company title would jeopardise and harm their careers.
- Bret had many good friends, like Undertaker, Vader, Austin. He wouldn't show up on Nitro and take away their livelihood by causing his former employee to crash and burn
- As I said before, Bret viewed McMahon only second to his father, in terms of respect. Why would he want to do that? Besides, it wasn't like Bret wanted to leave, but the financial situation and circumstances, and pressure by Vince forced him to leave.

One thing I think that's being forgotten by everyone that figures as a counterpoint of sorts to this two arguments ...

Most everyone thinks Bret wouldn't have taken the belt with him to WCW. Fine. I happen to agree there.

But what would've stopped Eric Bischoff from coming on Nitro the next night and saying "WE SIGNED THE WWF CHAMPION AWAY FROM THE WWF!!!"? After almost two years of some of the most underhanded business practices on Earth, how could anyone assume Bischoff would be a stand-up guy when he had the WWF's throat virtually beneath his bootheel? He does that, and there goes the WWF; it looks like the Titanic now. Even the reigning WWF Champion is jumping ship; it must be dying.

I'm not saying what Vince did was right at all ... but sometimes, what's right and what needs to be done can't be reconciled. I don't think Vince did the RIGHT thing ... but Bret's behavior didn't put him in a position to do much else. In the end, everyone was right ... and everyone was wrong.

Jed Shaffer
~Gotta agree with Val here ... how is this a debate?

[amsiraK]

It's not so much a debate, but it's one of those hot-button issues people like to talk about. This is a discussion board, after all.

[Fireravenv]

The whole situation could have been handled better and it's a shame it ended the way it did. In the grand scheme of things its just a tv show and probably shouldn't have been taken as seriously by Bret as it was.

But who am I to argue against him? Wrestling was his life. But who knows, from his biography I can tell he wasn't the most honest person on the planet. Cheating on his wife and mother of his children. Perhaps this was a bit of karma coming back to bite him in the ass.

[Big Daddy Bad Booking]

coksf said:

katievick said:

I'm just going to cut and paste what I said in the wwe.com thread:

He didn't HAVE to put it on Shawn though. In a normal workplace, if the employer sees two employees having a grudge, he/she will ask them to patch up differences, or try and distance them as much as possible, for the sake of the working environment, and themselves. Austin, Taker, Mankind, Shamrock, Owen...anyone of these could have become World champion.

One small question: who else would you put it on? The match was advertised at Survivor Series, and there wouldn't have been a bait and switch then and there. Since the TV and the promotions were built as such,there really was no other person they could put it on.

[PTBartman]

coksf said:

tyfo85 said:

Im a big fan of Bret and I wish that wouldnt have happened, BUT I agree with Vince McMahon. He had to do it.

If he let Bret leave Survivor Series still the champion, how did he know Bret would really show up for Raw the next night to give up the belt like he said he would. As far as I know, he wasnt contractualy obligated to appear after Survivor Series. He was going to WCW. Vince knew it, Bret knew it, most of the fans knew it. So whos to say Bret wouldnt just say, smurf it im not coming to Raw, sorry, and then show up the next week on Nitro with the WWF title in his hands.

It was during a critical period in the Monday Night Wars. The Womens title was one thing, but the WWF WORLD CHAMPION appearing on Nitro and dropping the belt in the trash or something could be a huge blow to the WWF and a huge angle for WCW.

If it was today or in the last few years, I would 100% agree with Bret Hart. But because of the situation in the wrestling war at that time, and the lenghts WCW had already gone, I dont blame Vince AT ALL for what he did. It was the right thing to do as the owner of the WWF at that time IMO.

I certainly see where you're coming from, but lets also factor in other things, that are non-work related -

- Bret's family members was still employed by WWF, even if he was leaving. Trashing the company title would jeopardise and harm their careers.
- Bret had many good friends, like Undertaker, Vader, Austin. He wouldn't show up on Nitro and take away their livelihood by causing his former employee to crash and burn
- As I said before, Bret viewed McMahon only second to his father, in terms of respect. Why would he want to do that? Besides, it wasn't like Bret wanted to leave, but the financial situation and circumstances, and pressure by Vince forced him to leave.

Yeah but Vince had all ready been burned by Hogan Savage etc I'm not saying he did the right thing, just saying I understand his mindset when he did it.