In Honour of the Tenth Anniversary of the Screwjob

[cernex]

Bret had a creative control clause in his contract, Vince ignored the contract all-togheter and did what he wanted, thus "screwing" Bret. Good reason, bad reason, or "buissness" reason, he screwed Bret. I don't see the need for more discussion.

El Cernex

[amsiraK]

brainofj said:

coksf said:

I can certainly see that happening. I can say Vince really was protecting his interests, in that account. I don't like how he went about it though. But he was ultimately responsible for this situation - he told his World Champion to jump ship, because he wasn't able to pay him his contracted amount. He could have easily have Bret drop the title months before urging him to sign with WCW.

From what I understand, the decision to release Bret happened in late October/early November, between Badd Blood and Survivor Series. So, there wasn't really time to have Bret drop the title before SurSer; Vince had sort of painted himself into a corner, which is his fault.

All in all, the whole think sucked. From every angle.

Jed Shaffer
~Karisma ... I was only referencing the OP's "let's debate!". I don't think anyone's gonna be swayed here.

YAY! I got a Post-Note reference! w00t!

LOL

I know. There really is no persuasion possible in this, the most polarizing of wrestling arguments. It's nice that there's no outright animosity coming up here.

[Ben Wyatt]

karisma888 said:

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.

I would piss myself laughing if that ever happened

[CrazySting]

Legally, Bret was in the right. He had creative control in his contract, so it was illegal for Shawn and Vince to do that. Doesn't really deal with the morals of the situation, but a court of law would have taken Bret's side I have to think.

[jmac950]

I love Bret. I really do. But, lets face it, the WWE could not afford or risk Bret no showing on Monday night. We'll never know if Bret would have shown up. But I will say one thing, I guarantee you Bischoff would have offered Bret everything under the sun to no-show. And like someone said, if Bret won, the next night Bischoff would have proclaimed that WCW had the WWF world champion, and probably would have talked bout the WWF folding, etc.

Personally, I'm still a little confused why they couldn't have just made the match a triple or fatal four way match for the world title.

[HMARK Center]

And, I can understand why Shawn agreed to it. He was a company man who did what he was told. And, he probably figured that if he didn't agree to it, then he would fired and replaced with someone who would. Basically, Shawn was just doing what his boss wanted.

Now, now, let's not get ahead of ourselves here.

Shawn was the man who "lost his smile" before WM 13, who almost pulled a power play to prevent himself from having to lose to Austin at WM 14, and had threatened numerous times to make a bee-line for Atlanta. Shawn had NEVER been a "company man".

And you can't really make the "do what your boss tells you" argument if your boss gives you a control clause in your contract. Vince screwed Vince on the whole deal, waiting as long as he did to tell Bret "go to WCW", not being more creative with his booking to prevent Bret vs. Shawn, and giving Bret the kind of contract that he had.

Yet, despite all his mistakes, it all ended up benefiting Vince WAY more than Bret in the end.

There's no way it was all a work. Too many mistakes, too much blind luck. Bret jumping ship had all the potential in the world to be the death blow to the WWF. Vince would have never, ever risked that.

[The Thread Barbi]

katievick said:

coksf said:

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.

I think Loki pointed out a simple backstage skit to take Michaels out of the running. Like when Taker was advertised to face Khali in a Punjabi Prison match. What happened?

I've always wondered, why did Bret need a 20yr deal?

Could he not have taken a 2yr deal from Vince? Was he that desperate for money? If he was that loyal, would money really make a huge difference? And if it did, then how indeed could Vince be sure Eric wouldnt offer up a stupid one off fee for the WWF belt to get trashed?

That's were the pro-Bret stuff has always fallen for me. If Bret was so loyal and everything, why didnt he just stay for a shorter contract?

I don't know why it was a 20 yr deal. Possibly both sides agreeing mutual loyalty after Bret turned down WCW's offer. Bret was to remain as an active competitor for 3 or so more years, then take an office job for a significantly reduced amount, until the contract ran out.

[skillz]

hulk6785 said:

And, I can understand why Shawn agreed to it. He was a company man who did what he was told. And, he probably figured that if he didn't agree to it, then he would fired and replaced with someone who would. Basically, Shawn was just doing what his boss wanted.

Shawn was a company man? Shawn MICHAELS? Wow. Just...wow.

My stance has always been: Vince screwed Bret. Hart had creative control (at least reasonable creative control) in his contract and he was lied to about the finish. Vince had his reasons for going through with it, and his reasoning was valid but it doesn't change what happened. Ultimately, it could have been avoided.

BTW, I'm glad someone brought up Ric Flair in 1991. There are so many cases of Vince McMahon hypocrisy when it comes to business/competition that an entire book can be dedicated to it. No one should be painting him as a victim.

[tap]

Flair screwed Windham.

[wrestlecrapcrap]

On the creative control argument, I think Vince has some leverage considering Bret's contract had the wording 'Reasonable' in there, and Vince is entirely within his rights to claim that refusing to drop the belt when the owner of the company asks you to is totally unreasonable.

After all, it is pre-determined, Vince make him who he is and put the belt on him in the first place, so he should drop it whenever he is told.

[Bob Schlapowitz]

wrestlecrapcrap said:

On the creative control argument, I think Vince has some leverage considering Bret's contract had the wording 'Reasonable' in there, and Vince is entirely within his rights to claim that refusing to drop the belt when the owner of the company asks you to is totally unreasonable.

After all, it is pre-determined, Vince make him who he is and put the belt on him in the first place, so he should drop it whenever he is told.

Well said. People always conveniently forget the "reasonable" part of the creative control clause.

[jmac950]

Bret and Shawn hated each other because they were in a love triangle with Sunny.

[BrianZane]

I was kind of hoping that the OP was going to finish the title with, "go screw someone you love...in the good way though."

Seriously though, I think Vince did the right thing to take the title off of Bret, they just went about it in a bad way. If Vince went along with Bret's original plan to have the SS match end in a Schmozz (tm), then have him vacate the belt the next night, you might as well have had Bret give the WWF Title the Alundra Blayze treatment. How good does the company look when he goes, "I'm dropping this title and going to another company. See you on TNT"? That would have been pretty bad for the image of the company compared to the interesting things WCW was doing at the time.

[DrizzlinShytes]

I'm with Vince. Wrestlers are supposed to put over people on the way out. Bret put no one over. He wanted to go out as champ...while on his way to the WWF's biggest competition. It makes no sense.

Furthermore this idea that he shouldn't have to lose to Shawn is crap. For all the talk that Shawn was the immature unprofessional prick, it sure seems unprofessional to refuse to put over the biggest star in the company with whom you've had a redhot feud because you don't like him personally. Like that matters? This is a billion dollar industry. It doesn't matter if you don't like him. Not to mention that all Bret's holier-than-thou nonsense about Shawn being immoral turns out to be all on him. He was cheating on his wife while saying Shawn was the poor role model. He should be impaled by that pedestal he always sat on.

All Bret had to do was what everyone else before him did which is job on the way out to the next guy in line. It doesn't matter if you like the person, this is business.

[messiahtype]

the funniest thing about the montreal screwjob is that no matter how much it's talked about, people always leave out big details.
1. bret was signed through dec.8th. he had plenty of time post survivor series to drop the belt..

2.as far as trashing the belt the next night, unless bret wanted to get sued for showing up on rival tv while still under contract to wwf, i don't see how could've done it

3. why didnt bret trash the belt upon making his wcw debut? he has plenty of replicas.

4. how can you possibly paint a guy who turned down a great contract, way less dates and guaranteed turner movie roles, to remain with a downtrodden company, as unprofessional?

5. bret helped austin become a star. helped make raw entertaining with the usa/canada angle. yet was basically forced out as champ. he first told him to talk to wcw on sep 22. so he had plenty of time to get the belt off before sseries and after.

but his myth that bret could've trashed the belt the next night(which couldn't have happened since bret was under contract to wwf) has taken a life off his own. yet you want bret to put over a guy who not only refused to job to him, but buried bulldog in his hometown, and said his father was basically walking dead. and refused to job to everybody and opnely bragged about it. shanwn ain't never produced results to get away with sh*t like that. i'll continue later.

[JMA]

Here's how I see it: Vince was the one who offered and broke Bret's twenty year contract. Without that contract, the Montreal Screwjob never would've happened. Bret had creative control as well, which Vince also broke. Bret didn't refuse to drop the belt, he just wouldn't lose to the guy who had gotten out of jobbing to him. Bret couldn't have gone to Nitro the next night (which many people don't seem to understand) and had plenty of time to drop the belt after SS.

I don't see how it's much of a debate really. It only really seems like a debatable subject due to the misinformation (i.e. "Bret could've gone to Nitro" or "Bret refused to job") that's spread regarding the subject. The only somewhat believable argument I can see for the Screwjob is an "ends justify the means" one. But that doesn't hold much water for me. The justification for an action does not rest solely on its consequences.

[BxB]

You know what I love? People hate on Bret for refusing to drop the belt or saying that he was going to WCW with it. But, he never once threatened Vince that he was going to leave with the belt. Unlike

1. Honky Tonk Man who did refuse to drop the IC belt to Macho Man- Watch the Dibiase shoot, he confirms it.

2 Ric Flair actually took the WCW title to WWE, yet nobody ever brings that up.

3. Shawn lost his smile.

But, it's always that Hitman guy that gets the flak. Gotta love the IWC.

[I'm The Cool One]

vince wasnt very understanding of bret's situation. and bret didnt understand that wrestling is a smurfing work.

the whole thing really made bret hart seem like a belt mark and made vince look really ruthless and uncaring.

thats my dot oh two

[HMARK Center]

withteeth said:

vince wasnt very understanding of bret's situation. and bret didnt understand that wrestling is a smurfing work.

the whole thing really made bret hart seem like a belt mark and made vince look really ruthless and uncaring.

thats my dot oh two

I think it pretty clearly had nothing to do with being a belt mark, and everything to do with Bret despising Shawn Michaels as a human being.

[King Fox -1017 Bricksquad]

Im on Vince's side.