|
Post by no2humanorchid on Nov 18, 2007 7:21:34 GMT -5
Okay,so on the day of the 10 year anniversary of the infamous Montreal Screwjob at Survivor Series,I was just wondering if there was anyone on this board that actually beleives that the whole thing was a work???I know for a fact that if you tell someone who hates wrestling the story,they're guaranteed to say "oh it was all planned" or some crap like that.Im not going to argue with anyone who DOES think it was still a work,Im just idly curious to know if theres anyone about who thinks it was.Oh,and Im not one of the people that thinks it was a work.
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Nov 18, 2007 7:35:07 GMT -5
Okay,so on the day of the 10 year anniversary of the infamous Montreal Screwjob at Survivor Series,I was just wondering if there was anyone on this board that actually beleives that the whole thing was a work???I know for a fact that if you tell someone who hates wrestling the story,they're guaranteed to say "oh it was all planned" or some crap like that.Im not going to argue with anyone who DOES think it was still a work,Im just idly curious to know if theres anyone about who thinks it was.Oh,and Im not one of the people that thinks it was a work. The actual day of the Screwjob was about 8 days ago and yes we had several threads about people who thought it was a work. Sometimes I think it was a work as well. Reason why I say that is because during the Wrestling with Shadows documentary, when Bret is at his house watching the Raw where HBK brings out the midget Hart, there is no WWF logo on the bottom of the screen, now unless Canada gets a different version of Raw where there is no logo on the bottom of the screen, he must've got a master from WWE. Why would WWE give him that if they were on such bad terms? Just something I thought of a few years back. Not saying I'm right or wrong, just my opinion on it.
|
|
|
Post by FCVDave on Nov 18, 2007 7:38:04 GMT -5
Okay,so on the day of the 10 year anniversary of the infamous Montreal Screwjob at Survivor Series,I was just wondering if there was anyone on this board that actually beleives that the whole thing was a work???I know for a fact that if you tell someone who hates wrestling the story,they're guaranteed to say "oh it was all planned" or some crap like that.Im not going to argue with anyone who DOES think it was still a work,Im just idly curious to know if theres anyone about who thinks it was.Oh,and Im not one of the people that thinks it was a work. The actual day of the Screwjob was about 8 days ago and yes we had several threads about people who thought it was a work. Sometimes I think it was a work as well. Reason why I say that is because during the Wrestling with Shadows documentary, when Bret is at his house watching the Raw where HBK brings out the midget Hart, there is no WWF logo on the bottom of the screen, now unless Canada gets a different version of Raw where there is no logo on the bottom of the screen, he must've got a master from WWE. Why would WWE give him that if they were on such bad terms? Just something I thought of a few years back. Not saying I'm right or wrong, just my opinion on it. I think he is actually watching the real version with the logo but they have edited in the picture on screen. Cameras don't pick up things on TV screens very well and considering they had the rights to show other WWE footage it makes sense they they might have a copy without the logo.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Nov 18, 2007 7:39:29 GMT -5
Matter of fact I do, for a few reasons.
The conveneince of Bret just happening to have a documentary film crew with him at the time. Yes, he was leaving WWF, but still...
The fact that the screwjob was actually a major benefit for all three participants, four counting Hebner. Old Earl got himself some notoriety, which ain't bad for a ref, Shawn got the kind of heel heat you can't buy, Vince used the moment to catepult "Mr McMahon" into the ultra-heel spot, and Bret, WCW's ineptitude not withstanding, had the role of "face in peril" sewed up for life with a ton of momentum for his debut.
It was, more or less, Kaufman/Lawler. Every single participant benefitted, ticket sales went up, money was made, and years after the actual event, people were still debating it.
Yes, it could have all been a shoot that was jsut incredibly convenient, in that it boosted everyone's visibility, and made everyone money, but I'm not one to throw it all up to pure luck. This was a smart, calculated risk that paid handsomely.
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Nov 18, 2007 7:40:03 GMT -5
The actual day of the Screwjob was about 8 days ago and yes we had several threads about people who thought it was a work. Sometimes I think it was a work as well. Reason why I say that is because during the Wrestling with Shadows documentary, when Bret is at his house watching the Raw where HBK brings out the midget Hart, there is no WWF logo on the bottom of the screen, now unless Canada gets a different version of Raw where there is no logo on the bottom of the screen, he must've got a master from WWE. Why would WWE give him that if they were on such bad terms? Just something I thought of a few years back. Not saying I'm right or wrong, just my opinion on it. I think he is actually watching the real version with the logo but they have edited in the picture on screen. Cameras don't pick up things on TV screens very well and considering they had the rights to show other WWE footage it makes sense they they might have a copy without the logo. I dunno, it's been a while since I've seen it, but how would've the documentary ended if there was no screwjob?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2007 7:48:55 GMT -5
Matter of fact I do, for a few reasons. The conveneince of Bret just happening to have a documentary film crew with him at the time. Yes, he was leaving WWF, but still... The fact that the screwjob was actually a major benefit for all three participants, four counting Hebner. Old Earl got himself some notoriety, which ain't bad for a ref, Shawn got the kind of heel heat you can't buy, Vince used the moment to catepult "Mr McMahon" into the ultra-heel spot, and Bret, WCW's ineptitude not withstanding, had the role of "face in peril" sewed up for life with a ton of momentum for his debut. It was, more or less, Kaufman/Lawler. Every single participant benefitted, ticket sales went up, money was made, and years after the actual event, people were still debating it. Yes, it could have all been a shoot that was jsut incredibly convenient, in that it boosted everyone's visibility, and made everyone money, but I'm not one to throw it all up to pure luck. This was a smart, calculated risk that paid handsomely. This is what I believe, too. When Vince passes away, I think that we'll get some new answers about this (and a lot of other subjects).
|
|
|
Post by no2humanorchid on Nov 18, 2007 7:50:29 GMT -5
Okay,so on the day of the 10 year anniversary of the infamous Montreal Screwjob at Survivor Series,I was just wondering if there was anyone on this board that actually beleives that the whole thing was a work???I know for a fact that if you tell someone who hates wrestling the story,they're guaranteed to say "oh it was all planned" or some crap like that.Im not going to argue with anyone who DOES think it was still a work,Im just idly curious to know if theres anyone about who thinks it was.Oh,and Im not one of the people that thinks it was a work. The actual day of the Screwjob was about 8 days ago and yes we had several threads about people who thought it was a work. Sometimes I think it was a work as well. Reason why I say that is because during the Wrestling with Shadows documentary, when Bret is at his house watching the Raw where HBK brings out the midget Hart, there is no WWF logo on the bottom of the screen, now unless Canada gets a different version of Raw where there is no logo on the bottom of the screen, he must've got a master from WWE. Why would WWE give him that if they were on such bad terms? Just something I thought of a few years back. Not saying I'm right or wrong, just my opinion on it. I realise the actual anniversary was a few days ago,but Im referring to PPV EVENT-wise anniversary,not actual dates.Thought Id just nitpick and point that out ;D .Some very interesting theories so far though in all seriousness.
|
|
randomranter
Dennis Stamp
When you grow up....... YOU'RE GONNA BE WROOOOOONG!!!!
Posts: 4,804
|
Post by randomranter on Nov 18, 2007 8:09:58 GMT -5
Reason why I say that is because during the Wrestling with Shadows documentary, when Bret is at his house watching the Raw where HBK brings out the midget Hart, there is no WWF logo on the bottom of the screen, now unless Canada gets a different version of Raw where there is no logo on the bottom of the screen, he must've got a master from WWE. Why would WWE give him that if they were on such bad terms? Just something I thought of a few years back. Not saying I'm right or wrong, just my opinion on it. It's been years since I watched the documentary, so I could be wrong here. I don't think Bret was watching RAW at that time. I think he was watching footage shot by the people making the documentary. A&E (or whoever made it) may have had a contract saying they could shoot footage on days X, Y, and Z, which gave them the right to shoot the footage themselves and show it to bret. Since it's technically A&E's footage and not WWF's, there would be no logo. I dunno, it's been a while since I've seen it, but how would've the documentary ended if there was no screwjob? I think the original plan was it was just supposed to be a general A&E Biography-type program like they did with other wrestlers such as Andre, Hogan, and SCSA. I'm not saying it was or wasn't a work. Only those involved know with certainty. I'm just saying that those questions can be answered relatively easily. Personally, I really don't care. If it was a work, though, it was definitely that decade's "Kaufman/Lawler".
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Nov 18, 2007 8:14:52 GMT -5
Reason why I say that is because during the Wrestling with Shadows documentary, when Bret is at his house watching the Raw where HBK brings out the midget Hart, there is no WWF logo on the bottom of the screen, now unless Canada gets a different version of Raw where there is no logo on the bottom of the screen, he must've got a master from WWE. Why would WWE give him that if they were on such bad terms? Just something I thought of a few years back. Not saying I'm right or wrong, just my opinion on it. It's been years since I watched the documentary, so I could be wrong here. I don't think Bret was watching RAW at that time. I think he was watching footage shot by the people making the documentary. A&E (or whoever made it) may have had a contract saying they could shoot footage on days X, Y, and Z, which gave them the right to shoot the footage themselves and show it to bret. Since it's technically A&E's footage and not WWF's, there would be no logo. I dunno, it's been a while since I've seen it, but how would've the documentary ended if there was no screwjob? I think the original plan was it was just supposed to be a general A&E Biography-type program like they did with other wrestlers such as Andre, Hogan, and SCSA. I'm not saying it was or wasn't a work. Only those involved know with certainty. I'm just saying that those questions can be answered relatively easily. Personally, I really don't care. If it was a work, though, it was definitely that decade's "Kaufman/Lawler". I wasn't aware of that till now, but if I remember it was a tape of the show which was shot the same way it was if you were watching it on USA/TSN. If that is confirmed (about the documentary getting the WWE footage without the logo), then I'll rescind my earlier statement, but I still think that sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by 8-BitAssassin on Nov 18, 2007 8:15:27 GMT -5
If it was a work, though, it was definitely that decade's "Kaufman/Lawler". *sigh* We're due for another Kaufman/Lawler type controversy.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Nov 18, 2007 8:23:46 GMT -5
Vince almost got his ass kicked by the Undertaker and Foley temporarily quit the company that night. Was that part of the "work" too?
|
|
|
Post by 8-BitAssassin on Nov 18, 2007 8:24:37 GMT -5
Vince almost got his ass kicked by the Undertaker and Foley temporarily quit the company that night. Was that part of the "work" too? If they were working everyone, I could see that.
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Nov 18, 2007 8:24:44 GMT -5
Vince almost got his ass kicked by the Undertaker and Foley temporarily quit the company that night. Was that part of the "work" too? As I remember hearing in the past, sometimes the boys would get worked as well. Not saying this is true or not, but it's not the first time.
|
|
|
Post by Jared Has Been Enlightened :) on Nov 18, 2007 8:26:19 GMT -5
Vince almost got his ass kicked by the Undertaker and Foley temporarily quit the company that night. Was that part of the "work" too? I don't see why they couldn't be. I don't believe it was a work, I'm just saying, adding those two elements would've made it all the more believable.
|
|
randomranter
Dennis Stamp
When you grow up....... YOU'RE GONNA BE WROOOOOONG!!!!
Posts: 4,804
|
Post by randomranter on Nov 18, 2007 9:59:08 GMT -5
Vince almost got his ass kicked by the Undertaker and Foley temporarily quit the company that night. Was that part of the "work" too? Why not? Letterman didn't know Kaufman/Lawler was a work at the time
|
|
Mr Captain Falcon
Dennis Stamp
So I could write anything in here and it'll be posted?
Posts: 4,705
|
Post by Mr Captain Falcon on Nov 18, 2007 10:25:50 GMT -5
Honestly I would love nothing more than to see Bret Hart return this sunday as a guest referee for HBK/Orton and he just allows Orton to do ANYTHING without dq'ing him. Then at the end HBK puts him in the sharpshooter and Bret Hart calls for the bell, and HBK and Bret Hart hug and laugh.
I would HATE the industry but i would LOVE it at the same time. I mean, if it did happen then we've been worked for 10 years now! That would be pretty awesome.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Nov 18, 2007 11:32:17 GMT -5
Vince almost got his ass kicked by the Undertaker and Foley temporarily quit the company that night. Was that part of the "work" too? Why not? Letterman didn't know Kaufman/Lawler was a work at the time Letterman didn't employ Kaufman and Lawler. The point I was making that seems to be missed is that there was a HUGE risk in the Screwjob that rarely gets mentioned regardless of whether it was a work or shoot, ie the entire roster might revolt. Yes, they'd be "working the boys". One of the boys wanted to beat Vince's brains out. Another one quit briefly. I strongly doubt Austin was 100% behind Vince's actions once he saw what happened. Vince had to know what he was going to do was going to royally piss off the rest of his crew. He'd take that chance if he truly thought his company was at stake. There's no way he'd take that chance just to "work the boys".
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,628
|
Post by The Ichi on Nov 18, 2007 12:07:17 GMT -5
Honestly I would love nothing more than to see Bret Hart return this sunday as a guest referee for HBK/Orton and he just allows Orton to do ANYTHING without dq'ing him. Then at the end HBK puts him in the sharpshooter and Bret Hart calls for the bell, and HBK and Bret Hart hug and laugh. I would HATE the industry but i would LOVE it at the same time. I mean, if it did happen then we've been worked for 10 years now! That would be pretty awesome. I would love this. So much.
|
|
randomranter
Dennis Stamp
When you grow up....... YOU'RE GONNA BE WROOOOOONG!!!!
Posts: 4,804
|
Post by randomranter on Nov 18, 2007 12:09:59 GMT -5
Why not? Letterman didn't know Kaufman/Lawler was a work at the time Letterman didn't employ Kaufman and Lawler. The point I was making that seems to be missed is that there was a HUGE risk in the Screwjob that rarely gets mentioned regardless of whether it was a work or shoot, ie the entire roster might revolt. Yes, they'd be "working the boys". One of the boys wanted to beat Vince's brains out. Another one quit briefly. I strongly doubt Austin was 100% behind Vince's actions once he saw what happened. Vince had to know what he was going to do was going to royally piss off the rest of his crew. He'd take that chance if he truly thought his company was at stake. There's no way he'd take that chance just to "work the boys". Business decisions are made every day that the workers are not a part of. There is information that workers are simply not privy to. At my job, there is information that is not available to me. There is information that is made available to me that is not available to those who work under me. Simply put, in most businesses, information is made available on a need to know basis, and most employees usually don't need to know. Let's say it was a shoot. The only way that it would even remotely have a chance of working is that only those directly involved would know what's going to happen. If any of the other wrestlers knew, then there's a very good chance it would have gotten back to Bret and the whole plan could have fallen apart. Now let's say it was an elaborate work. How effective do you think it would have been if the internet dirt sheets spoiled it all over the place? We wouldn't be sitting here 10 years later talking about it. SS97 would be yet another poor PPV not worth remembering. Why? Because we'd have all known what was going to happen and that it was all scripted. The only way that they could have gotten the desired reaction was to keep the information to only those who had direct involvement in the incident. Letting "the boys" know would mean the very real possibility that it would've been all over the net, ruining the whole idea. Whether it was a work or shoot, the only way the plan was going to work was to "work the boys".
|
|
8.2.11/SAVIOR_NEZ
Don Corleone
Michael Nesmith, inventor of all you hold dear!
Posts: 1,534
|
Post by 8.2.11/SAVIOR_NEZ on Nov 18, 2007 12:13:53 GMT -5
Wasn't Chris Kanyon of all people saying Bret Hart told him Montreal was a work? I seem to remember hearing him on some online radio show claiming this.
|
|