The W
Views: 97779191
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
29.7.14 0950
The W - Pro Wrestling - Bret Hart Fires Back (Page 2)
This thread has 76 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.46
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next
(6161 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (97 total)
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 393 days
Last activity: 393 days
#21 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.38
    Originally posted by Rudoublesedoublel
    what's he done other than write non-stop about Montreal?








Gone bicycle riding.
In terms of Savage, Flair says Savage was good, not great due to Savage wanting to have everything rehearsed ad nauseum. Perhaps that is why Savage/DDP were able to have good chemistry together, as they both had a similar viewpoint.
Of course, Flair has to be the villain to Bret, as Flair dared to believe Bret should have dropped the strap rather than hold the company hostage because he was in his 'hometown'.

(edited by redsoxnation on 13.7.04 1559)
Jay
Bauerwurst








Since: 27.3.04
From: St. Louis, Missouri

Since last post: 3265 days
Last activity: 3052 days
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.51
Of course, Flair has to be the villain to Bret, as Flair dared to believe Bret should have dropped the strap rather than hold the company hostage because he was in his 'hometown'.

Flair didn't drop the NWA Championship before heading to the WWF did he?



"Back in the old days of the Bash they had guys like Dean Malenko and Arn Anderson. But we got Sable and Torrie!" -Michael Cole continuing to prove he's an idiot (paraphrased due to me not having a copy of GAB 2004, nor will I ever)
MonteCarl
Potato korv








Since: 21.1.02
From: Saginaw, MI

Since last post: 151 days
Last activity: 27 days
AIM:  
#23 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.66
Flair didn't drop the title not because he refused to, but because Jim Herd told him to forget it and just not show up. Flair was willing to drop the title to Luger or Windham on seperate occasions, but Jim refused to fly Flair in to do the job, which is also why they didn't get the BIG GOLD BELT back from Flair as well.
OMEGA
Lap cheong








Since: 18.6.02
From: North Cacalacky

Since last post: 1855 days
Last activity: 1823 days
#24 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.64
    Originally posted by Rudoublesedoublel
    Luckily Hart managed to squeeze in 2 references to Montreal and 1 reference to what a hero he is in Canada; otherwise it might have slipped my mind.


Bret mentioned Montreal because Flair brought it up in his book. However, Flair is listening to the McMahon/Michaels/Hunter version, so Bret just tried to give his side of the story. He had a perfectly valid reason for bringing it up in his rebuttal.



The answer to WWE's financial problems...

Never 'Wiener of the Day', and is actually quite bitter about it.
Jay
Bauerwurst








Since: 27.3.04
From: St. Louis, Missouri

Since last post: 3265 days
Last activity: 3052 days
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.51
Flair didn't drop the title not because he refused to, but because Jim Herd told him to forget it and just not show up. Flair was willing to drop the title to Luger or Windham on seperate occasions, but Jim refused to fly Flair in to do the job, which is also why they didn't get the BIG GOLD BELT back from Flair as well.

Agreed, but things can be worked out before blatantly taking the top championship of one company onto the television of another.

It all results in he-said, he-said, and who you believe. Personally, I put more stock into what Bret says, due to his history of honesty, and the fact that he seems to recall facts better.

However, Flair is listening to the McMahon/Michaels/Hunter version

Which, depending on the day of the week, can be any number of stories.

(edited by Jay on 13.7.04 1511)


"Back in the old days of the Bash they had guys like Dean Malenko and Arn Anderson. But we got Sable and Torrie!" -Michael Cole continuing to prove he's an idiot (paraphrased due to me not having a copy of GAB 2004, nor will I ever)
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 27 min.
#26 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.61
Really though, who's the one who was holding the belt for ransom? Flair for wanting to parlay dropping the title into a contract extension, or Hart for wanting to drop the title in Springfield instead of at Survivor Series.
Jay
Bauerwurst








Since: 27.3.04
From: St. Louis, Missouri

Since last post: 3265 days
Last activity: 3052 days
#27 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.51
Really though, who's the one who was holding the belt for ransom? Flair for wanting to parlay dropping the title into a contract extension, or Hart for wanting to drop the title in Springfield instead of at Survivor Series.

Both.



"Back in the old days of the Bash they had guys like Dean Malenko and Arn Anderson. But we got Sable and Torrie!" -Michael Cole continuing to prove he's an idiot (paraphrased due to me not having a copy of GAB 2004, nor will I ever)
JoshMann
Andouille








Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL

Since last post: 2206 days
Last activity: 2203 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#28 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.93
    Originally posted by Jay
    Flair didn't drop the NWA Championship before heading to the WWF did he?


But also, Flair was recognized as both the WCW Champion as well as the NWA champion at that time. Herd stripped him in July of that year when he fired Flair of the WCW Title, but the NWA still recognized Flair as champion right up until he officially signed with the WWF in September 1991, when on September 9 (give or take a day) he was officially stripped of the moniker of NWA World Champion.

The title would remain vacant until Masa Chono defeated Rick Rude in a tourney in 1992.

(edited by Blanket Jackson on 13.7.04 1616)


That's right, I said it- I said the J-Word
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 27 min.
#29 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.61
"Really though, who's the one who was holding the belt for ransom? Flair for wanting to parlay dropping the title into a contract extension, or Hart for wanting to drop the title in Springfield instead of at Survivor Series.

Both."

Well ... I was going to say Flair because there was an actual ransom involved rather than just a change of plans. But both works.
Jay
Bauerwurst








Since: 27.3.04
From: St. Louis, Missouri

Since last post: 3265 days
Last activity: 3052 days
#30 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.51
Well ... I was going to say Flair because there was an actual ransom involved rather than just a change of plans. But both works.

Different circumstances. See, just because you're a mark for someone doesn't mean you blindly agree 100% with them. Case-in-point, I find Bret to be partially at fault for Montreal: the title-dropping situation could have been worked out, but both sides were extremely frustrated and stubborn.



"Back in the old days of the Bash they had guys like Dean Malenko and Arn Anderson. But we got Sable and Torrie!" -Michael Cole continuing to prove he's an idiot (paraphrased due to me not having a copy of GAB 2004, nor will I ever)
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 27 min.
#31 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.61
"See, just because you're a mark for someone doesn't mean you blindly agree 100% with them."

I'm a mark for both of them. It's just that Flair's assessment of Montreal in the book was funny considering the circumstances behind his own situation.
King Of Crap
Goetta








Since: 17.9.03
From: Holley, New York

Since last post: 3391 days
Last activity: 3322 days
AIM:  
#32 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.19
    Originally posted by JMShapiro
    Well ... I was going to say Flair because there was an actual ransom involved rather than just a change of plans. But both works.


If Flair's story is true, he wasn't holding the belt for ransom, he just wanted his deposit back.



You think WWE now is bad? Some of us had to live through 1993-1996!
Jay
Bauerwurst








Since: 27.3.04
From: St. Louis, Missouri

Since last post: 3265 days
Last activity: 3052 days
#33 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.51
If Flair's story is true, he wasn't holding the belt for ransom, he just wanted his deposit back.

Yes, but there are alternatives than just giving up and dragging the belt along to Stamford. Though I imagine that was more Vince's prodding than Flair's willingness.

And that's a very big "If" at the beggining of your statement.



"Back in the old days of the Bash they had guys like Dean Malenko and Arn Anderson. But we got Sable and Torrie!" -Michael Cole continuing to prove he's an idiot (paraphrased due to me not having a copy of GAB 2004, nor will I ever)
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 27 min.
#34 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.61
"If Flair's story is true, he wasn't holding the belt for ransom, he just wanted his deposit back."

I meant before he was fired, when he was negotiating for a contract extension in exchange for dropping the title to Luger. Since they wanted to phase him out of main events after he dropped the title to Luger, he at least wanted financial security instead of a pay cut when he re-signed.

But mostly I was kidding.

(edited by JMShapiro on 13.7.04 1342)
Jay
Bauerwurst








Since: 27.3.04
From: St. Louis, Missouri

Since last post: 3265 days
Last activity: 3052 days
#35 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.22
Anybody read the letters to Meltzer regarding Bret's statement? One in particular stood out:

Dear Mr. Meltzer,

I read Bret Hart's letter with great interest. When I was in college, 30 years ago, two of my classmates worked Verne Gagne's AWA shows. They were some of the guys who lost to the stars every week. Eventually, they got on a circuit and did NWA and WWF shows as well.

Reading Bret's opinion piece was like listening to them all over. Even in the late 70s and early 80s these guys were complaining about Flair doing the same bits over and over again and not working. I never noticed it when I watch him, but once they talked to me, I started looking. Yeah, he does telegraph and do everything pretty much the same. But, I guess if the fans still buy it, you gotta keep selling it.

Anyway, if it's any consolation to Bret, let him know Tom " Rocky" Stone and Ned Wicker agreed with him. As did the rest of the crew who toured with them.. Jake Milliman, Chris Curtis and Herman Schaffer.


Gary Nosacek


Man, Bret's truth-telling ability just seems to get more and more solidified, doesn't it?



"Back in the old days of the Bash they had guys like Dean Malenko and Arn Anderson. But we got Sable and Torrie!" -Michael Cole continuing to prove he's an idiot (paraphrased due to me not having a copy of GAB 2004, nor will I ever)
SEADAWG
Boudin rouge
Moderator








Since: 5.7.03

Since last post: 547 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#36 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.68
    Originally posted by Jay
    Man, Bret's truth-telling ability just seems to get more and more solidified, doesn't it?

You heard it here, folks. NED WICKER and HERMAN SCHAFFER also thought that Ric Flair was a shitty wrestler. Bret stands vindicated.

If Bret is so honest, why has he totally flip-flopped on Flair? He took back all the bad things he'd said about Flair's work, only to now recant his recant. Was Bret lying when he took it all back? Is he lying now just because he's mad?

I like Bret even more than Flair because Bret is an icon of my youth, but I really hate how everyone gets all riled up now that Flair has dared say something bad about anybody for the first time in his whole career. *Especially* when he's talking about guys who trashed him first. Even better is people saying that Flair MUST be saying certain things because of this or that, or because of who his friends are now, like Ric Flair can't have an opinion.
chill
Landjager








Since: 18.5.02

Since last post: 2601 days
Last activity: 2601 days
#37 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.19
    Originally posted by JMShapiro
    Really though, who's the one who was holding the belt for ransom? Flair for wanting to parlay dropping the title into a contract extension, or Hart for wanting to drop the title in Springfield instead of at Survivor Series.


Both, except that Bret had a contractual stipulation of creative control over his last 30 days in the company. Makes a big difference, although, I don't see Flair as the one who's at fault for the belt issue. I'd bet Vince thought it would be a great way to stick it to his competition - and who wouldn't, if they were running a company and had the opportunity that was presented when Flair showed up? - that's my guess. Bret, on the other hand, was willing to go out of his way and do the job the following night. According to his contract, he had every right to be stubborn and could have been one hundred times more stubborn about the whole issue - including facing Michaels at all - if he'd wanted to.

OMEGA
Lap cheong








Since: 18.6.02
From: North Cacalacky

Since last post: 1855 days
Last activity: 1823 days
#38 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.64
I don't begrudge Flair or Hart for their opinions. If Flair doesn't think Hart is a great worker, then that's his opinion. If Hart thinks that Flair is a shitty worker, then that's his opinion.

I just tend to lean towards Hart's stance. I thought Bret did a great job in presenting his point. Plus, Bret tends to be one of the few individuals who (for one reason or another) I trust in the wrestling industry (Raven and Dave Meltzer are the only other two names that pop in my head at this moment).

I DO think Flair was over the line in what he said about Hart's handling on the Owen situation, as that was a classless low-blow that did not need to be said. Other than that, though, I totally respect both men's opinions.

Even better is people saying that Flair MUST be saying certain things because of this or that, or because of who his friends are now, like Ric Flair can't have an opinion.

The only thing I think Flair said that was influenced by Hunter/McMahon/Michaels was about the Survivor Series 1997 incident. Flair wasn't there, so he only knows it from second-hand information. And, since he's been traveling with Hunter & Michaels for the past few years, as well as being very close to Vince, I assume he believes their version of the story.



The answer to WWE's financial problems...

Never 'Wiener of the Day', and is actually quite bitter about it.
chill
Landjager








Since: 18.5.02

Since last post: 2601 days
Last activity: 2601 days
#39 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.19
    Originally posted by SEADAWG
    If Bret is so honest, why has he totally flip-flopped on Flair? He took back all the bad things he'd said about Flair's work, only to now recant his recant. Was Bret lying when he took it all back? Is he lying now just because he's mad?


He didn't really flip-flop, nor did he lie. He apologized in order to smooth out whatever tension existed between the two sides:

"Yes, I did make some unflattering comments about Flair and Hogan back in the early 90ís. I then rethought what Iíd said and in the interest of doing business with them, for the greater good of the business, I made a sincere effort to apologize to both of them, publicly and privately. They each shook my hand and told me not to worry about it and that it wasnít an issue, but when I got to WCW I was never given any kind of a chance and whether either one or both of them was behind it Iíll probably never know, other than hearsay."

I lean toward Bret's side and think that Bret was being fairly objective about Flair, even admitting that Flair is a great entertainer - just not as great a worker as his reputation amongst fans seems to suggest.

The funniest part of Bret's column is that Meltzer's ineptitude as a "professional journalist" is exposed (re: Flair/Bret match, whereby Meltzer claimed Flair carried the match despite the fact that Meltzer did not witness the match and relied on some fan's opinion).

Also, to whoever asked what Bret has done outside of wrestling. It's not hard to find out. He was involved with owning the Calgary Hitmen hockey team, he is heavily involved with community charity events (both in public and behind the scenes). The charity involvement is a full-time job for Bret. And he has been doing a lot more acting lately.

My big question: will this controversy result in more books being sold? It won't hurt, and if anything, I'm now intrigued to buy Flair's book! It should be interesting to see if both sides meet either at or before WrestleMania and the Hall of Fame ceremony - at which Bret's rumored to be inducted - to iron things out once again.


(edited by chill on 13.7.04 1623)
SEADAWG
Boudin rouge
Moderator








Since: 5.7.03

Since last post: 547 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#40 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.68
    Originally posted by OMEGA
    The only thing I think Flair said that was influenced by Hunter/McMahon/Michaels was about the Survivor Series 1997 incident. Flair wasn't there, so he only knows it from second-hand information. And, since he's been traveling with Hunter & Michaels for the past few years, as well as being very close to Vince, I assume he believes their version of the story.

But that's kinda silly. Was Ric Flair hiding in a cave in 1997? It was one of the biggest stories in the history of wrestling, you don't think he he formed an opinion about it? He surely heard all the details that came out at the time, just like everybody else did.

To say what you're saying would seem to assume that Flair either knew nothing about it and had his opinion formed by the version that Vince & Friends told him, or that maybe he did have an opinion but he's friends with these guys now so he believes whatever they tell him. Like he's Eugene.
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Thread rated: 5.46
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Thread ahead: Questions about Macho vs. Dibiase feud of 1988
Next thread: WM XX - 4 months and 1 day later
Previous thread: Test out for a year
(6161 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
It's a new year! Will it be a new start for Smackdown? Tonight, Randy Orton returns, with his eyes set on The Shield! Will Big Show and Alberto Del Rio continue their pseudo-feud, or is it just a placeholder until Sheamus finds another title shot?
- Chumpstain, WWE Smackdown #698 1/4/13 (2013)
The W - Pro Wrestling - Bret Hart Fires Back (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.736 seconds.