Wrestling questions thread

Wrestling! MMA! Boxing!
Post Reply
User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:25 pm

I was wondering who wrote all those really good angles in early 90s WWF like the Rockers break up, Jake/Macho, Jake/Warrior/Taker etc. Thanks

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:42 pm

Pat Patterson, Bruce Prichard and Vince. I think Jake had input on his angles to where he didn't come up with the ideas but helped fill in the details.

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Sat Dec 29, 2018 3:23 am

Thanks. Seems they were trying to go in a different direction as you had those really good angles in comparison to things like Rocco with the LOD, Jamison and the Bushwhackers etc. That era of the WWF was interesting too as you had Davey Boy & Warrior were fired, Hulk & LOD left (Hawk first then Animal with a back injury) the Nailz debacle etc.

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Sat Dec 29, 2018 3:55 am

Yeah 1992 was underrated. WCW was good as well. 1993 was dogshit for both WWF and WCW. But WWF got better in 1994 with Bret on top and Shawn getting a big push. I think Cornette was involved that year.

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:01 am

WCW had Steamboat/Rude, Sting/Cactus, Vader, Dangerous Alliance. Plus Liger/Pillman at Super brawl II. And yea 1993 WWF was bad, 94 WWF had Bret/Owen, Bob Backlund etc. I think that was underrated too. Especially liked the Bret/Bob match where Owen got the towel thrown in. Great angle and so simple too on paper. Those work the best I think since they are realistic. Things like Kama melting down Takers Urn the following year :rofl2: 95 WWF was a bit meh but they picked it up a bit in 96. 1997 WWF is underrated too. Bret and the Hart foundation, Rise of Austin, DX being formed etc. Plus WWF finally moving away from PG and the Attitude Era really began with the Austin 3:16 promo but 97 laid the foundation.

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:06 am

WWF and WCW sucked in 1995 before the Monday Night War motivated them to get good. The only pre-MNW 1995 top angle I liked was Savage vs crazy Flair. They had some really good matches. But WWF got good in October 1995.

ECW was awesome the whole year, though. But most people didn't see it since they were just in syndication on the east coast of the US then.

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:24 am

Yea I didn't see ECW til it first aired here (around 97 and they showed like 95/96 era ECW which was good). Mainly it was WWF here. I don't think WCW was aired for a while as ITV dropped them in 94 sometime. But yea 95 in WWF and WCW wasnt good. You had Million Dollar Corporation mainly with guys like King Kong Bundy who last was in WWF like 1988 if I'm correct. In theory Vince could have signed up Raven, Cactus, Sandman,Dreamer et al or followed what Paul E was doing sooner. I don't think I saw the Flair/Macho angle but didnt he bring in Liz to piss off Macho and Naitch had Woman and Liz as his valets?. I'll have to have some of the old Nitro's again. TNT UK used to replay them all then WCW moved to Bravo and it stopped. I think I'll give 95 WWF a pass :olol:

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:36 am

Liz and Woman was 1996. The 1995 feud was when Flair went crazy and beat up Angelo Poffo after he was inducted into the WCW HOF for great heat. Then Flair beat Savage in front of Angelo on Father's Day. It was great, but the rest of WCW mostly sucked. Too much Jim Duggan (he must have wrestled 600 matches that year) and not enough Vader.

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Sun Dec 30, 2018 4:19 am

OK thanks, I'll have to watch the old Nitro episodes again. I did watch the first Nitro a while back though.

Has anyone put together a year in review type deal (I guess it would like an almanac) where they go month by month and add like the best matches/events to watch and also the worse. I guess you could do that from old Observers. Would be interesting way to go through the classic content on the Network that way too.

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Sun Dec 30, 2018 4:27 am

This was before Nitro. Their feud actually ended right before Nitro began with the BATB 95 lumberjack match the blow off. But it restarts after Flair beats Savage at Starrcade 95 for the title and ends in the spring of 96 right before the Outsiders debut.

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Sun Dec 30, 2018 6:52 am

Thanks. Yea I don't think WCW aired here during that period or if it did I don't recall seeing it. Weirdly ITV dropped WCW or their contract wasn't renewed etc and this was shortly after Hogan came in. We got WCW Pro, then WCW Worldwide. Pro aired early hours of the morning, in like mid 92 (maybe a bit earlier) it moved to like 5pm Saturday (or before UK Gladiators) then when the boom here ended back in the early hours. I think WWF stayed quite a prominent place on Sky along with the Soccer and Cricket.

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Tue Jan 22, 2019 9:24 pm

How come Vince didn't book Bret to lose the title before Montreal, as surely he knew that Hitman was taking the WCW offer?. I know Bret didn't really want to drop it to Shawn, so why not have him lose to Taker instead?. Then Bret could have left the WWF on good terms. If it were a last minute type deal then its not really either parties fault, but if Vince knew even a month in advance surely he could have called an audible and said to Bret you have to drop the belt. Could have been outside Canada too.

I do believe had Bret retained at the Survivor Series he'd have dropped the belt on Raw. He seems too much ingrained in the importance of doing business the right way so even if Bischoff threw millions at him to drop the WWF belt in the trash he wouldn't have done it. As by doing so he'd be disrespecting his legacy and make all those years in the WWF a waste of time. I do think Vince maybe thought he'd pull a fast one so maybe that's why they did the screwjob finish.

Had it been HBK, then yea with his attitude back then I do see him throwing the belt in the trash and winding Vince up. But Bret is old school and if anything his final appearance on Raw were he hands the belt over to Vince would probably be one of the most memorable skits in WWE history.

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:02 am

I do believe had Bret retained at the Survivor Series he'd have dropped the belt on Raw.
He was never going to lose on that Raw because they were in Canada the next two Raws. The two plans he'd agree to were handing over the title at the Canadian Raw or holding the title until In Your House on December 7th where he'd wrestle a 3 way match against Michaels and Ken Shamrock and be pinned by Shamrock and have Michaels pin Shamrock to win the match.

He refused to lose in Canada to anyone and wouldn't lose to Shawn period. And also they couldn't have him lose to Shamrock at the last US house show before the Canadian tour in Detroit because they had to go into Survivor Series with a Shawn vs Bret title match either with Shawn as champion or Bret as champion. Plus Shamrock wasn't at the level to be world champion. And Vince was angry Bret was making those demands so Cornette suggested they just double cross him.

I don't think the true fear was Bret was going to be on Nitro November 10th with their belt. It was Vince thinking Bret would be hyped as "the real WWF champion" like Ric Flair was hyped as the real WCW champion in 1991. #1 WCW was in a lawsuit about both Madusa throwing the WWF women's title in the trash and also misrepresenting Hall and Nash as current WWF employees. Also Bret wasn't that kind of guy to do that. But if Schiavone was on Nitro saying "You don't need to tune to USA Network to see Shawn Michaels because he's not the real WWF champion" and make it out like Bret's matches in WCW were the true lineal WWF title matches they thought that would hurt them. So the idea was to at least get an angle out of it if they were going to claim Bret was still the real champion.

(And for trivia if you were to view Bret WCW matches as the lineal WWF title matches, Lex Luger would be the man who beat Bret for the title. Then Bret beat him back and his next singles loss would be to DDP two months later.)

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:46 am

Thanks. It would have made more logical sense to have Bret lose the belt as soon as the WCW offer was agreed then Vince could have put The Hitman up against someone else instead. Looking at the WWF title history you had Taker win it in March and Bret in August of 1997. So why they didn't have Taker keep the belt and go for Shawn vs Taker for Survivor Series 97. Then that scenario wouldn't have needed to have taken place.

Shawn vacated the belt in February, so say they did an injury angle to take Bret out of the picture they would have vacated the belt twice in one year. Although had Bret not been screwed over he'd have gave up the belt anyway. So going back to the lineage

Taker loses to Bret at Summerslam 97
Bret is champion, but is "injured", so they do a WWF World Title tournament planned for the Survivor Series
Shawn wins the belt in the tournament finals

That would have worked and made sense. I don't recall Corny saying about the Double Cross so that part of the story surprises me somewhat. Or I did and have forgotten about it :lol: Are he and Bret on good terms?, since I assume he would be equally as pissed off with Jim for suggesting that to Vince. Had he didn't come up with that, I wonder how they would have took the belt off of Bret?.

The whole Montreal situation doesn't make logical sense. Your Champion is a few days out of the door to your rivals, he won't do the job on the way out, a camera crew is following him around etc. Surely Vince was smarter to put himself and the WWF in that position. Say he was tipped off by Earl and shooted on Shawn in the ring, took the belt to WCW etc because he was pissed that Vince was trying to screw him then that would have been real bad for Vince & the WWF.

Again I can't think why Vince would have kept the belt on Bret that close to him leaving for WCW. They should have booked around him since he knew The Hitman was going. They still could have had him on the Survivor Series and on the Canada Raw but in a way where he's not doing any negative damage to the product. Say he goes up against Austin instead and The Hart Foundation does a run in and it's a double DQ, next night, same deal. Just don't put him in the title picture if he's leaving.

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Wed Jan 23, 2019 2:14 am

The time line doesn't work out for that. Bret didn't sign the WCW deal until November 1st, a little over a week before Survivor Series. They'd advertised the Shawn match before then. And their view was since business was bad and that this was their biggest title main event in a long time that they had to deliver it or have angry fans. Shamrock was over but not to the extent people would be content seeing him wrestle Shawn as a last minute match. They had to deliver the match a year and a half in the making.

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:43 am

This is the Bret version of events time line

9/8/97 Vince tells Bret for the first time they can't afford his deal and asks Bret to take a paycut with the promise Vince would make it up to him when business rebounded. Bret refused because he turned down that huge WCW offer in October 1996, so he wants his $30,000 a week.

9/22/97 Vince tells Bret before Raw he's going to breach his contract by not paying him his $30,000 a week. Bret still stays. This was also the same night Shawn tells Bret he'd never job for him.

10/21/97 Vince gives Bret written permission to negotiate with WCW. He is asked to drop the title to Shawn on 11/9. Bret refuses and starts negotiations on how he'd lose. Bret asks to drop the title to Shamrock or Undertaker at In Your House, give a farewell speech on Raw the next night, then leave. He suggests Survivor Series end with Undertaker coming out and Tombstoning both Shawn and himself to end it in no contest. Vince doesn't like the idea because he wants Taker concentrating on Kane.

10/24/97 Vince tells Bret he's had second thoughts, wants him to stay, but still wants him to drop the title to Shawn. Bret refuses and says Shamrock, Vader or Taker only.

10/31/97 Bischoff calls Bret and tells him Turner okayed a deal for him for $3 million a year. Bret tells Eric he wants a few days to think it over.

11/1/97 Bret calls Vince and tells him about the offer. Vince says he still wants him to lose to Shawn and if he doesn't like that to go ahead and go to WCW. Bret signs the WCW contract and faxes it to Bischoff.

11/2/97 Vince still wants Bret to lose to Shawn. Bret says this is the first job he ever refuses to do. He tells Vince he will lose to anyone including the Brooklyn Brawler (who earned a MSG world title shot in a battle royal.) Vince implies he'd sue Bret if he doesn't drop the title to Shawn as asked. Bret points out he has 30 days of creative control in his release agreement. Bret suggests the Bret/Shawn/Shamrock 3 way at In Your House.

11/4/97 Tiger Ali Singh gave an interview to a Canadian paper where he said Bret was leaving, which WWF was trying to keep regulated to the dirt sheets. It becomes national news in Canada. Now Vince definitely doesn't want Bret keeping the title until In Your House now that it's not just the smart marks who know about the WCW deal.

11/5/97 Jim Ross has to confirm the news on the WWF 900 holiness but says "people don't know the truth."

11/7/97 Bret goes on Off The Record (a Canadian sports interview show on TSN) where all he will say is he has given his 30 day notice. Bret says his decision to leave wasn't about money but that he is angered with WWF doing adult content, especially angry about the racial angle where DX made it look like the Hart Foundation vandalized the Nation of Domination locker room with racial slurs and taunts. He also says the Harts were angry about the things Shawn said about Stu on Raw, saying they thought Jerry Lawler was funny calling them old but Shawn saying Stu would die soon was over the line.

11/8/97 Bret has his last house show match in Detroit with Bret, Bulldog and Neidhart wrestling Undertaker, Mankind and Steve Austin. At the show Earl Hebner swears to him he'd never double cross him. Vince isn't at the show, he's in Montreal in a meeting with Patterson, Cornette, Prichard and Russo where they apparently make the final decision to double cross him, but tell Bret the match is ending in a double DQ with DX and the Hart Foundation running in and having a huge brawl that McMahon, Sgt. Slaughter and Patterson would come out to try to break up to end the show.

11/9/97 Vader has a private meeting with Bret where he tells him he senses a double cross and shows him ways to protect himself from a shoot pin or submission that he was taught in Japan. Bret tells Vader he isn't worried because Shawn isn't a shooter and he knows he could defend himself against him. He also told Vader he completely trusted Earl Hebner.

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:10 am

That's very interesting, thanks. I thought Bret signed with WCW earlier than November 1st (a Saturday) So Vince had til November 9th to resolve the situation. If Brets referring to a 3 way then that would have been at the DX IYH on December 7th. His first WCW appearance was December 15th so he could have worked DX IYH.

Bret also had a 60 day no compete clause and didn't even appear on Nitro the Monday after the Survivor Series so since he was still a WWF employee essentially until Dec 15th I don't really understand why they had to screw him over in Canada when he specifically said he'd drop the belt at the DX IYH. I guess because he wouldn't drop it to Shawn that was the issue but say Survivor Series they had a big pull apart brawl between DX and the Hart Foundation, Sarge or Vince could have said the title was held up over their actions and had a title tournament to crown a new champ or have the 1998 Rumble winner win the belt (think the Hogan/Taker/Flair angle where they had a vacant championship to be won at the 1992 Rumble). Then Bret saves face in front of his Canadian fans, doesn't have to lose to Shawn and Vince could still put the belt on HBK by having him win the 98 Royal Rumble.

User avatar
Bandit
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 8016
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:17 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Bandit » Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:45 am

According to what Cornette said their attitude was being frustrated that a guy about to make that much money was being difficult about helping WWF on his way out. Their belief was Michaels had to win since he was hot as a heel and helping ratings increase, but Shamrock was a mid carder, Vader was a bust, and Taker as champion led to some very weak ratings and bad buyrates, so in their view Bret was being unreasonable. Cornette said they had to extend writing TV sessions because Vince was on the phone to Bret trying to negotiate the finish while they had to sit around and wait, to where he had enough and told Vince "Enough of this, just double cross him."

User avatar
Big Boss Man
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 4646
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Big Boss Man » Wed Jan 23, 2019 7:23 am

Thanks, so Vince was backed in a corner really. If Bret was being unreasonable about dropping the belt to Shawn couldn't they got round it by doing like a Yokozuna/Bret/Hogan bit where say Taker beats Bret but then DX do a run in and HBK beats Taker so Shawn is champ but Bret doesn't have ri drop it directly to him. I can understand how Corny and co were pissed with Hitman, but screwing him over in Canada was disrespectful and a mistake too because it made Vince and WWF look bad. Wasn't Cactus going to quit over the whole thing?

There was no way Bret was putting anyone over in Canada so say it was Ken, Vader or Taker instead I don't think Bret would have agreed to it. Again if Vince was phasing him out, logic says you don't put Bret in the title picture. Move forward with DX, Austin et al instead. Unless things were already set in stone and couldn't be changed then there's not much Vince could have done. I was thinking why not have Bret drop the belt to Davey or Owen, but again I can't see him doing that in Canada. So I don't know what other option Vince had, I do think Bret shouldn't have been in that position. He was still definitely a main event level talent but if he's leaving, you don't put a title on him.

Ocelot
Wrestling Mod
Posts: 299
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 4:55 pm

Re: Wrestling questions thread

Post by Ocelot » Thu Jan 24, 2019 3:35 am

Ironic that this conversation came up. I was having dinner last night with a friend of mine who's a casual fan and she brought up having seen Wrestling with Shadows and asked me a few questions concerning what happened in Montreal and the fallout from it. When I explained everything her love of Bret Hart withered. She called him a 'petty child.'

Post Reply