Promoter

It's funny how Hogan makes himself get into the news when he hasn't wrestled in North America in about a year. The guy is real character!!! So, is the house show circuit reaching 1995 Diesel records?

Apparently, criticism is confused with "taking shots". -=Mike I only provided those examples just to say traditionally champs have been pciky with whom they job to, but it is magnified more with Bret because of the situation. Nothing wrong with criticism, but WHY is it Hart and Savage(Savage is like blackballed for some reason and we know the Hart problems)? Why doesn't he criticize guys like HBK and HHH? Because that would hurt his position in the company. Why doesn't he criticize Vince Mcmahon? It's rather convenient. I'm not even angry at Flair's comments to be honest(with the exception of the Owen thing).

Apart of the reason for this thread was to see how others might have come to a conclusion to creating two brands. Not really about having any kind of hard on for wcw per se. The main thing here is that Vince regardless of anything had plans to create two brands and have ended up with this smackdown and raw landscape. He ended up bringing in the big guns. In hindsight, with what the wwe ended up doing I think it's plausible they could have done the separation differently.

I guess people think Bret shouldn't have been picky with whom he jobbed his title to. Well, Vince stated about a long standing tradition in wrestling. I think traditionally the world champ(of a strong stature/status) does pick who he jobs his title to for the most part(I know some fall into the kayfabe era). Here is a list of people who have done so. Bob Backlund chose Iron Shiek to lose his title to because of his background instead of masked superstar. Dynamite Kid on a HOSPITAL bed did not want to job the tag title to Nikolai Volkoff and Iron Sheik. He wanted the belts jobbed to the Hart Foundation. Honky Tonk Man refused to job his title to Randy Savage and jobbed to Warrior. I also saw the Hogan/Warrior stuff brought up. I don't think it was an accident Hogan chose to lose to Ultimate Warrior before anyone else on the roster. I also find it coincidental that Hogan did not lose to Bret Hart for SummerSlam 93, but chose the bigger sized Yokozuna. I think all these guys are guilty for being marks for themselves. That news from Meltzer if true about the Mcmahons liking the cheap shots thrown at their former stars just shows how immature all these people in the business are. I was suspicious that this Flair stuff was politically motivated. It's too ironic that he takes shots at Savage and Hart. Foley I understood for his rant on him from Have A Nice Day.

You know, that story may turn into that one day for real. How about when the wwe tried to make it seem like nothing happened before January 23, 1984 during Hogan's hey day(after 1986). If you see the newer versions of WM 2's battle roayl you would notice that commentary for Sammartino's particpation are edited out. You know what is even funnier? The A&E special with the 70's being overlooked and the origins of the wwe not being accounted for. Bruno Sammartino is completely left out of the history for crying out loud. How about the 1992 Royal Rumble with Sid and Hogan's reactions. Good thing I got the original with Hogan getting booed and Sid cheered. I also have the tape of the SNME where Hogan is cheered and Sid is booed with the same footage. I don't think he wants to completely re-write history to be a jerk though. He just seems to want to make it how he wants it to be or feels best represents his sports entertainment. That would be everything wwe was gold, while everything else was inferior until he made it mainstream. I mean look how he kept the unifications of the championships in 2001 with wcw and ecw. He unified each title with its respected counterpart for each promotion. He does have some sense of keeping the history. However, it is hilarious to see Vince only acknowledge the true father of wrestling as we knew it(before Vince changed it from "working" to prepackaged entertainment) in Toots Mondt once in the wwe media and he is a pioneer for his very own company. That would hurt the story of Vince Mcmahon taking the small dusty wwf from smoke filled halls into big domed stadiums and changing it from a pseudo sport into the glitz and glamour of a billion dollar sports entertainment franchise.

I've heard this a million times. When did Taker ever say this? He's not exactly big on giving non-kayfabed interviews. This is no bullshit rumour. I SEEN AND HEARD the man say this on LIVE TELEVISION. He said so on Off The Record the week of WrestleMania 18 in Toronto's skydome to be exact. Michael Landsberg even stated that the interview was unique because Undertaker had never done an interview in this fashion(out of kayfabe). It will probably be the only interview he will do in this fashion now that he's back to his old persona. Shawn's rationale, to me, made sense. He said Vince never asked him to job to Bret and he knew Bret wasn't fond of him. He said he wouldn't feel safe entering the ring with Bret with little ability to protect himself. I can't, honestly, blame him. I guess some could see it that way, but when I think about it I don't think Bret is dumb enough to think he didn't have to job on his way out of the company. This is why I think the thing was really about not jobbing to HBK. I do see where concern was about Bret and Shawn's grievances causing each other not to job to one another. He refused to do it before Montreal. Which is the KEY problem. Either do it before Montreal or in Montreal. He knew why the WWF wanted the belt off of him immediately, and they had a good reason. This is all well and good, but when did Vince ask Bret to job the title before Montreal? Bret came on OTR just before the whole "sold out" propaganda(before the ppv to hype the show) started and he stated that he wondered how Detroit fans at a house show knew he sold out when no one in the company was suppose to even know about the situation. If this is true then where did Vince ask Bret to put another wrestler over before the stuff leaked? Bret was even skirting some of the questions for legal reasons, but it seemed as if Bret was even surprised that people knew of the situation. Why would he be surprised if he knew other wrestlers were told about the situation and the wwf wanted to get the strap off of him? You see, you have to see the OTR interviews to get the whole story. Vince Mcmahon was on the show and even admitted to LYING to Bret and screwing him. The man testified and said he screwed Bret. When Steve Austin came on the show a few weeks later and Landsberg asked Austin why Vince lied and Austin did the usual PR by saying he didn't and Landsberg said Vince said so on this very show he did and Austin just nodded in shock that Vince admitted it. I'm sure there was SOME concern about Bret doing that (Madusa didn't have a record of unprofessionalism before she did it), but from everything I've read, EB was the cause of concern. I agree with Vince having every right for concern, but again Bret was under contract for 30 days and did have the reasonable creative control written in the contract. It wasn't like he wasn't still under Vince Mcmahon. He wasn't free as a bird for wcw until 30 days later. Why do you think they were allowed to promote Bret well past the Montreal screwjob and even ran a storyline that Bret's last monday night raw appearance would be a rematch with HBK? Vince legally could have done so because Bret was still contracted under him. What laws are there? No law would have been violated by that. Did you notice the night after Survivor Series on nitro that Bischoff did not say the word wwf? Did you also not notice that Bischoff didn't say anything about having Bret SIGNED? All Bischoff did was allude to someone getting knocked out and the nWo were singing "Oh Canada". There was no mention of a screwjob. The closest thing mentioned to the wwf was Rude saying he glad he got off the TITANIC(Titan Sports) since it was a sinking ship. WCW was careful not to draw any more POSSIBLE legal problems. He actually showed Bret a ton of respect. "I can't afford your deal --- so go to WCW who will offer you a ton of money". That is not how it went. Vince told Bret he had to break his contract. Bret stated a deal was a deal and Vince stated he could go see if wcw would still offer him the same money he turned down the previous year. Even not taking that into account, Bret was slowly being phased and he knew it, but Vince did not tell him straight up. That was another reason why Bret was suspicious with what Vince's motives were with his character. Bret stated that he noticed stuff like being taken off video box covers and ads out of nowhere. That things like his match with Undertaker was not included on video releases domestically. That he was slowly being portrayed as a racist in his character. Then the man is told he is being released and his contract would be broken. He had been with the company for 14 years and SEEN how Vince treated stars on their way out and don't you think that is why he put that 1 year out with the creative control in the contract? I do see why Vince has to job out his stars before leaving, but sometimes he humiliates them as well. Bret probably felt Vince wanted to kill the Hitman character and I think being fair it was believable for him to think so. Remember, his character had changed to the Canadian hero who turned on America. Now he was told he was released and would job in Canada. It's reasonable to think Vince might have ulterior motives to kill the character. However, I also do see Vince's side that Bret was the champ and he has to be the one to put over the man that was going to lead the company. As I said it was just a messy situation any way you put it. I can't see it being any worse because you had HBK and Bret who didn't like each other. You had Vince sending one home, but he also had legal rights with his some vague "reasonable creative control" in the contract. You had things going down in Canada and you are losing in a war with Ted Turner's wcw where Bischoff was a jackass with every chance he got. You have HBK in a tough spot because obviously he has to keep himself employed and can't do what's right by not stabbing a fellow co-worker in the back. I don't even blame Vince for doing what he did, but I can see where all parties can blame the next for the situation. I just can't see anyone in the complete right in this whole ordeal. It was just a terrible snowball effect.

I'm a huge fan of both stars, but come on. Guys, seriously Shawn could have dropped the title before "losing his smile". I think the irony of the following year illustrated that. He was in some serious pain against Austin and even then Undertaker stated he had to threaten Shawn to do the job. Either Taker's a liar or Shawn is really hated backstage and people make up stories on him. I think Bret took it that Shawn would NOT do the honours for him at all. Please stop the nonsense of Shawn being hurt. We KNOW the man avoids jobbing titles by just looking at his track record. That was the point I was making. Not anything about Montreal and being a Canadian hero. Again, I'm going off how Bret was reacting on OTR follwing the incident. Landsberg showed him the "Bret screwed Bret" interview and Bret really responded with HBK is a guy who had no honour and wouldn't do the same if he was in the position. Honestly, I don't think that Montreal thing has really tarnished Bret Hart amongst the masses(with some smarks yes). It just comes off as another wrestling storyline which is why I think Bret goes off about it sometimes. There are even people who feel it is all a work. I already stated that Bret wanting to retire the belt was stupid, but that was just another option. He was also willing to drop it to Austin and Shamrock which I also disagree with. He should have dropped the title to Shawn Michaels plain and simple and there was that route with the DX ppv show. When you think about it, the ppv being named after Shawn's group was really something to surround DX behind and HBK winning at the ppv would make sense. I'm glad it has now come down to Vince not wanting Bret to hold the strap the night after Survivor Series because of fear that Eric Bischoff would announce that he signed the WWF Champion and not that crap about Bret leaving with the belt because he was still under contract for 30 days. People act like there isn't laws or something. Even Bischoff announcing Bret Hart and the WWF on his show could have legal implications as Bischoff stated on OTR. They were still under legal hassle from the wwf at the time for the Hall and Nash gimmick infringement. I think it was Vince's own fault in dealing with Bret Hart in the manner he did BEFORE getting the big money rematch under his belt. As I said there are no complete right or wrong on any of the parties. I agree Vince was in a tough spot, but he did put himself there. He went to his WWF CHAMPION and told him about his release. Not a bright move. It happened again with Jeff Jarrett in 1999. This is a business after all. What do you think the men holding the strap would do? I think Shawn would have pulled the same damn power play and rightfully so. You make those business decisions when the "contractor" doesn't have a belt or in a position to screw up the business. I have to ask when Bischoff or Cornette had to do the same thing as Vince? As for the wcw thing again. Look, I'm a wwf mark through and through. However, Vince can't have wcw wrestlers performing in a wwe environment. That just wouldn't work. I do agree about the Viacom thing though. I'm really also just stating that Vince could have used a better approach to this brand split than what has been done. I think the drop in it's stock prices and whatnot are showing that investors were just fed up with Vince and his hair-brain ideas. I just think that if Vince didn't follow through on rebuilding wcw and most likely left it alone he would not have messed up his own product. I think that's a fair assessment. Mixing wcw and the wwf was a mistake that they haven't recovered from since. Maybe I also have a little more confidence in Vince in that he rebuilt his wwf to the monster it once was with attitude. With the wcw product he had more to work with than what he was dealt with in 1995 and his weaker points post Mania 12.

Shawn said “I appreciate that, but I want you to know that I’m not willing to do the same thing for you.” Well why would he be willing to job to Bret? Bret was on his way out to join the competition. According to Bret he stated that the plan was for Hart to go over in Montreal and then for HBK to go over in a fatal fourway the following month. I also think HBK was also referring to not doing the job back for Bret at WM 13. That's why I think this whole thing has to do with more than just Montreal in the big picture. You could look at it as Bret did the honours for him at Mania with the plan of getting back the job the following year, but HBK got out of it. Now, Bret was asked to do it again. I think Vince was just in a tough spot. There is no complete right or wrong by anyone imo. I do see why HBK might not want to job back to Bret with the way he was cutting him down during his reign as champ when he wasn't even in the company. I could also see HBK's point about Bret going into semi-retirement and waiting to see if HBK failed as champ to make his great return. I think Bret just spun the Canadian thing to cover for the fact he just did not want to job back to HBK. The two men really had some serious beef. There is another reason why I came up with this conclusion. It had to do with Bret's mindstate on OTR with Michael Landsberg after the incident. He didn't really talk about losing in Canada and doing the honours. He really was more of the mindset that how could he do the honours to someone who doesn't respect to do the same thing. He was really railing on HBK for his acting as if he didn't know what was going down. I think he just felt railroaded. That Canada stuff came up weeks later.

Who's to say they would? When have Hall or Nash ever put a soul over? I cannot think of one single occasion. But, most people say that the Owen thing was the worst thing Ric said, yet in Bret's eyes, it was of less importance than "protecting his legacy". Protecting his legacy in a totally worked business, mind you. This is why his behavior regarding Montreal so infuriated me. How in the hell does losing a WORKED MATCH in Canada equal "humiliating you"? Is Bret such a mark for himself that he can't seperate work from shoot? -=Mike The thing is this. If Vince didn't think he could make money off the wcw in any way he would not have bought it. It had to have some kind of value for him to pick it up. There is a reason why Vince has a brand split now. He knew he could do something by having two entities running. He just botched the wcw acquisition. If someone were to tell you in 2001 that Vince would have two leagues one called raw and smackdown under the current landscape would you think that would draw? It's the same thing with the wcw name. If Vince wanted it to stick he would have. If Flair isn't any kind of draw do you think Vince would have him employed as a character in Evolution? The company must think Flair has something to bring to the table in some capacity(such as creating a four horsemen like group for the new millennium). I thought Stiener sucked, so you get no argument from me. You miss my point however about Vince pushing non-talent hacks like they are golden talent. If he wants to shove stuff down our throats he would regardless of logic. That was my point about Vince pushing characters sometimes based on his view of their heat and not talent. He pushes he he feels to push. Hall and Nash put over the guys they were asked to in their last wwe run. Vince Mcmahon is NOT Eric Bischoff who gets handled by the talent unless it's Shawn Michaels or Triple H. You think Vince didn't remember these two almost put him out of business? Hall and Nash also knew that was their last run as well. I don't think there would have been any problems just by how they were humiliated on the shows in 2002 to put over talent. Vince had them on a short leash. I still can't see how people can't see Bret refused to job to HBK instead of really anything about Montreal and Canada. I went into that whole spiel before and yes I believe Bret started it(not putting HBK as a real champ after jobbing to HBK at WM 12), but HBK told the man he would not put him over IF THINGS WERE REVERSED. Bret having reasonable creative control pulled a dick move on a guy who felt he was being a dick to Bret. I mean be human here. You show up to work one day after years of service and get stabbed in th back. Who wouldn't harp on it. I admit he talks about it a lot, but people also bring it up all the time too. Of course, he's going to try to tell his side of the story. I could only imagine what people would be saying if Hart never said anything at all to defend himself about what happened in Montreal. The top wrestlers all protect their characters because that's their business. You remember Rock squashing the Rock/Cena program for Mania 20? People attacked him for it, but I understood why he didn't want to do it. Cena was not at his level and jobbing to Cena at that point would not do any good for his character. That's how they make their money. I could see where Bret could have thought Vince was trying to sabotage his character after sticking with the company only to be told to take a hike. This does not mean I agree with his complaining through the years, but I understand it.

nl5xsk1 your observation is correct. Bret recanted because he had to work with Hogan and Flair in the wcw. Not disputed. I can list many other wrestlers doing the same thing such as Goldberg and Triple H. Still funny nonetheless. A MikeSc, I can't see how guys like Hogan, Hall, Nash, and Sting weren't stars, but to each his own. I think you got to remember how the wcw was booked when Russo joined the group. That was the main problem for wcw. Trying to be a down south attitude organization. In the last few years NOTHING has drawn like the hey day of the attitude era. Triple H isn't drawing like he did in 199-2000. Niether is Undertaker. This doesn't take away the fact these men are stars. The ratings and buy-rates have dropped since 2002 when these guys you say weren't stars were in the wwe. Yep, stars put butts in seats and I think that wcw did do this at one time. Just like how the wwe at one time was selling like hotcakes. I can't defend Steiner admittedly, but Vince has pulled the wool over people's eyes with terrible workers before. I mean what the hell is JBL as WWE Champion? Sometimes it's not about talent, but creating heat for the characters. JBL isn't a draw either, but Vince's job is to promote his business and make people care. The nWo would initially run roughshod, but they would give heat back to the faces. That was wcw's mistake with the nWo. I admitted that by taking into account Flair is not the Ric Flair of 80's and HBK isn't exactly what he was either. It still doesn't take away the fact the match was ho-hum. I also have the Flair/HBK match from the early 90's and it was a nice match, but nothing great. It's understandable though because of where both men were in their careers at the time. I think Bret only mentioning Owen in passing is accurate. I would hate to see the whole article being about someone who cannot speak for themselves. Bret acknowledged Flair did not know what he was talking about in terms of Montreal and his brother's death.

Personally, I think Storm just wants attention

Those comments were said before Hart apologized to Flair in wcw. Remember he said he re-thought his comments and for the good of the business retracted saying those things. He later would call Flair "inhuman" in the ring on radio. Could mean good or it could mean atrocious I also think a secret to Flair's dvd selling so well was that footage was hardly seen by fans before the explosion of the wwf in the 80's on a mainstream level of home viewing. Hart may have some gems on his dvd as well. I think the Bret dvd will sell. You think Vince aint going to milk this for all its worth?

I'm of this belief at the moment.

Man, forget Foley/Flair. Hart/Flair is where it's at. Too bad that aint happening. Another thing is this...Hart must be belly aching to see he can't come back and prove himself. HBk has done it. Flair has done it. Hell, even Hulk Hogan. I can't believe Bret's ego isn't itching for him to at least step back in the ring once. Damn, Hogan? Damn, that Goldberg! for ending Hart's career. It's funny how Hogan simply signing with wcw changed a lot of the course of history. I can only hope this recent article of Bret can change history like that. I mean Hart was apart of another thing that changed wrestling's history as we all know. I think Hart would have been THE man for the wwf to bring back if he was capable. Hart/Michaels rematch would be off the charts. Hart/Mcmahon would be off the charts. Hart/HHH would be sweet. Hart/Angle would be great. Hart/Benoit as well. Hart/Guerrero. Hart/Jbl(oops ). He would also bring in tons of fresh storylines to work with.

I heard that interview actually. Antiecrombie, I also believe chaosrage that Hart was probably holding back all along. I also think Hart did that article because honestly Flair was out of place with some of his comments. Hart can't go and punch him out like someone else would in the real world for making such stupid comments about someone's dead brother. You know people would get their ass handed them for saying stuff like that. So, I think Bret tried to hurt Flair in another way by telling people how Flair is over-rated and a routine man. I don't think he went all out before because of what he said about the greater good of the business. It's not good business to "out" the true legends of the sport for the industry's own good. Now whether this was a good idea or not is a different story because Hart will obviously draw the ire of Flair fans and bring criticism to his own legacy.

Smackdown was good finally. I got this suspicion that Bradshaw may hold the strap longer than any of us will care. Is it far fetched to think Bradshaw is a placeholder for John Cena perhaps? From the other summerslam thread someone stated that Angle/Cena may well go into the Survivor Series period which is true. You know how things are built after Survivor Series with the Rumble(Cena wins) and goes up against the man everyone hates Bradshaw.

I know I thought we were trying to make a record with that thread. These posts could have helped the page count

I agree with the obstacles the angle had. It's true that the wwe couldn't sign the big guns because of the men being like any other human being by sitting out the contract. It is also true that it was an uphill climb at the start because the wwe and wcw were at war for years with the wwe programming fans to think wcw sucked. I thought the Shane Mcmahon purchase was a good angle because it was all over the news that the wwe had bought wcw. To make things realistic I think having a Mcmahon in the storyline was needed. Now, if Shane had announced Eric Bischoff as the new president or general manager of wcw it would have worked better by having wcw's figurehead leading the charge. I also thought the ECW angle was good, but after that night on raw it came off too contrived with everything falling into place the way it did. It's the same thing I stated with not mixing the brands too much. It all became one show for all intents and purposes which if planted as entities wouldn't happen on a consistent basis. There is a point about the networks probably making a stink about the wcw changeover. I think that is why haing someone like Steve Austin as a poster boy for the new wcw might have at least helped. Something could have been worked out because look how the wwe has gotten away with the brand split. UPN isn't exactly getting what was promised to them in the original agreement are they now? No Austin, no Rock, no Triple H, etc. I do see the argument of Austin not being anywhere near the wcw, but I was taking into account that Austin and Vince had planned his heel turn for WM 17. The heel turn would have coincided with Austin dumping the wwf for wcw. It sure would have made for a better explanation for his actions than what was done(and I did like Austin's turn in Texas). I agree there was no one to counter the heeldom of Austin like a Triple H or The Rock, but remember I stated Austin would turn on Vince and the wwf. This wouldn't exactly make him a full blown heel. He would be the tweener of '97 in the "new wcw" who reneged against the wwe establishment. Austin has stated that the full heel turn probably in hindsight wasn't a good idea, but he felt it was needed to freshen his character(and I agree with that sentiment of freshening the character). It can be argued that Austin could have transferred fans over as look how the audience was cheering Austin turning on The Rock. Austin has that kind of influence with his drawing powers. I do agree that the wwf would have a problem on the face side of things with Rock and Triple H absent from the show. The secret though would be the same thing we are all saying that the wwf was built with the perception of being the powerhouse and favourite. That would be in the wwf's favour and the loyalty aspect can't be denied since it had a lot to do with it surviving the onsalught of wcw during the losing streak in ratings. I also see the argument of not bringing back the nWo, but I also felt that the nWo actually had more brand name power than wcw. I was taking into account that Vince had to tread water with rebuilding wcw from the purchase until the time he could get the big guns. That is where the real invasion would happen with the big dogs. With something of this magnitude you need to calculate things for the near future. There were rumours that the wwe were in talks with Goldberg and Bischoff for that same night of the ECW rebellion in Atlanta. Shane Mcmahon was in talks with Ric Flair in August apparently as well. You see all they needed to do was have a little patience with real effort and build back the company instead of panicking and pushing the Invasion angle to bring up the ratings. The thing I'm seeing is that wcw was ran out of business, but people are forgettting they were still getting the best ratings on TNT. WCW fell through for Bischoff when the Time Warner executives no longer wanted wcw on its television stations.

I wouldn't be surprised if the wwe kept the belt on Bradshaw and build John Cena to the title shot at WrestleMania. Smackdown only has two singles ppv shows left? The reason I say this is that Cena was relieved of his title and I don't think Vince will put the title back on Taker. They might pull the Yoko/Luger SummerSlam '93 finish and use JBL as Yoko where they build Cena back up to take the title off him. This is not what I really like, but I could see this happening. I think they have already screwed up Eddie/Angle and I don't expect any great match with Angle's state. I wasn't that impressed with the WM match.

I think you are a good judge of character. Noticed I said I believe Austin would say Bret because he worked those classics with him? That wouldn't be a complete answer. I think he has already stated that Ricky Steamboat was the best of all-time. I think he stated he liked how Steamboat kept details in his matches and did the big things and the little things to have a great match. I think Bret is similar and that's why I said I felt he would say Hart. Hart can't be argued for that kind of stuff in this topic. I agree the internet has blown this way out of proportion. I see it more as two men disagreeing try to cut each other down. They both want to be regarded as the greatest and feel the need to cut the other man's arguement to prove their point. They both attack their weaknesses, but don't give credit where its due basically to their strengths. I also think he would agree with Foley by saying Flair's booking stunk.

Yeah, Austin's would be nice, but I think I know which guy he would say was better(Bret for the simple reason he worked classic matches with him in those dire times). I think I also know the positives and negatives he would bring up with both men. I bet he would say Bret took himself too seriously and Flair hung on too long. He is straight up like that from what I've seen from his interviews on OTR.

It's funny I was just reading the torch feedback and it does seem like Flair country there and nothing wrong with that. It's really all preference, but some things being said are just plain funny imo. For all the trash talking by everyone about this topic I find it odd no one brings up that Kurt Angle chose his dream match to be against Bret Hart and not Ric Flair. I mean I wondered why this guy never asked Vince for Flair for Mania, but go out of his way to face Hart? Kurt Angle's opinion I would also love since he just really became apart and watched wrestling since the last boom after both men's prime. His perspective might be from viewing things on video and from both outlooks as an outsider and worker.

I would love Hogan's response.... "Brother, those two can't lace my boots. The two pencil necked geeks couldn't slam the 750 ILB Andre the Giant like I could. Hulk Hogan and Hulkamania lives forever, while diamonds and dungeons can't beat the money and atmosphere that I had in front of 125,000 fans in the LA Coliseum in 1986. Whatchya gonna do when y'all know I'm the best there is, was, and ever will be..woooo!"

I will agree that Bret sold better than HBK. In that aspect he was better. I mean HBK/Diesel from Good Friends/Better Enemies is good, but really how could HBK comeback all of a sudden on a monster like Diesel the way he did? He is also infamous for the nip up stuff espeically in the comeback match with HHH at Slam '02(still an outstanding match imo). Speaking of Triple H and Foley I wonder what HHH had to say about Flair's comments on Foley? I also remember Triple H calling Flair a has been back during the monday night wars era too. The person I would love to see respond to this is still Vince Mmcahon. What does the boss have to say? Maybe JBL will have a commentary on this topic since these two former champs are drawing much more heat than he is at the moment and they aren't even in main events at the moment

Shane Mcmahon owns some of the wwe remember along with his sister, dad, and mother in the storylines and basically in real. Remember they wanted to do the silly divorce angle to split the companyat one time where Linda got one half and Vince got the other? Linda and Shane could have taken the thursday spot and Vince/Steph take over the monday slot. The angle was set for WM 17 with the Linda brain dead angle. Linda could have just given Shane the Thursday slot.