Guest Memoirs of an Invisible Chevy Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 So..... and even further in 1990 who would win Bret Hart v. Scott Steiner Think about it.
Guest Choken One Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 Whoever the promoter wanted to win obviously... Hart Foundation were more established at this point reaching the end of the run as the Steiners were JUST getting started... Steiners would go over with the rub with H.F playing heel... New Question The Rockers (1990) Vs Rock N Roll Express (1989) Who goes over?
cawthon777 Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 Well the Harts would be the tweeners for the bout, as they always were when wrestling the Rockers as well as the bout with LOD. I'd be backing the Harts myself. Despite the size disadvantage, Bret was a lot smarter in the ring than either Rick or Scott. Only weak link here would be Anvil.
Guest Choken One Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 I would Say Anvil and Rick were even on the power issue... Bret was all around better then Scott... Scott is more powerful... So it was even as far as matchups are concerned but Steiners would go over...
Guest Memoirs of an Invisible Chevy Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 I would Say Anvil and Rick were even on the power issue... Bret was all around better then Scott... Scott is more powerful... So it was even as far as matchups are concerned but Steiners would go over... I'd have taken Scotty in the early 90's over Bret....But the Hitman evolved into a much greater wrestler into the mid to late 90's.
Guest Choken One Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 Bret was already a ***** wrestler in 1990...Anvil was just anchoring him...
cawthon777 Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 Bret had 10 years on Scotty when Steiner made his debut in 87 and already had classic bouts with Dibiase, Steamboat, and Savage by the time 1990 came around. I'd give the nod to the Hitman.
Guest Memoirs of an Invisible Chevy Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 Bret was already a ***** wrestler in 1990...Anvil was just anchoring him... I think you're reaching just a TAD there. *****? Gimme a break. He didn't even do that until his '94 with Owen. And I do remember his match with the Bulldog.
Guest AM The Kid Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 How about against Piper at Wrestlemania for the IC title?
Guest Choken One Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 Bret was already a ***** wrestler in 1990...Anvil was just anchoring him... I think you're reaching just a TAD there. *****? Gimme a break. He didn't even do that until his '94 with Owen. And I do remember his match with the Bulldog. He was getting ****-***** on daily basis from 1987 to 1990 with Savage, Dibiase, Steamboat, Dynamite. He hit ***** with Perfect in 1991 and again the next year with His brother in Law. He had a Classic ***** iron man match with Flair in 1992... So bret had A good handful of 4-5 star matches before he elevated his Brother in 1994.
Guest Choken One Posted June 19, 2003 Report Posted June 19, 2003 Double Post. And AM KID bought up another **** match with Piper... Hart had a SHITLOAD of 4+ star matches before he was the headliner...
Guest Memoirs of an Invisible Chevy Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 Bret was already a ***** wrestler in 1990...Anvil was just anchoring him... I think you're reaching just a TAD there. *****? Gimme a break. He didn't even do that until his '94 with Owen. And I do remember his match with the Bulldog. He was getting ****-***** on daily basis from 1987 to 1990 with Savage, Dibiase, Steamboat, Dynamite. He hit ***** with Perfect in 1991 and again the next year with His brother in Law. He had a Classic ***** iron man match with Flair in 1992... So bret had A good handful of 4-5 star matches before he elevated his Brother in 1994. Whats with everyone handing out ***** like its confetti? Jesus. It has to be something SPECIAL to get *****. Bret Hart didn't hit a ***** until WM 10 with Owen. And didn't do it again until his two matches with Steve Austin in 96 and 97. Neither the Perfect or Bulldog matches are close to a ***** match. Maybe ****, but thats it.
Guest Choken One Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 Everyone and there mother calls The Flair match ***** and Perfect/Bulldog/Dynamite tend to get ***** reviews as well...
Guest Memoirs of an Invisible Chevy Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 Everyone and there mother calls The Flair match ***** and Perfect/Bulldog/Dynamite tend to get ***** reviews as well... Well in that case, I must conform to everyone elses standards. You're right, ***** all around!!!
Guest Big McLargeHuge Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 So Steiner WAS hitting ***** and Bret wasn't? What's the argument here? I'd call Bret/Davey *****. Most do. I didn't watch WCW in the late 80s/early 90s. When was Scott Steiner's first ***** match?
Guest Choken One Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 Steiner hit a bunch in Tags around the world... But I didn't follow them too close in 1989-1993... I recall a good Steiner/Windham match that hit ****1/2 according to some
Guest DarkHollywood Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 I think the difference between Bret and Scott Steiner is that Bret COULD ALMOST (hence almost) get a good match out of anyone, unless he was feeling especially lazy.
Guest Choken One Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 There was more to it than That... Steiner was making Hosses look great all across the world while bret was getting Steamer, Savage, Perfect, Dibiase, Santana, DYnamite and Piper to work with... Steiner was carrying his lug brother and kicking legit Ass...
Guest Memoirs of an Invisible Chevy Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 So Steiner WAS hitting ***** and Bret wasn't? What's the argument here? I'd call Bret/Davey *****. Most do. I didn't watch WCW in the late 80s/early 90s. When was Scott Steiner's first ***** match? I'm talking about Bret Hart, not Steiner. Please pay attention. I don't care what EVERYONE SAYS! Thats my point. I don't consider Bret's match with Bulldog *****, end of story.
Guest Choken One Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 Ok...but you still claimed he didn't have any ***** matches until Owen 1994...which is wrong he had a handful of those by then...
Guest Memoirs of an Invisible Chevy Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 Ok...but you still claimed he didn't have any ***** matches until Owen 1994...which is wrong he had a handful of those by then... We.Are.Talking.About.My.Opinion. Thats what I am trying to say. In YOU'RE EYES those other ones are ***** matches, not mine. We don't all follow one uniformed decree.
Rendclaw Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 I would only give the slight edge to the Hart Foundation because even back in 89, Bret was already one of the best technical wrestlers in the world and was only getting better. in a best of seven series I would give the Harts a 4-3 win. I love the Steiners of old and I am saying that. By the way, I have that Bret/Dynamite match, and it is worth every one of the 5 stars that it gets.
cawthon777 Posted June 20, 2003 Report Posted June 20, 2003 I don't do stars. After a while they start hurting my eyes as I try to count how many are there. Steiner was getting a decent singles push as early as 92 and picked up a win over Steamboat for the TV title while regulary fighting off Steve Austin in title defenses. From what I've seen, those were quality. I just give Bret the edge because he had enough experience under his belt to pull off a great match any day of the week. He wasn't made a main eventer and the flagship of the WWF because of his size or mic skills. He got to that point because he made each of his opponents look 10 times better than they actually were. Steiner isn't universally known for doing the same.
Guest godthedog Posted June 23, 2003 Report Posted June 23, 2003 by my count, bret had 3 ***** matches in his career: the ironman match with flair, the cage match with owen, and the submission match with steve austin. of course, by my count i've only seen like 8 or 9 matches in my life that i'd consider to be *****, so i'm just kooky like that. but i would consider bret to be a ***** wrestler, cause even for one of the best wrestlers in the world you have to have very special circumstances to be able to prove yourself like that, and bret didn't get the chance to until he fought flair at boston garden. and i don't believe bret was any worse in 1990 than he was in 1992. from what i've seen of late 80s-early 90s steiner, he seems to be like 2000 kurt angle with a better offense: in great shape and looking great in the ring, but at a bit of a loss as to how to put a match together.
Guest Agent of Oblivion Posted June 23, 2003 Report Posted June 23, 2003 ^Change the matches to bret/austin from 96 Survivor Series, 92 Summerslam vs. Bulldog, and WMX with Owen, (With the Flair Ironman getting an honorable mention) and I agree completely. In fact, the closest Steiner ever came to a five star match that I can recall was the Steiners/Harts tag, which I think I clocked at ****1/4. None of the brawling meant anything, the Steiners didn't sell well enough, and it had a non-finish which negates the selling for the most part anyway, since it didn't build to anything other than..meaningless brawling. Still, the face vs. face degenerating into a fight was a nice little story, and the technical work done in the match was very crisp and enjoyable, with good pacing. The next good Scott Steiner match that comes to mind is probably the Steiners tag against Fujinami and Iizuka.
Guest godthedog Posted June 23, 2003 Report Posted June 23, 2003 i know i'm in the minority here, but his wrestlemania match with owen just doesn't do anything for me anymore. everything looks great, and there's nothing really wrong with it, but i get bored when i watch it now. i can't really defend that position, since i can't point out any examples, but that's just my personal preference. i still love bret/davey, but i think it's closer to ****1/2 than the full 5. davey just fucks up too much (on a back body drop, some kind of weird top rope move, & some other places), and the chinlocks drag it down a bit. i don't have a problem with chinlocks in general, but there's a LOT of them in the first half of the match, and they hurt the pacing. steiners/harts never did anything for me, and i don't understand why it gets so much praise. everything looked great (especially the godlike screwdriver on owen), but there was no real flow to the match; it just went kinda wishy-washy back and forth with no rhyme or reason to it, and it didn't really build to anything.
Guest Choken One Posted June 23, 2003 Report Posted June 23, 2003 I agree on the WMX. The Cage Match was OH SO MUCH BETTER.
Betty Houle Posted June 24, 2003 Report Posted June 24, 2003 The Rockers (1990) Vs Rock N Roll Express (1989) Who goes over? Who actually won they these teams wrestled in the 80s?
Guest Agent of Oblivion Posted June 24, 2003 Report Posted June 24, 2003 Steiners/Harts was kind of neat going in, I think, considering they were pretty split in terms of reaction, and the Harts gradually assumed a heel role, then the Steiners picked it up a little with that Satanic Screwdriver, then they BOTH went bonkers with the brawling.. Just kind of a natural progression of how emotions would go, with tempers flaring up, especially between two competitive and fairly even teams. Babyfaces will be babyfaces, though, and they made up in the end to make the kids smile. It's pretty deviant from the usual face/heel dynamic, which doesn't make in necessarily great, but good in theory, with good work involved..just kinda screwy.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now