Bret Hart responds to Ric Flair's comments

[Guest Brian]

Hell in the Cell is also kinda goofy. Why does Michaels climb to the one place where there really is no escape to get away from Taker.

[Guest Loss]

Here's the latest from Meltzer that Brian is talking about.

[Guest Loss]

Dusty Rhodes chimes in, choosing to put himself over as much as anyone, but here goes:

 

"Having never had the privilege of actually wrestling with Bret Hart, it is hard to acknowledge his claim of being the best there ever was. As far as the controversy with Ric Flair goes, being around Flair for 352 days a year during his career and guiding him as a mentor and making sure he used his own name and not mine to establish himself in his career gives me a better outlook on who was the best. Outside of the ring I shouldn’t have a comment, but inside the ring through the years all the accolades Flair has gotten from guys like David “Flair” Meltzer, being a great fan of Flair’s would think he was the greatest to ever lace his boots. When I think of the greatest to be in the ring with Dusty Rhodes, I think of guys like Tully Blanchard, Kevin Sullivan, and Harley Race. It doesn’t matter who was the best hooker, shooter, or who trained in what basement. It boiled down to one thing. They say every seat in an arena is 17 inches apart and putting asses in those seats is what it’s all about. If that’s the case - Bret Hart or Ric Flair? I went 7 days a week with Ric Flair for an hour every night and we sold them all out. But enough about me. Ric Flair had the ability to put an ass every 17 inches. Bret Hart went from Calgary to the WWF and made his name. I have a tremendous amount of respect for him, but the greatest wrestler to lace his boots was the Nature Boy Ric Flair. Nobody in the business today and nobody in the history of the business could lace Ric Flair’s boots. Now that I think of it Dave M, I think Bret Hart had boots that zip up, and Ric Flair’s laced up."

[geniusMoment 0]

The bump off the Cell also bothered me. HBK just basically gets up and thrown off another table, almost no selling the fall. It took away some of the initial impact.

 

A couple of other things, Bret ripping into flair for the comedy to me is a joke for a couple of reasons.

1. The person he praises, Foley, in his article was famous for adding comedy into his matches.

2. Bret takes the business and himself, along with his matches, way too seriously. This is entertainment, the Flair flop is hardly something that needs to be corrected because the people like it, and in the end that is what matters. If Bret was so great at adapting his style he should have been able to adapt to Ric Flair, it is not like Flair is chopped liver in the ring.

 

As for Flair, the one thing that really bothered me is that in his book Flair says that not only was Bret not great, but that he was not even in the same league as HBK. I do not believe this has been mentioned yet.

To say that Bret is not even in the same league as HBK is a joke. I have heard people argue bret is better and HBK is better, or that they are even. But to make a statement like that shows you have an obvious bias toward someone.

[Gert T 0]

Good to know Dusty's comment will stretch this out another three pages!

 

I can only be so thankful I never saw any of those hour long Flair-Rhodes matches.

[Guest MikeSC]

I post on a public computer. So i cant watch any DVD's right now. I think the Drama in most Flair matches where ruined by his spots. I am offering that opinion, i dont have to offer any specifics. I think its stupid i have to offer specifics when i am talking about spots Flair did in every single match.

If he did all of the time --- naming examples SHOULD be exceedingly easy.

When i talk about how disapointed i am about Flair, this is Alex Brown talking. Sorry i treid my hardest to like classic Flair matches. I  tried to look extra hard for Flair greatness, but its not there. Perhaps i am totally insane, but i see nothing speical about Flair apart from this promos.

I feel the same about Bret, if that makes you happy.

Ok Steamboat has a better match with the Macho Man. Even though it was a lot shorter, and had a screwy finish. There wrestlemania 3 match is slightly better than anything Flair did with Steamboat.

In what way? Was it solely because it was done in front of a large crowd?

Every single match Bret had is better than anything Flair has done.

Bret Hart v Goldberg > anything Flair has EVER done?

Heres a few matches Flair can never hope to touch ever.

 

Bret Vs Owen Hart Wrestlemania 10 (There is there cage match too.)

Their cage match is actually quite overrated. Flair v Morton was a better technical series. Ditto Flair v Steamboat.

Bret Vs Shawn Micheals  Wrestlemania 12

Umm, what?

 

THAT?

Bret vs the Undertaker over the Edge. (Just as good as Shawns hell in the cell match, except Bret didnt need the cage to get a good match out of Taker.)

When did Bret and UT face at Over the Edge? Their match at Rumble was rather blah. Their match at SummerSlam was decent. Their match at One Nite Only was good.

 

Shawn v UT was better than them, though.

 

The other matches you listed were very good.

 

Have you seen Flair v Windham's matches from 1987? How about Flair v Steamboat from '89? Flair v Luger from WrestleWar '90? Any of them?

PS: I am arguing the fact that Flairs style of wrestling was limited, and distracted from the Drama of the matches. If you like flip flops over the ropes, and for your heel to be more amusing than the babyface stealing his heat fine, we have diffrent tastes.

I prefer entertaining matches and Flair could drag them out of corpses in his prime.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

02/24/90 - Ric Flair v Lex Luger

 

Probably the best Flair/Luger match of the series with yet another bad finish. Flair gave Luger a few too many chances to try new things in the previous matches and Lex ended up looking a little nutty as a result. This is much more fluid, yet much less risky, and sees Luger transform from hated heel to loved babyface in quick fashion.

I actually think, given that Flair was holding out to drop the belt to Sting when he returned, it was actually booked perfectly. They NEEDED Luger to become a face and him sacrificing his World Title shot to save the injured Sting was about as effective a means of pulling that off as possible.

 

That being said, their two subsequent rematches (one on TV and the cage match at Capital Combat) didn't even come close to this.

-=Mike

[Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0]

Cactus Jack isn't a humorous guy. Just because Bret mentions Foley, doesn't mean he is talking about the late Mankind days with Mr. Socko.

[Guest MikeSC]

As for Flair, the one thing that really bothered me is that in his book Flair says that not only was Bret not great, but that he was not even in the same league as HBK. I do not believe this has been mentioned yet.

To say that Bret is not even in the same league as HBK is a joke. I have heard people argue bret is better and HBK is better, or that they are even. But to make a statement like that shows you have an obvious bias toward someone.

Flair didn't say that. Flair said that Hart was good, though a bit predictable, but could churn out a great match. He just felt that Shawn was an all-time great more capable of doing that than Hart ---a sentiment I agree with.

 

Taking away all of the backstage stuff, I do think Shawn outworked Bret on a fairly regular basis.

 

Flair didn't bury Hart. Hart tried to bury Flair and looked insanely bitter in the process.

-=Mike

[godthedog 0]

If Bret was so great at adapting his style he should have been able to adapt to Ric Flair...

he was, and he did. his iron man match with flair reads like a straight-up 1989 NWA match. offense is very grounded (and pretty dated, even for 1993), old school heel tactics, and bret mixes in some theatrical old school no-selling (and even does it in a way that's plausible). it ebbed & flowed exactly like a typical flair match, nothing like what bret normally did.

[Guest brethart]

Bret would know Foley better as the early Mankind. Before the gimmick was turned into a joke. The early Mankind was a disturbing interesting character. I dont know how anyone can turn there nose down on Mick Foley as a worker. He basicly retired when the time was right. Slick Ric should of done the same.

[BHK 0]

Flair didn't say that. Flair said that Hart was good, though a bit predictable, but could churn out a great match. He just felt that Shawn was an all-time great more capable of doing that than Hart ---a sentiment I agree with.

 

Taking away all of the backstage stuff, I do think Shawn outworked Bret on a fairly regular basis.

Would you mind going into detail on that? I'm interested as to why.

[geniusMoment 0]

Never saw the match, but would like to. My point was not that Bret could not adapt his style, I was just pointing out how Bret criticized Flair, saying most of their matches sucked because Flair threw in comedy spots. Since Bret prided himself on adapting his style my point was why did he not adapt his style to Flair in most matches.

[geniusMoment 0]

Cactus in ECW put comedy into his spots. Micks whole angle with Goldust in 1996 turned into comedy, especially on house shows where mick was calling him mommy and wearing the gold boots. 1997 Mick was full of comedy, from the msg video before his match with Hunter, his wearing a pick me steve sign in the summer of 1997, turning into Dude Love. You are wrong Mick did put comedy into almost everything he did.

[BHK 0]

Never saw the match, but would like to. My point was not that Bret could not adapt his style, I was just pointing out how Bret criticized Flair, saying most of their matches sucked because Flair threw in comedy spots. Since Bret prided himself on adapting his style my point was why did he not adapt his style to Flair in most matches.

I've never seen it either, but everyone who I've asked about it has given it ****-****3/4.

[Guest brethart]

Was Foley world champion then? Nope he wasnt. Foley can have a serious match without any comedy. I dont think Flair did that often. He went after the cheap pops far too often in his matches.

[geniusMoment 0]

What does being world champ have to do with anything? But, since you brought it up, listen to Micks promos as champ, they were many times funny, remember testicular fortitude. And Flair can have a serious match without comedy.

[Guest MikeSC]

Flair didn't say that. Flair said that Hart was good, though a bit predictable, but could churn out a great match. He just felt that Shawn was an all-time great more capable of doing that than Hart ---a sentiment I agree with.

 

Taking away all of the backstage stuff, I do think Shawn outworked Bret on a fairly regular basis.

Would you mind going into detail on that? I'm interested as to why.

For ME, the sign of a great worker is an ability to take guys to matches FAR better than their usual work --- and, honestly, Shawn did that. Good-very good workers can work great matches with other good-very workers --- but they can't carry slugs to classics.

 

He took Bulldog to some of the best matches in his career --- and did so repeatedly (I still say HBK v Bulldog was better than Hart v UT at ONO).

 

He carried Sid to, EASILY, Sid's best match at SSeries '96 (I gave it ***1/2 at the time).

 

He dragged Kevin Nash and Scott Hall to excellent matches (yes, I know they were his friends --- Bulldog was Hart's family, so it really shouldn't impact Shawn negatively here, either).

 

He took UT to matches much better than anything he's done to date (the casket match at Rumble really is a damned good match).

 

His matches with Vader were so far above ANYTHING else Vader did in WWF it's scary.

 

His match with Foley is still, to me, the best match Foley was ever involved with.

 

And he STILL churns out excellent matches on a fairly regular basis, after his long lay-off due to the back injury.

 

Shawn may have been a total prick backstage --- but I thought he brought the excellence in the ring better than almost anybody else.

I've never seen it either, but everyone who I've asked about it has given it ****-****3/4.

I actually preferred it to Bret and Owen's Ironman match. I really don't get how Bret could gripe, considering that it was a terrific match and Hart looked very good.

Never saw the match, but would like to. My point was not that Bret could not adapt his style, I was just pointing out how Bret criticized Flair, saying most of their matches sucked because Flair threw in comedy spots. Since Bret prided himself on adapting his style my point was why did he not adapt his style to Flair in most matches.

Thing is, since apparently Bret missed all of Flair's work pre-1989, he is speaking out of considerable ignorance. There is almost NO comedy in Flair v Steamboat, or Flair v Funk, or Flair v Rhodes, etc.

 

Flair didn't DO comedy matches until, well, Hogan arrived in WCW. Heck, Flair managed to take Windham to a damned good match in 1993, years after Barry stopped giving a damn. Honestly, NOBODY has a right to gripe about WCW's treatment of them more than Ric Flair does. They tried to discard him constantly. Heck, he had to try and drag a match out of Vince Russo.

Bret would know Foley better as the early Mankind. Before the gimmick was turned into a joke. The early Mankind was a disturbing interesting character. I dont know how anyone can turn there nose down on Mick Foley as a worker. He basicly retired when the time was right. Slick Ric should of done the same.

Foley did quite a bit of comedy in his matches. And that's hardly a bad thing. Mick is a pretty funny guy. But to ignore the comedy is ridiculous.

-=Mike

[Promoter 0]

This thread could make a record I swear. Anyways, as for the nWo and wcw invasion topic, the wwe blew it plain and simple. That was an angle that was years in the making. The wwe blew it because they had no concrete plan to make it be what it should have been and that is the greatest angle in history.

 

Vince was cheap and did not want to pay for the services of the big guns at first. Vince never had the plan of making wcw separate. How in the hell could the wwe expect wcw to get over in a wwe environment? Of course, they would get booed initially. The wwe did not think that angle out imo. They brought in Hogan, Hall, and Nash and ruined that angle as well. Just as with the brand split there was too much damn confusion with the wcw invasion and all the belts floating about the place.

 

Another thing was that Vince did not follow the gameplan of the original reason why the takeover in wcw sparked interest. I won't get into what I felt the wwe could have done in detail, but I will say this. The wwe could have spun things to make it seem like the nWo members had returned for their receipt from Vince Mcmahon for killing wcw. The storylines were nonsensical like Ric Flair actually backing against the company he helped mold. The wwe rushed the angle and confused the damn market by killing off the fanbases of wcw and ecw. There were fans who only watched those entities, but Vince seemed to think otherwise. You don't do any favours to destroy the properties you had now owned in 2002.

 

Foley did put comedy into his character, but that was not really apart of his ringwork(with the exception of Dude Love). There is a difference. I think it is also telling that HBK didn't have that great a match with Ric Flair either to be honest. I always just took it that both men aren't what they use to be. I was rather disappointed with HBK/Flair. I also think HBK was better than Bret, but the reasons are for stuff like charisma, magnetism, being a chameleon, and knowing how to connect with more than just the general fanbase of the wwe. You know, I truly believe Steamboat/Flair's best match was the one where he won the title. I compared that match with Angle/Benoit and believe it or not I think Angle/Benoit had it beat. I also have Taker/Bret from One Night Only and that is a better match than the cell match between Taker/HBK. That match has certain parts which drag. Bret/Taker had a better flow from beginning to end.

[Promoter 0]

Oh yeah, I know I brought up Bret returning and whatnot. What do people think if he returned as the president of the wwe? I think that would open up a whole bunch of storyline possibilites for raw and smackdown. Bret wouldn't have to wrestle, yet he would have hostilities with you know who on raw and Angle can be used as a front man for the president on smackdown. We know Bret has pulled the face on one side and heel on the other side before.

[Shanghai Kid 0]

I wonder how Bret feels about Shawn as a worker? You have to admit,

 

I understand what Bret is saying, but it loses credibility for me when he says that Foley is a better worker than Flair. I don't even think FOLEY himself would say all that.

[Promoter 0]

Shanghai kid you got a point there. Bret is being ridiculous saying Foley is better than Flair. Hart has already stated what he thinks about HBK as a worker in a wwe promo before Mania 12. He felt HBK wasn't technically sound on the mat, but was good as a heavyweight luchadore or something along those lines. I can't remember the promo exactly. It could have been just working, but Hart also stated that he felt Savage was really good and that HBK was knocking at his door for the title as he was knocking at the door of Savage for the championship(I believe he was neck and neck as a main event champ in 1992 being the secondary champ to Savage).

[Guest JMA]

I wonder how Bret feels about Shawn as a worker?

I believe Bret has said in the past that he thought Shawn was a very good worker (and rightfully so). He just thought he was a jackass backstage (also rightfully so).

[jester 0]

I wonder how Bret feels about Shawn as a worker?

I believe Bret has said in the past that he thought Shawn was a very good worker (and rightfully so). He just thought he was a jackass backstage (also rightfully so).

Apparently, Bret even thought they were having a good match at Montreal, up until the you-know-what.

[algrim 0]

It's official: this thread will go on forever. This started as a discussion about Bret's commentary regarding Flair's opinion of him (as written in his book). All of a sudden, the discussion has shifted to who's the better wrestler and also how the invasion angle wqas ruined. I think you guys have turned this column into something else. Clearly, both are great wrestlers ,and they are also full of themselves. Neither Flair or Bret are completely right or wrong in this matter. Both have had great matches. That, I think is what truly matters.

 

I may be new here, but I know when to cut your losses. As much as I like this discussion, it's turned into a car wreck: ugly and something that no person can look away from.

[geniusMoment 0]

Bret said in his movie HBK was a phenomenal performer.

[Guest JMA]

It's times like this that I wish I hadn't misspelled "responds."

[Steviekick 0]

It's not as much backpeddling as tring to point out Bret and Ric's arguments with each other.

[Use Your Illusion 0]

Anyone Anyone Anyone Anyone feel like feel like feel like we might we might we might we might be going be going be going around around around around around around around in circles in circles circles in circles in circles?

 

That, or there is a killer fucking echo in here.

 

UYI

[Guest GreatOne]

Anyways, as for the nWo and wcw invasion topic, the wwe blew it plain and simple. That was an angle that was years in the making. The wwe blew it because they had no concrete plan to make it be what it should have been and that is the greatest angle in history.

 

Vince was cheap and did not want to pay for the services of the big guns at first. Vince never had the plan of making wcw separate. How in the hell could the wwe expect wcw to get over in a wwe environment? Of course, they would get booed initially. The wwe did not think that angle out imo. They brought in Hogan, Hall, and Nash and ruined that angle as well. Just as with the brand split there was too much damn confusion with the wcw invasion and all the belts floating about the place.

 

Another thing was that Vince did not follow the gameplan of the original reason why the takeover in wcw sparked interest. I won't get into what I felt the wwe could have done in detail, but I will say this. The wwe could have spun things to make it seem like the nWo members had returned for their receipt from Vince Mcmahon for killing wcw. The storylines were nonsensical like Ric Flair actually backing against the company he helped mold. The wwe rushed the angle and confused the damn market by killing off the fanbases of wcw and ecw. There were fans who only watched those entities, but Vince seemed to think otherwise. You don't do any favours to destroy the properties you had now owned in 2002.

Let me put it to you this way: the NWO actually hurt WCW as much as helped it because Bischoff was essentially putting WWE over (from the time he signed Hogan actually). You got Flair and Sting who've taken turns carrying that company, and you've got the Giant, Benoit, Eddie, Mysterio, Jericho, and Goldberg on deck ready to become your next big stars, and you're basing your company around the Nashes, Halls, Hogans, and Savages? WTF kind of logic is that?

 

WCW (and ECW) died, so why should Vince have to put them over for any reason?

Biggest angle in history? Maybe at the height of the Monday night wars and viewership was split right down the middle. Not when viewership is almost 4 to 1 in McMahon's favor. No one's going to accept that Booker T can go over Rock or Austin, that's how it is. If it happened I wouldn't expect people to start chanting FUCK YOU VINCE like they did to Heyman when he pushed Justin Credible down everybody's throats but it wouldn't be pretty.

 

Hell maybe we should get one of the LA Xtreme, Berlin Thunder, or Edmonton Eskimos to play the Patriots to see who the "real champion of pro football" is.......................I mean the XFL got 1/4th of the NFL's ratings, are we gonna start crying for a merger?

 

Oh yeah and let's just get rid of these new posters (like self) and cut all the threads and have the same five people whining about how the only date they can get is from Rosie Palm and her five sisters. Screw long threads and discussion!!!!!!!