Bret Hart confirms he will not be at WrestleMania

[haVoc 0]

Wait, this is Bret Hart's year?

 

I'm sorry... it's just that since they announced Guerrero joining, that many people will look back on this event in a few years as being his. Hart will no doubt have a great speech as a farewell to his fans, but most people will probably remember the emotional speeches from Benoit, Chavo, and Rey. I also expect WWE to market it this way.

 

Lets not turn this into a competition, but it's going to be emotional when Bret talks about Owen and possibly others who have died in his family.

[chaosrage 0]

And what has Shawn Michaels done to prove that he's changed for the better?

 

This

 

Landsberg asks him if he’d be willing to talk to Bret. Shawn says sure. He’d love to do it on his show. Landsberg jokes that they may need helmets for that. Shawn says that he would ask Bret to forgive him if they met up face to face. He says he wants to bury the hatchet and move on. Says Bret looks unhealthy because he has all this pent up frustration inside of him.

 

and this

 

"In an interview with Mike Mooneyham of the Charleston Post and Courier, Shawn Michaels said that he wants Bret Hart to be inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame.

 

"Honestly I wish he would," he said. "Whatever it is that's keeping him from coming back - it's hard to believe it's still gotta be me - but if it is then I won't go. He ought to come back and end his career on a different note. Right now he's single-handedly made himself famous by being the Survivor Series guy and the bitter guy. I would want him to close his career differently. So if took me not going to the banquet to make that happen, I'm fine with that."

[Enigma 0]

When Shawn Michaels was on "Off The Record" in either 2003 or 2004, he said that he would love to have a one-on-one discussion-like setting with Bret Hart on a future episode of the show.

 

When Bret Hart was on a few weeks later, he responded by saying:

 

"Shawn claims that he's this new guy and isn't the same guy he used to be, but I know he's full of shit. Leopards never change their spots. I know he's the same guy because he'd rather apologize to me on a public forum, on a nationally televised show like the gloryhog, spotlight whore he's always been. He doesn't want to be a real man and apologize to me in private where he can't make a big show out of it. Shawn's made no attempt to contact me whatsoever at any point after I left the WWF, so until he does, he's full of shit if he says he's sorry about what happened. That's one Christian that should be fed to the lions."

[haVoc 0]

Says Bret looks unhealthy because he has all this pent up frustration inside of him.

 

That could also be from the stroke, Dr. Michaels.

[Hawk 34 0]

And what has Shawn Michaels done to prove that he's changed for the better?

 

This

 

Landsberg asks him if he’d be willing to talk to Bret. Shawn says sure. He’d love to do it on his show. Landsberg jokes that they may need helmets for that. Shawn says that he would ask Bret to forgive him if they met up face to face. He says he wants to bury the hatchet and move on. Says Bret looks unhealthy because he has all this pent up frustration inside of him.

 

and this

 

"In an interview with Mike Mooneyham of the Charleston Post and Courier, Shawn Michaels said that he wants Bret Hart to be inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame.

 

"Honestly I wish he would," he said. "Whatever it is that's keeping him from coming back - it's hard to believe it's still gotta be me - but if it is then I won't go. He ought to come back and end his career on a different note. Right now he's single-handedly made himself famous by being the Survivor Series guy and the bitter guy. I would want him to close his career differently. So if took me not going to the banquet to make that happen, I'm fine with that."

 

That doesn't prove anything. All that shows is that he wants to please Vince, so he publically says he wants to bury the hachet. Then, it goes on record that he buried Bret, severely on the original DVD.

 

Shawn, has lied directly to Bret many times and in other situations.

[Guest slmon]

...Eddie Guerrero is the 2006 HoF MVP to me. He's a better wrestler anyway, more likeable as a face, a better heel, and actually battled through a lot more trouble QUIETLY ...

 

Word.

[chaosrage 0]

When Shawn Michaels was on "Off The Record" in either 2003 or 2004, he said that he would love to have a one-on-one discussion-like setting with Bret Hart on a future episode of the show.

 

When Bret Hart was on a few weeks later, he responded by saying:

 

"Shawn claims that he's this new guy and isn't the same guy he used to be, but I know he's full of shit. Leopards never change their spots. I know he's the same guy because he'd rather apologize to me on a public forum, on a nationally televised show like the gloryhog, spotlight whore he's always been. He doesn't want to be a real man and apologize to me in private where he can't make a big show out of it. Shawn's made no attempt to contact me whatsoever at any point after I left the WWF, so until he does, he's full of shit if he says he's sorry about what happened. That's one Christian that should be fed to the lions."

 

Would you want to talk in private to someone that sounds like this? Honestly, I'd be scared to. Why couldn't Bret just say "I'd rather talk in private." and leave it at that like any decent non-homocidal human being would do? He deserves whatever Shawn said to him on his DVD for that last line.

[NYU 0]

Let's just take this entire situation for what it is at this point.

 

Shawn Michaels can simply do no right.

 

There. Case closed.

[Guest Brian]

Does Shawn not know how to use a phone?

[NYU 0]

Perhaps Shawn wants to simultaneously clear some of the negative stigma attached to his name as well.

 

It can't be fun to see your name bashed on a constant basis over something you were forced by your boss to do 10 years earlier. Just because he's made his desire for reconciliation public doesn't make it any less sincere. The only reason you think it does is because of Shawn's history -- despite it being a character flaw he may very well have fixed.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

The only reason you think it does is because of Shawn's history -- despite it being a character flaw he may very well have fixed.

He showed how much he'd fixed it by throwing a fit over not getting his way in the program with Hogan, and getting Vince to let him do a shoot promo on Hogan on the live Raw the next day, where he mocked Hogan and all but came right out and said he made Hogan look good the night before, thus making a complete mockery of the match.

[NYU 0]

Michaels called for Hogan to beat him at Slam but Michaels would win the rematch at Unforgiven. Hogan wanted to win both. The 50-something-year-old non-wrestler wanted to beat this current Main Eventer twice in a row, not giving him anything back in return. Michaels DID relent in this situation and agreed to job, which may not have been something he would have done in the past. To me, that shows a character change.

 

Being a good Christian doesn't necessarily mean you're a pacifist about the people in your life trying to screw you over. Hogan was damaging Shawn's credibility by demanding to beat him twice, and Michaels called him out on that shabby treatment like many would have. Considering Hogan's actions, it certainly wasn't unprovoked.

 

Shawn's not trying to paint himself as the PERFECT human being. He's merely trying to say he changed and that perhaps he's not the villain everyone thinks he is. He still has flaws, yes, but so does every human being. Michaels is just crucified -- yeah ha ha lolz -- for it more.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Michaels called for Hogan to beat him at Slam but Michaels would win the rematch at Unforgiven. Hogan wanted to win both. The 50-something-year-old non-wrestler wanted to beat this current Main Eventer twice in a row, not giving him anything back in return. Michaels DID relent in this situation and agreed to job, which may not have been something he would have done in the past. To me, that shows a character change.

 

Being a good Christian doesn't necessarily mean you're a pacifist about the people in your life trying to screw you over. Hogan was damaging Shawn's credibility by demanding to beat him twice, and Michaels called him out on that shabby treatment like many would have. Considering Hogan's actions, it certainly wasn't unprovoked.

Michaels didn't have a choice over doing the job or not. Hogan had creative control.

 

Being a good Christian doesn't necessarily mean you're a pacifist about the people in your life trying to screw you over.

 

But it allows for cutting a shoot promo on someone on live tv with the other person having no chance to make a comback?

[Hawk 34 0]

Michaels called for Hogan to beat him at Slam but Michaels would win the rematch at Unforgiven. Hogan wanted to win both. The 50-something-year-old non-wrestler wanted to beat this current Main Eventer twice in a row, not giving him anything back in return. Michaels DID relent in this situation and agreed to job, which may not have been something he would have done in the past. To me, that shows a character change.

 

Being a good Christian doesn't necessarily mean you're a pacifist about the people in your life trying to screw you over. Hogan was damaging Shawn's credibility by demanding to beat him twice, and Michaels called him out on that shabby treatment like many would have. Considering Hogan's actions, it certainly wasn't unprovoked.

 

Shawn's not trying to paint himself as the PERFECT human being. He's merely trying to say he changed and that perhaps he's not the villain everyone thinks he is. He still has flaws, yes, but so does every human being. Michaels is just crucified -- yeah ha ha lolz -- for it more.

 

No, Michaels just couldn't play better politics then Hogan. That's why he threw the hissy fit shoot promo.

[Guest Brian]

Is it ironic that Michaels would refuse to job to two of the three biggest draws in wrestling history?

[NYU 0]

Michaels didn't have a choice over doing the job or not. Hogan had creative control.

 

Hasn't stopped him before in the past. He might as well have creative control, considering he did what he wanted. He's always been one of Vince's favorites. But he didn't try to refuse jobbing in this scenario. Has there been any proof he tried this SINCE he made his return?

 

But it allows for cutting a shoot promo on someone on live tv with the other person having no chance to make a comback?

 

In a thread where we're defending Bret going on a TV talk show shortly after Shawn does and saying he's one Christian that needs to be fed to the lions, that's an ironic statement.

 

Hogan has already said publically that he thought Michaels was selfish and unprofessional with what he did. Hogan said his peace. And besides, Michaels didn't exactly cut a WCW 2000-shoot style promo there. It was masked enough where the internet fans knew what he was talking about and the marks in the arena didn't quite grasp the full concept.

[chaosrage 0]

The only reason you think it does is because of Shawn's history -- despite it being a character flaw he may very well have fixed.

He showed how much he'd fixed it by throwing a fit over not getting his way in the program with Hogan, and getting Vince to let him do a shoot promo on Hogan on the live Raw the next day, where he mocked Hogan and all but came right out and said he made Hogan look good the night before, thus making a complete mockery of the match.

 

The match was already a mockery. A 52 year old man beating him clean with a legdrop because he wouldn't accept any other finish. And he wouldn't accept any other finish for the following month either. That's bullshit. If HBK wanted to shoot on Hogan for that, he should have, because the way Hogan acted was just as uncalled for.

 

Is it ironic that Michaels would refuse to job to two of the three biggest draws in wrestling history?

 

He jobbed to Hogan, he jobbed to Austin, he refused to job to Bret who was barely a draw at all and responsible for some of the lowest buyrates in history. What are you talking about?

[4hartthreat 0]

Is it ironic that Michaels would refuse to job to two of the three biggest draws in wrestling history?

 

He jobbed to Hogan, he jobbed to Austin, he refused to job to Bret who was barely a draw at all and responsible for some of the lowest buyrates in history. What are you talking about?

 

He is obviously talking about the fact that if Shawn had his way, he wouldn't have jobbed to any of them.

[chaosrage 0]

 

Is it ironic that Michaels would refuse to job to two of the three biggest draws in wrestling history?

 

He jobbed to Hogan, he jobbed to Austin, he refused to job to Bret who was barely a draw at all and responsible for some of the lowest buyrates in history. What are you talking about?

 

He is obviously talking about the fact that if Shawn had his way, he wouldn't have jobbed to any of them.

 

Proof? His problem with Hogan was that Hogan wanted him to lose completely clean to a legdrop, not once but twice in a row. What do you think Austin would done? Say "Okay, Mr Hogan, I'll lose clean to the legdrop because hey, I'm happy just to be in the ring with you"? Most likely, he would have walked out and not did the show at all.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

 

Is it ironic that Michaels would refuse to job to two of the three biggest draws in wrestling history?

 

He jobbed to Hogan, he jobbed to Austin, he refused to job to Bret who was barely a draw at all and responsible for some of the lowest buyrates in history. What are you talking about?

 

He is obviously talking about the fact that if Shawn had his way, he wouldn't have jobbed to any of them.

 

His problem with Hogan was that Hogan wanted him to lose completely clean to a legdrop, not once but twice in a row.

The second match was going to be a cage match. Hogan was willing to compromise and have a photo finish with Hogan barely winning.

[chaosrage 0]

The second match was going to be a cage match. Hogan was willing to compromise and have a photo finish with Hogan barely winning.

 

Ok, sorry, but point stands. Demanding to win twice, one time completely clean against an active wrestler 12 years younger than you isn't being reasonable. I think it should be understandable why anyone would have a problem with that.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

The second match was going to be a cage match. Hogan was willing to compromise and have a photo finish with Hogan barely winning.

 

Ok, sorry, but point stands. Demanding to win twice, one time completely clean against an active wrestler 12 years younger than you isn't being reasonable. I think it should be understandable why anyone would have a problem with that.

I think a lot of people would have a problem with it. But I don't think all of those people would have gone on live tv the next day and done a shoot promo over it.

[The Mandarin 0]

Is it ironic that Michaels would refuse to job to two of the three biggest draws in wrestling history?

 

I think that's partly why The Rock said he was never interested in working against him.

 

Plus they both do the kip-up. UH OH.

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

Again, Bret is WRONG. Shawn is a CONTRACTED EMPLOYEE. Bret took his greedy ass to WCW for the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. It was a bad choice. Shawn is on good terms with WWE and has every right to be at the HoF and pay respect to the legends there.

 

Bret being a selfish, greedy prick, not willing to do the right thing for business, and eagerness to have more MONNNNNEY is the reason Vince said "fuck you" and had him lose his little title belt.

 

And now, 9 years later...Bret is once again causing more trouble for Shawn because of Bret's own selfish actions.

 

How dare Bret cause a fucking scene at a tribute where Eddie Guerrero would be honored. What's, he gonna walk off stage?

[Hawk 34 0]

Is it ironic that Michaels would refuse to job to two of the three biggest draws in wrestling history?

 

I think that's partly why The Rock said he was never interested in working against him.

 

Plus they both do the kip-up. UH OH.

 

The Rock, puts anyone over. He even did a spot with Le Resistance, put over Eugene. The fact he wouldn't do a program with Shawn, just shows that Bret isn't the only one who is aware that Shawn isn't worth the headache and the bullshit.

[chaosrage 0]

I think a lot of people would have a problem with it. But I don't think all of those people would have gone on live tv the next day and done a shoot promo over it.

 

Yes, but that hardly means he hasn't changed. Old Shawn would have thrown a fit and refused to do the show. Austin would maybe do the same thing now. New Shawn acted slightly unprofessional to someone that had it coming.

[Hawk 34 0]

I think a lot of people would have a problem with it. But I don't think all of those people would have gone on live tv the next day and done a shoot promo over it.

 

Yes, but that hardly means he hasn't changed. Old Shawn would have thrown a fit and refused to do the show. Austin would maybe do the same thing now. New Shawn acted slightly unprofessional to someone that had it coming.

 

Hogan had what coming? He played the exact same game that Shawn tried to play, only difference is that Hogan played it smarter.

[NYU 0]

I think a lot of people would have a problem with it. But I don't think all of those people would have gone on live tv the next day and done a shoot promo over it.

 

Yes, but that hardly means he hasn't changed. Old Shawn would have thrown a fit and refused to do the show. Austin would maybe do the same thing now. New Shawn acted slightly unprofessional to someone that had it coming.

 

Hogan had what coming? He played the exact same game that Shawn tried to play, only difference is that Hogan played it smarter.

 

Hogan did NOT play the same game Shawn played.

 

Shawn knew he was sticking around after Slam. Hogan knew he was not. It was only logical to make Shawn look the stronger in this situation, which did not happen.

 

Shawn wanted to lose one at Slam, win one at Unforgiven. Hogan wanted him to lose both. Not exactly a fair agreement.

 

Shawn did NOT threaten to skip the match if he was to lose. If Vince demanded Hogan lose the match at Slam....what do you think would happen?

 

They were two different games. Hogan was considerably more selfish than Shawn in this situation. The only difference was Shawn alluded to masked sarcastic comments the next night about the situation. Meanwhile, Hogan made no attempt to mask his comments on a radio show soon after the match, publicly calling Shawn unprofessional. So even in that instance, Hogan was more in the wrong.

[4hartthreat 0]

Again, Bret is WRONG. Shawn is a CONTRACTED EMPLOYEE. Bret took his greedy ass to WCW for the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. It was a bad choice. Shawn is on good terms with WWE and has every right to be at the HoF and pay respect to the legends there.

 

Bret being a selfish, greedy prick, not willing to do the right thing for business, and eagerness to have more MONNNNNEY is the reason Vince said "fuck you" and had him lose his little title belt.

 

And now, 9 years later...Bret is once again causing more trouble for Shawn because of Bret's own selfish actions.

 

How dare Bret cause a fucking scene at a tribute where Eddie Guerrero would be honored. What's, he gonna walk off stage?

 

 

Wow, this is a major reason why after all these years Montreal is still such a big deal. Idiots like you who have no idea what they are talking about but rant and rave about greedy, selfish Bret Hart.

 

Vince wanted Bret to go to wcw. It was his idea. He got the ball rolling on the whole thing. Bret wanted to honor his contract with Vince and the wwf, but Vince told him he couldn't and that he would personally contact wcw and do all he could to get Bret the best deal possible.

 

How the hell can anyone that follows wrestling on the net NOT know this stuff? It's only the most controversial and talked about thing ever in wrestling.

 

And as for your retarded comment about Bret disrespecting Eddie by leaving the show, Vince and company have pissed on Eddie's memory much worse than Bret walking off a stage would do to it.

[Hawk 34 0]

Yep, it's fairly common knowledge that Vince essentially pushed Bret out the door once he knew WCW was calling. Bret offered to take a reduction.

 

Bret, held off on answering Bischoff until the very latest moment possible. However, people like UTSU insist that Bret was bolting out the door with the title holding it hostage. When the fact was, Bret couldn't legally appear in WCW until weeks after Montreal, couldn't take the title with him (a lawsuit that would have drowned WCW, would have occured). Bret offered to do any situation other then jobbing to Shawn in Canada. He was willing to job it to Taker, Austin, Shamrock. There were over a dozen scenarios he offered to Vince.