Blaming Bret is unreasonable. He had a contract that Vince wanted out, rather than sue or dig his heels in he reasonably took the option to leave as he believed Vince was in dire financial situation. Then Bret reasonably wanted to use his creative control clause in his contact. Vince screwed Bret and should've known that the animosity between Shawn and Bret would've make business difficult. Should've dropped the belt to Owen and leave with another 5 star classic behind him.
@@brixtonmystery I can understand that but to be fair it's the contract that Vince offered and was accepted. Unfortunately Vince did this to himself so unnecessarily screwed Bret. I'm sticking with a match with Owen would've fixed it and given us a much better match.
I know how it went down... Vince:"HEY PAL! things are tricky and i can't pay the amount we agreed upon. You have 3 choices moving forward, 1. We can renegotiate your deal. 2. I can help you out in any possible wcw deal." Bret:"and 3?" Vince:"Bret, how do the words "Montreal Screwjob" sound to you?" Bret:" I'm listening."
If it was at the garden then it was probably the Sept.22 97 raw where Austin stunned McMahon. Which means they had about 45 days to get the belt off him. Imo Bret owed them nothing. He could have played hard ball and not agreed to terminate his contract. I doubt Hogan, Shawn, Warrior, etc would voluntarily shred a 20 year multi million dollar contract just as a favor to Vince. So in agreeing to do so, I think Bret already fulfilled his end of the bargain. If in return he wants to go out however he wants then I think they owe him that. Had Bret played hard ball they would have had to terminate several other top guys whose combined salary equalled Bret's. Possibly Shawn and Hunter. So it's possible Bret saved the jobs of the two guys that screwed him.
@Bryan Mack I have never heard or read that Bret was "disruptive" in the dressing room and if that was the case, then the rest of the boys would not have cared about Bret as far as it relates to Montreal. The only thing I can think of when Vince says disruptive is maybe the real life fight that took place between Bret and Michaels backstage in Hartford Ct a few hours before RAW. In which case that was completely based on Michaels Sunny days comment.
@Telly Delucca Also interestingly was how Bret told Michaels pre-emptively that he had no problem putting him over at survivor series, which showed that Bret was all business, until Michaels shit all over that.
@Telly Delucca When did Michael’s say this? Michael’s said no the first time and then When Bret told Vince, Vince went to Shawn and asked Shawn to put Bret over at a house show to show Bret that he was business and that’s when HHH told Micheal’s not to lay down for someone that is leaving the company. So Michael’s said no, twice. If Michael’s did tell Vince and Bret that, then Bret would have been fine putting him over. It never happened, period.
I think in Bret's book he states that he didn't realize he was mic'ed in the meeting with Vince, it was a wireless mic he had been wearing for some time--I used to work in the film industry and the sound recordist hears EVERYTHING on wireless mcs, like celebrity actresses taking a shit, or in one instance Sly Stallone getting a blow job in his trailer, because people forget they have a live mic on and just go about their business, the transmission range is huge. When Bret came out of the meeting with Vince, the director of the doc said that Bret just made the documentary but Bret didn't understand what he was talking about. Neither of them planned on recording the meeting, it just happened by accident.
Sounds good but I don’t buy it. I been mic’d up for days and often am. I rip out the mic when taking a shit and my camera guy turns it off. It’s plausible what you said but in reality things were so tense with legal implications that it’s MORE than likely that it was totally setup. Especially with a cerebral guy like Hart.
@@brixtonmystery Legality is in the clear, if the subject agrees to be personally filmed and for the location to be openly used and they sign the release, that is it. That's why it's in the film, and why the film was released. I used to work in documentary films a lot, and betryal of trust is a cornerstone of good documentaries. That's how you have people agreeing to be in a doc, come across as absolutely horrible, complain about how the documentary misrepresented them or they didn't know this and that would be included, but in the end can't do a thing except publically complain. Also, Bret was't used to being on a live wireless mic. For him, a microphone is the stick. And you still have instances that I have witnessed--including on a Marvel Studios film I worked on--sound recordists picking up actors in the bathroom, saying things under their breath that no one is supposed to hear, and yes, the Stallone story is real. I worked in camera, and we don't give a shit about if the sound is recording or not, that's the sound department's job. The reality is that actors are busy, and they sometimes disappear from set before the sound recordist can turn off their battery pack attached to them, so if the director whisks them off to a trailer after a take, it is likely that their wireless mic is still transmitting. In documentary filmmakig though, you don't usually respect the participants full privacy, you are usually there to expose it rather.
It was already decided at the MSG RAW that year that if either Shawn or Taker would be victorious in the Hell In A Cell match at Bad Blood, would face the champ at Survivor Series. I think McMahon was already pushing for a part 2 of Hart vs Michaels anyway and obviously, it was the beginning of Undertaker and Kane's feud.
Ken Shamrock should have defeated Bret as a worked shoot. They should have had him use some MMA moves to defeat him like Brock defeated Cena at SummerSlam 2014.
It should've been a triple threat and Bret didn't have to get pinned. Why not make it a 4 way. Bret, Owen, Shawn and Taker. Have Owen pin Bret immediately via small package as a surprise move. Let Owen win the title and have him drop it to Shawn the next night on Raw. It's a win win.
Bret publicly in wrestling with shadows I believe and I think in some other interviews he was making 1.5 million a year and he said that in his book also WCW offered 3 million a year so he took half to stay with the WWE
Prichard is just so salty, even after all these years. Bret literally said he would drop it to anyone bar Michaels. Meltzer has copies of documents Bret's lawyers sent back and forth with Vince's saying as much.
i don't know why Bruce is playing coy. Shawn and Undertaker were making 750K and Bret was making twice that. I have a great way they could have gotten a title change. Have Undertaker come out and take a shot at Shawn, miss and nail Bret. Opposite of summerslam 97. of course i'm sure Bret wouldn't have gone for it.
@@festo8756 ^^see above^^. You’re missing the point. Why put the wwf belt on someone and then push him out? Just because somethings happened before doesn’t make it right.
Vince going back on a deal just one year later, and the leaving the belt on Hart while he was signing a contract with WCW says alot of him as a businessman. It's a wonder that WWE didn't go the way of XFL, WBF, and IcoPro.
Any and everyone in the wrestling business has always said Bret Hart has been willing to do business. He’s serious about how he’s portrayed, but he’s always been willing to do business. The only person to deny that is Prichard. I think the one full of crap is the star of this podcast.
Bret Hart actually thinks he won his titles. I mean FFS, he’s leaving. McMahon should as a promoter simply tell Bret he’s losing to this guy or that guy and that would’ve been that! Bret simply didn’t want to “Lose” his title FULL STOP. He wanted to keep the title and carry on!
You either don't have all the information, or you are choosing a narrow point of view on purpose. Legally, and contractually Bret Hart was 100% in the right to exercise the creative control clause that Vince agreed to, especially after Bret voluntarily allowed Vince to back out of his 20 year contract, thus saving Vince tons of money, and likely the jobs of other talent who would have had to be cut to afford Bret's 20 year deal. It was also Vince who put that belt on Bret, and didn't bother trying to take it off until the last minute. Fuck Vince McMahon.
He said he'd drop it to the brawler!!! It was literally ANYONE but shawn! Shamrock was actually his hope! But Austin Owen taker even hhh! He just didn't want it to be shawn! Pretty reasonable if you ask me!
I wonder why none of Vince’s stooges ever mention the fact that Bret TWICE offered to drop it to Shawn?! First time Shawn said “thanks, but I wouldn’t do the same for you.” Second time Bret said “I’ll put him over, but he needs to prove that he’ll put me over first (Montreal).” Again, this time helped by Paul, Shawn again says no. Why on Earth, even if you didn’t have reasonable creative control in your contract, would you put Shawn over after that? 🤷🏻♂️ Also as nobody ever remembers this, Montreal wasn’t Bret’s last night in the company, he had worked an agreement to stay into December. To be fair though Eric was planning to announce Bret on the 10th.
Say what you want about Brett , but he really was the best there is , the best there was, and the best there ever will be at being a professional wrestler. He made you care , he sold , he could make everything seem real. I wasn't even a fan of his , but I respect his craft . I also can understand his frustration with the industry. He could bring it night in and out without being drugged up and was a serious person. Being a serious person was his downfall, nobody likes a serious person... I'm a serious person and I've gotten endless crap about how I do my job although it works perfectly, people want to be lax and people like Brett wouldn't let them be laxed and Vince bought on Shawn's alpha screwball mentality over Brett's alpha serious mentality and WCW just used him wrong until the didn't then he got concussed and was done. WCW should have immediately put him in the main event, he should have been the one to beat Goldberg by figuring out how ( like the metal plate under the hockey jersey). But with contracts like Hogan's with creative control, what could Brett do besides get frustrated?? I don't blame him from getting mad and not showing up early because the product was bs and decided by guys like Hogan, not the booker.
Everyone is at fault here. Vince for putting Bret against Shawn Michaels when Shawn had refused to put Bret over months before and Bret for using the not losing in Canada nonsense. He should just told Vince “I aint losing to Shawn. Put someone else” I bet Bret would have lost to the Undertaker or anyone else but HBK
The thing is Bret did tell Vince to do this. He said he would lose to undertaker, Steve Austin, even the Brooklyn brawler. Bret said this. You can find it either in an interview on RUclips or in his book. I hate it when people say “Bret didn’t want to lose in Canada”. That had nothing to do with it. He just didn’t want to lose to Shawn cause Shawn said he wouldn’t return the favor to Bret. I get that Vince has monopolized the wrestling industry and folks are afraid to speak their minds now but let’s not forget how ALL the wrestlers in the wwe (minus the cliq members and maybe Gerald Brisco and pat paterson) we’re all upset when it happened. Mick Foley even boycotted the following Raw episode.
Lol at Prichard n WWF being a model of ethical behavior. Shoulda been Bret n Taker at Survivor Series or they should’ve honored that contract. Robbed us of so many potential classics.
Bret said he told Vince he was willing to resign his old contract!! Vince wanted him to take a pay cut! How bout Vince, who is a billionaire taking a pay cut!! These guys wrestle, are on the road over 330 days a year, their bodies are taking a beating, constantly taking pain meds so they can wrestle, and he wants them to take a pay cut!! GTFO!!
God I get sick of the company man. And Bret was the best wrestler you had. FN performer smh. Bret Hart was the biggest mistake in the 90s. WWF letting him go, and wcw used him horribly. Just a big waste of a guy who was prime and also the best in ring wrestler in the business at the time. Bret could make anyone look great. I hate we missed out on a lot of great things that could have happened with the hitman. I loved Bret against Austin. A lot better than hbk and Austin. Cause hbk just would quit instead of being the second tier guy behind Austin. Hitman would have stayed and wrestled Stone cold over and over if needed. Hitman versus Mick. Why did you let him go?? Idiots. Just look at one show the wwe does today. All garbage. Period
Bret is a pathological liar and I honestly believe he's an active dreamer and thats where he comes up with so many of the scenarios where he thinks something happened that never did.
@@kranix9166 SummerSlam 1992, Bret claimed the crowd were for him vs Davey. Hogwash! He was booed by sections of the crowd, and there was the big pop when Davey won. Bret Hart was one of the very best, and is honest from his point of view, but he is his own biggest fan. He never mentions Steve Austin called their WrestleMania match either. Before anyone bites my head off, I’m a fan of Bret. Bruce Prichard does corroborate when Eric Bischoff has said time and again about zero creative counter from Bret when he didn’t like the creative. His solution for dropping the belt was poor. What I’ve always found funny was why didn’t Vince use Pat Patterson to mediate the two of them. You can bet they would have both listened to him.
Blaming Bret is unreasonable. He had a contract that Vince wanted out, rather than sue or dig his heels in he reasonably took the option to leave as he believed Vince was in dire financial situation. Then Bret reasonably wanted to use his creative control clause in his contact. Vince screwed Bret and should've known that the animosity between Shawn and Bret would've make business difficult. Should've dropped the belt to Owen and leave with another 5 star classic behind him.
Dude he was getting his salary DOUBLED from $1.5M after already being paid TWICE as much as the next guy (Shawn Michaels at $750K).
@@brixtonmystery I can understand that but to be fair it's the contract that Vince offered and was accepted. Unfortunately Vince did this to himself so unnecessarily screwed Bret. I'm sticking with a match with Owen would've fixed it and given us a much better match.
@@natbetton5929 Owen as champion? I can dig that.
Wearing a wire wasn't ethical but double crossing Bret was?
It was said Bret earned 1.5m USD per year and Shawn was on 750k. Sources - Shawns book and Brets book
I know how it went down...
Vince:"HEY PAL! things are tricky and i can't pay the amount we agreed upon. You have 3 choices moving forward, 1. We can renegotiate your deal. 2. I can help you out in any possible wcw deal."
Bret:"and 3?"
Vince:"Bret, how do the words "Montreal Screwjob" sound to you?"
Bret:" I'm listening."
It was most likely a work. Bret made alot of money and the attitude era was born.
whats with the "hey pal" thing? is that a legit mcmahon phrase or is that just something that caught on?
If it was at the garden then it was probably the Sept.22 97 raw where Austin stunned McMahon. Which means they had about 45 days to get the belt off him. Imo Bret owed them nothing. He could have played hard ball and not agreed to terminate his contract. I doubt Hogan, Shawn, Warrior, etc would voluntarily shred a 20 year multi million dollar contract just as a favor to Vince. So in agreeing to do so, I think Bret already fulfilled his end of the bargain. If in return he wants to go out however he wants then I think they owe him that. Had Bret played hard ball they would have had to terminate several other top guys whose combined salary equalled Bret's. Possibly Shawn and Hunter. So it's possible Bret saved the jobs of the two guys that screwed him.
Exactly this. Been sayin this for years. There's no other way to break down the situation.
totally agree.
Bruce never points out how difficult Shawn was to deal with and being one of the main reasons that Bret didn't want to drop it to him.
@Bryan Mack I have never heard or read that Bret was "disruptive" in the dressing room and if that was the case, then the rest of the boys would not have cared about Bret as far as it relates to Montreal. The only thing I can think of when Vince says disruptive is maybe the real life fight that took place between Bret and Michaels backstage in Hartford Ct a few hours before RAW. In which case that was completely based on Michaels Sunny days comment.
@Telly Delucca Vince saying Bret was difficult was just Vince blaming of all people, Bret, to take the heat off of himself (Vince).
@Telly Delucca Also interestingly was how Bret told Michaels pre-emptively that he had no problem putting him over at survivor series, which showed that Bret was all business, until Michaels shit all over that.
@Telly Delucca When did Michael’s say this? Michael’s said no the first time and then When Bret told Vince, Vince went to Shawn and asked Shawn to put Bret over at a house show to show Bret that he was business and that’s when HHH told Micheal’s not to lay down for someone that is leaving the company. So Michael’s said no, twice. If Michael’s did tell Vince and Bret that, then Bret would have been fine putting him over. It never happened, period.
@Telly Delucca Michael’s never said he would put Bret over anytime before the match happened, period. “The end”.
I think in Bret's book he states that he didn't realize he was mic'ed in the meeting with Vince, it was a wireless mic he had been wearing for some time--I used to work in the film industry and the sound recordist hears EVERYTHING on wireless mcs, like celebrity actresses taking a shit, or in one instance Sly Stallone getting a blow job in his trailer, because people forget they have a live mic on and just go about their business, the transmission range is huge. When Bret came out of the meeting with Vince, the director of the doc said that Bret just made the documentary but Bret didn't understand what he was talking about. Neither of them planned on recording the meeting, it just happened by accident.
In Bret's little mind he is God's gift to the business, and he really was good.
Sounds good but I don’t buy it. I been mic’d up for days and often am. I rip out the mic when taking a shit and my camera guy turns it off. It’s plausible what you said but in reality things were so tense with legal implications that it’s MORE than likely that it was totally setup. Especially with a cerebral guy like Hart.
@@brixtonmystery hopefully Bret will admit it eventually. Nash thinks it was a work
@@brixtonmystery Legality is in the clear, if the subject agrees to be personally filmed and for the location to be openly used and they sign the release, that is it. That's why it's in the film, and why the film was released. I used to work in documentary films a lot, and betryal of trust is a cornerstone of good documentaries. That's how you have people agreeing to be in a doc, come across as absolutely horrible, complain about how the documentary misrepresented them or they didn't know this and that would be included, but in the end can't do a thing except publically complain.
Also, Bret was't used to being on a live wireless mic. For him, a microphone is the stick. And you still have instances that I have witnessed--including on a Marvel Studios film I worked on--sound recordists picking up actors in the bathroom, saying things under their breath that no one is supposed to hear, and yes, the Stallone story is real. I worked in camera, and we don't give a shit about if the sound is recording or not, that's the sound department's job. The reality is that actors are busy, and they sometimes disappear from set before the sound recordist can turn off their battery pack attached to them, so if the director whisks them off to a trailer after a take, it is likely that their wireless mic is still transmitting. In documentary filmmakig though, you don't usually respect the participants full privacy, you are usually there to expose it rather.
@@adamirishconundrum851 Coming from a idiot who believes Bruce Pritchard at all that insult doesn't mean much. Who cares what Nash says?
Why didn’t they just make it into a triple threat with undertaker involved? Kane comes in, destroys undertaker, and Shawn gets the pin. Easy.
It was already decided at the MSG RAW that year that if either Shawn or Taker would be victorious in the Hell In A Cell match at Bad Blood, would face the champ at Survivor Series. I think McMahon was already pushing for a part 2 of Hart vs Michaels anyway and obviously, it was the beginning of Undertaker and Kane's feud.
Ken Shamrock should have defeated Bret as a worked shoot. They should have had him use some MMA moves to defeat him like Brock defeated Cena at SummerSlam 2014.
It should've been a triple threat and Bret didn't have to get pinned. Why not make it a 4 way. Bret, Owen, Shawn and Taker. Have Owen pin Bret immediately via small package as a surprise move. Let Owen win the title and have him drop it to Shawn the next night on Raw. It's a win win.
Bruce talking about being ethical.... Rich
Also I'm tired of the stupid ads in the middle of your videos.
Stop with the ads ffs
Especially mid sentence!!
.....Sign up at ad free shows
Bret publicly in wrestling with shadows I believe and I think in some other interviews he was making 1.5 million a year and he said that in his book also WCW offered 3 million a year so he took half to stay with the WWE
Prichard is just so salty, even after all these years. Bret literally said he would drop it to anyone bar Michaels. Meltzer has copies of documents Bret's lawyers sent back and forth with Vince's saying as much.
nothing gets more milked than how bret left wwe /wwf and bruce is always diplomatic and biased
97 I was 12 my dad ordered Survivor Series and when we saw Bret get screwed my dad said out loud that wasn’t supposed to happen
i don't know why Bruce is playing coy. Shawn and Undertaker were making 750K and Bret was making twice that. I have a great way they could have gotten a title change. Have Undertaker come out and take a shot at Shawn, miss and nail Bret. Opposite of summerslam 97. of course i'm sure Bret wouldn't have gone for it.
Should of made it a triple threat with Taker, either Taker acting as the transitional champion from Bret to Shawn.
I'm pretty sure Bret's mindset was no matter what Shawn is not winning at Montreal. Anyone else sure but Shawn No.
What I never understood is why did Vince ever put the belt back on Bret and then try and push him out a month or two later. It makes no sense
You must have never watched wrestling before. Management never plans stuff out ahead of time
@@festo8756 yes I’ve watched loads. But WWE today is the world woke federation. It’s so bad it’s horrendous
@@razorrabone4098 I guess you just were not smart enough to notice storylines getting dropped last minute in years past
@@festo8756 ^^see above^^. You’re missing the point. Why put the wwf belt on someone and then push him out? Just because somethings happened before doesn’t make it right.
@@razorrabone4098 it's because Vince has never planned ahead.
Vince going back on a deal just one year later, and the leaving the belt on Hart while he was signing a contract with WCW says alot of him as a businessman. It's a wonder that WWE didn't go the way of XFL, WBF, and IcoPro.
"you win it in the ring, you lose it in the ring" except that Shawn lost his smile in February that year and didn't lose it in the ring.
Comrade , I want to know the number too.
I could be wrong on this, but to my understanding, it was Bret who let the WWF out of their contract.
Conrad, I want to know the whole number too!! 😁
So basically Bruce is saying it’s unethical to try to catch someone lying. (Regarding the hidden mic in Wrestling With Shadows)
Any and everyone in the wrestling business has always said Bret Hart has been willing to do business. He’s serious about how he’s portrayed, but he’s always been willing to do business. The only person to deny that is Prichard. I think the one full of crap is the star of this podcast.
i respect bruce not handing out that information, even all these years later.
Why is catching Vince out ‘bullshit’ and ‘unethical’...
...but screwing one of your best guys after welshing on his contract isn’t...?
Bruce's bullshit answers about things like contracts is exactly why guys like Melzter thrived.
You mean screwing him out of his contract.
This is what they shouldve done: Have bret lose to either davey or owen.
This is a Conrad so before I watch I'm going to guess there will be two and breaks in a 9 minute video
Bret Hart actually thinks he won his titles. I mean FFS, he’s leaving. McMahon should as a promoter simply tell Bret he’s losing to this guy or that guy and that would’ve been that! Bret simply didn’t want to “Lose” his title FULL STOP. He wanted to keep the title and carry on!
Brett wanted to drop the title the next night on Raw. Why couldn't vince just let him do that?
You either don't have all the information, or you are choosing a narrow point of view on purpose. Legally, and contractually Bret Hart was 100% in the right to exercise the creative control clause that Vince agreed to, especially after Bret voluntarily allowed Vince to back out of his 20 year contract, thus saving Vince tons of money, and likely the jobs of other talent who would have had to be cut to afford Bret's 20 year deal. It was also Vince who put that belt on Bret, and didn't bother trying to take it off until the last minute. Fuck Vince McMahon.
@@burntvirtue Exactly. I love how people fail to mention the creative control clause Vince GAVE Bret.
Bs. Plenty of I’ll job the title to Steve ,Taker, Shamrock not hbk.
He said he'd drop it to the brawler!!! It was literally ANYONE but shawn! Shamrock was actually his hope! But Austin Owen taker even hhh! He just didn't want it to be shawn! Pretty reasonable if you ask me!
@@superstarreviews9937 Vince should have had Bret drop the title to the Undertaker then Undertaker could drop it to Shawn. No problem no screwjob.
If Vince McMahon was the genius people say he is, why didn't they take the belt off him first and then breach the contract?
@@Rjensen2 do you think geniuses aren’t flawed?
@@Abcd-k6i Now you are stalking me? 🤣🤣🤣
@@Rjensen2 I thought I’d see what other shit you were talking and it seems you are always wrong.
@@Rjensen2 I look at other comments to see how dumb people are.
I wonder why none of Vince’s stooges ever mention the fact that Bret TWICE offered to drop it to Shawn?! First time Shawn said “thanks, but I wouldn’t do the same for you.” Second time Bret said “I’ll put him over, but he needs to prove that he’ll put me over first (Montreal).” Again, this time helped by Paul, Shawn again says no. Why on Earth, even if you didn’t have reasonable creative control in your contract, would you put Shawn over after that? 🤷🏻♂️
Also as nobody ever remembers this, Montreal wasn’t Bret’s last night in the company, he had worked an agreement to stay into December. To be fair though Eric was planning to announce Bret on the 10th.
Say what you want about Brett , but he really was the best there is , the best there was, and the best there ever will be at being a professional wrestler.
He made you care , he sold , he could make everything seem real.
I wasn't even a fan of his , but I respect his craft . I also can understand his frustration with the industry.
He could bring it night in and out without being drugged up and was a serious person. Being a serious person was his downfall, nobody likes a serious person... I'm a serious person and I've gotten endless crap about how I do my job although it works perfectly, people want to be lax and people like Brett wouldn't let them be laxed and Vince bought on Shawn's alpha screwball mentality over Brett's alpha serious mentality and WCW just used him wrong until the didn't then he got concussed and was done.
WCW should have immediately put him in the main event, he should have been the one to beat Goldberg by figuring out how ( like the metal plate under the hockey jersey).
But with contracts like Hogan's with creative control, what could Brett do besides get frustrated??
I don't blame him from getting mad and not showing up early because the product was bs and decided by guys like Hogan, not the booker.
He was mediocre at best.
Conrad throws a hissy fit if he don't get his way. Must of been spoiled
One thing Conrad doesn’t let spoil is food.
Just like mah dat daddy!
Everyone is at fault here. Vince for putting Bret against Shawn Michaels when Shawn had refused to put Bret over months before and Bret for using the not losing in Canada nonsense. He should just told Vince “I aint losing to Shawn. Put someone else” I bet Bret would have lost to the Undertaker or anyone else but HBK
The thing is Bret did tell Vince to do this. He said he would lose to undertaker, Steve Austin, even the Brooklyn brawler. Bret said this. You can find it either in an interview on RUclips or in his book. I hate it when people say “Bret didn’t want to lose in Canada”. That had nothing to do with it. He just didn’t want to lose to Shawn cause Shawn said he wouldn’t return the favor to Bret. I get that Vince has monopolized the wrestling industry and folks are afraid to speak their minds now but let’s not forget how ALL the wrestlers in the wwe (minus the cliq members and maybe Gerald Brisco and pat paterson) we’re all upset when it happened. Mick Foley even boycotted the following Raw episode.
Lol at Prichard n WWF being a model of ethical behavior. Shoulda been Bret n Taker at Survivor Series or they should’ve honored that contract. Robbed us of so many potential classics.
Bret said he told Vince he was willing to resign his old contract!! Vince wanted him to take a pay cut! How bout Vince, who is a billionaire taking a pay cut!! These guys wrestle, are on the road over 330 days a year, their bodies are taking a beating, constantly taking pain meds so they can wrestle, and he wants them to take a pay cut!! GTFO!!
Vince later went back to Bret and told him he could pay it after all because they raised the price on the PPVs.
@@Rjensen2 If that was the case, he would have never left for the WCW.
Yet it’s ethical to screw Bret right Bruce
God I get sick of the company man. And Bret was the best wrestler you had. FN performer smh. Bret Hart was the biggest mistake in the 90s. WWF letting him go, and wcw used him horribly. Just a big waste of a guy who was prime and also the best in ring wrestler in the business at the time. Bret could make anyone look great. I hate we missed out on a lot of great things that could have happened with the hitman. I loved Bret against Austin. A lot better than hbk and Austin. Cause hbk just would quit instead of being the second tier guy behind Austin. Hitman would have stayed and wrestled Stone cold over and over if needed. Hitman versus Mick. Why did you let him go?? Idiots. Just look at one show the wwe does today. All garbage. Period
Conrad is the ONLY person that cares about most of the stuff he asks about
Brett heart is so horrible
Bret is a pathological liar and I honestly believe he's an active dreamer and thats where he comes up with so many of the scenarios where he thinks something happened that never did.
hes the most honest and hurts marks like yourself when he speaks the truth.
@Vincent Verona L Watz will not answer you because there is no example he can name, right L Watz.
@@DUFFYISBACK Bret is the biggest mark there is.
What are you even talking about?
@@kranix9166 SummerSlam 1992, Bret claimed the crowd were for him vs Davey. Hogwash! He was booed by sections of the crowd, and there was the big pop when Davey won. Bret Hart was one of the very best, and is honest from his point of view, but he is his own biggest fan. He never mentions Steve Austin called their WrestleMania match either. Before anyone bites my head off, I’m a fan of Bret. Bruce Prichard does corroborate when Eric Bischoff has said time and again about zero creative counter from Bret when he didn’t like the creative. His solution for dropping the belt was poor. What I’ve always found funny was why didn’t Vince use Pat Patterson to mediate the two of them. You can bet they would have both listened to him.