I think we need to re-clarify Vince's POV on this situation: Vince likely never feared that Bret would take the belt to WCW with him. Instead what Vince feared is if Bret retained the title in Montreal that Eric Bischoff would go on Nitro the next night and announce he had signed the WWE Champion. This may have been a justifiable fear due to the Madusa incident in 95 and the fact that Eric did go to the ring the night after Montreal and subtlety alluded to the fact that he had signed Bret.
Vince says he's not terrified of anyone, or anything. But funnily enough when he went to meet Bret in a park, he had police standing near by as he thought Bret was going to kill him.
@das9582 In fairness, if Bret had a clause legally that gave him creative control in the last month of his contract, Vince has nothing. Take that clause out and Vince can tell Bret to do whatever he wants. I agree. It's that creative control clause that Bret talks about that needs clarification. That determines who's right or wrong here.
@Lewis1711 Exactly. Maybe not the best matches of his life but his two classics with Stone Cold at SS 1996 and WrestleMania 13, his match with the Undertaker at Summerslam 1997 etc…
@SithLordRockstar Erm...this interview was conducted in 1998, so Vince was saying in 1998 that Bret's body was breaking down in 1998, which total piffle, and an out-right lie. I'm not quite sure why you're introducing a totally arbitrary argument, seemingly from nowhere with no rhyme or reason. Vince signed Bret to a new deal in 2004/05 for the DVD, but that only proves me right even more so because Vince didn't get Bret to work until their WM match several YEARS later.
7:43 - and the gangsterism continues. This guy is the friggin don of dons. he's like a mafia boss in a legal business but operating like a Paul Castellano. Holy shit
@14njd14 the key word in the contract is "reasonable" creative control, which means vince would have the final say on what's reasonable or not. Brett was not being reasonable.
When Vince says he felt "sorry" that he signed Bret that that contract, and that Bret was a problem, something doesn't ring true. I don't care about taking sides here. I'm trying to use logic to surmise what might have happened. By saying he signed Bret to a 20 year deal and immediately feeling bad about it, he's saying he made a huge mistake. Vince McMahon, if you look at his track record, doesn't make huge mistakes. I don't buy that Bret was a mistake. He was using Bret to screw the WCW.
@das9582 there is no way Bret would have walked out. IF Vince had actually 'ordered' and said, 'this is what is going to happen', Bret would have had to abide by it. Vince repeatedly says he 'asked' Bret, alluding to Bret having some sort of say. If he had wanted to, he could have ordered Bret to abide by his decision, and had Bret 'walked out' of the WWF with the title????? he would have been completely blackballed by everyone and fans. You can't just walk to WCW with the title.
Bret could've because he had a 30 day creative control clause in his contract. Meaning he could agree or disagree to do anything in the last 30 days of his contract you fuckin prick.
@das9582 First off, I respect your opinion and both sides of the story are very convincing but I do believe all Bret wanted was a proper send off. He didnt want to let down his fans in Canada and felt that after all of his hard work and dedication he deserved a happy ending. It was scheduled for him to appear on Raw the next night to give up the belt and say goodbye. Bret definitley would have showed up on Raw the next night. Besides, Shawn was allready over at that point.
he says he´s sad that he signed bret for those extra years? that´s so dumb. If bret didn´t sign with vince then Stone Cold would´ve never blew up as a star. Austin even admits that his matches with Bret changed his life and began his stardom.
(1)'Bret was breaking-down psychically', (2)'Bret was somewhat disputative in the locker room'. Hilarious, especially the first line, as he signed Bret in 2010 and worked a match with him. Those two fallacies belong with the 93,000 at WM 3 claim. Total nonsense.
@tsaleh88 We have moved on we are just trying to figure out the truth because we are wrestling fans. The problem is we will never know who is lying and who is telling the truth. Its an interesting topic to discuss, thats all.
BRET KNOWS DAMN WELL THAT THERES NO LOYALTY IN THE WRESTLING BUSINESS, HE SHOULD OF TOOK THE 3 YEAR 9 MILLION DOLLAR FROM WCW BEFORE THAT SHIT HAPPENED. HIS LOYALTY TO VINCE CAME BACK AND BIT HIM IN THE ASS
@TheJaydogg1984 IMpact Wrestling is definitley not going down the drain, if anything I see WWE going down the drain. Sure they are doing smart business now with their current age demographic but what happens when the dedicated fans get so sick of the show that they dont even watch anymore. Vince will lose 50 percent of his fanbase. Im not sure of the actual percentage of "real" fans but its got to be at least half the audience. Vince is getting old too. He doesnt have it anymore.
Bret Hart is not a fucking baby. Who ever thinks that is not a true wrestling fan and don't understand the reasons behind the true story. You should research it before you cast an opinion that you are dead wrong about.
@SithLordRockstar Again, you've not just put words in my mouth, but you've rather strangely made a totally arbitrary argument, based on an issue complete unrelated to the topic at hand. I'm at a loss to understand the grammar of the connection of your point. Something tells me it might not be entirely my fault...
bret hart with all due respect should have kept business on top to his own ego. vince did the right thing. as u can say see here vince says bret breached the contract several times several days before that montreal match.
