Montreal!

[Ricky Jackson]

The whole "Bret's contract was too expensive" story has always sounded a bit weird to me. I don't know what the exact annual amount was, but was it really the crippling financial burden Vince made it out to be? Was letting Bret go to WCW really the only answer?

 

As for booking Bret to win the title at Summerslam, wasn't the plan, at least originally, for Austin to finally beat him cleanly at Mania 14 and thus bookend Mania 13 and blow off the whole feud? That has always been the ideal ending for me, anyway. I guess I'm just curious if Vince ever considered having Bret stay until Mania, put Steve over, and then let him go to WCW.

[Loss]

That was the plan. But if Vince knew that he didn't want to keep Bret around at Summerslam, he shouldn't have put the belt on him in the first place. If he didn't know, it shows how little long term thought was going into things at that point.

[Ronnie]

The whole "Bret's contract was too expensive" story has always sounded a bit weird to me. I don't know what the exact annual amount was, but was it really the crippling financial burden Vince made it out to be? Was letting Bret go to WCW really the only answer?

If I recall correctly the WWF made a loss of $5m dollars that year. Bret's contract (was it $2m-ish?) represented a near halving of that deficit, if one assumes that PPV revenues wouldn't have changed as a result of Bret's absence. So I suppose that one could indeed justify it as a cost-cutting measure, consdering Bret's base salary was so far ahead of anybody else's.

[Bix]

One important piece of the puzzle that gets forgotten is that after the buyrates for the first $30 In Your House shows came in, Vince (truthfully) told Bret that the financial issues had cleared up. Then, when Bret begged Vince to convince him to stay, Vince threw out a bunch of clearly deliberately lame program ideas for after he lost the belt to Shawn that seemed designed to get him to take the WCW deal.

[jdw]

Right, but if it's true that Bret didn't have any dates left on the contract like he says.....

Bret only "didn't have any dates" because Vince didn't book him on clear dates other than (i) Raw and (ii) the next PPV. If Vince booked Bret on every TV and house show the balance of November, Bret would have been on them.

 

Now *how* Bret was booked/programed on those cards would have fallen under the contract. If Vince sent Bret around the horn and on TV in singles matches with Shawn getting pinned every night, Bret could have objected to it.

 

John

[Jingus]

Also, this doesn't always get brought up, but Vince was worried about losing Shawn too. Shawn had asked for his release on multiple occasions and let it be plainly known that he wanted to join Hall and Nash in WCW. Vince created that monster, but at that point he needed HBK and really, really couldn't afford to say no to him. Michaels would have faked an injury and bitched and moaned his way out of the company if he had to, it isn't like that kind of thing hadn't happened multiple times over the years, as far back as 93 when he was still a midcarder.

So why the hell didn't he just let Shawn go and keep Bret instead? Hart was a much more reliable employee and a better consistent draw than Michaels was. Getting rid of HBK would've meant Vince instantly becoming free of a lot of the backstage problems which had plagued the company; and it's not like WCW would've had any idea of what to do with Shawn anyway. And if the WWF no longer had to pay Shawn's probably-huge salary, then Bret's contract suddenly becomes infinitely more affordable. It boils down to Vince showing a really bizarre and still-unexplained favoritism to Shawn, letting him get away with all kinds of ridiculous bullshit which McMahon would've NEVER tolerated from any other performer before or since.

[NintendoLogic]

I'm going to ask this again. Can somebody please provide a source for "reasonable creative control meant both parties had to agree?" If Bret had unrestricted veto power, then "reasonable" is completely meaningless. And Dave's writeup of how everything went down in the 11/17/97 Observer indicates that Bret and Vince did, in fact, have differing interpretations of the word.

[kjh]

So why the hell didn't he just let Shawn go and keep Bret instead? Hart was a much more reliable employee and a better consistent draw than Michaels was. Getting rid of HBK would've meant Vince instantly becoming free of a lot of the backstage problems which had plagued the company; and it's not like WCW would've had any idea of what to do with Shawn anyway. And if the WWF no longer had to pay Shawn's probably-huge salary, then Bret's contract suddenly becomes infinitely more affordable. It boils down to Vince showing a really bizarre and still-unexplained favoritism to Shawn, letting him get away with all kinds of ridiculous bullshit which McMahon would've NEVER tolerated from any other performer before or since.

I think Vince viewed Bret, like he once did with Hogan and Savage, as an old horse he'd ridden for as long as possible and was about ready to be shot. By October, Shawn had already overtaken Bret as the hottest heel in the company. Moreover, his salary at the time was about 60% of Bret's and he'd have to pay Bret significant money for many years after he had retired.

[Bix]

I'm going to ask this again. Can somebody please provide a source for "reasonable creative control meant both parties had to agree?" If Bret had unrestricted veto power, then "reasonable" is completely meaningless. And Dave's writeup of how everything went down in the 11/17/97 Observer indicates that Bret and Vince did, in fact, have differing interpretations of the word.

David A. Meltzer in a number of Observer features and message board posts.

[NintendoLogic]

After some digging, I found the following Dave post at Wrestlingclassics:

 

That actual contract word was "reasonable"

 

The definition of reasonable was that both parties over the last 30 days would have to agree on any booking decision. Bret couldn't get what he wanted without Vince's approval. Vince couldn't book anything without Bret greenlighting it.

 

Using "reasonable" to say refusing to drop a title (which was never an issue) isn't reasonable is a misnomer.

 

Full would mean Bret could dictate to Vince. This is what I'm doing and you can't stop it. He didn't have that power. Both sides had to agree by the wording of what "reasonable" meant.

 

If I've used the word "full" it was to mean that he did have full contractual control to veto anything he didn't want to do.

But this doesn't quite jibe with what Dave wrote at the time: "He would have what the contract called "reasonable creative control" of his character during that lame duck period so that he couldn't be unreasonably buried on the way out." There's a pretty big gap between "can't be unreasonably buried" and "can veto anything he doesn't want to do." And again, he noted that Bret and Vince didn't agree on what it meant: "Hart talked about the clause in his contract giving him "reasonable" creative control, but McMahon claimed that refusing to drop the title in Montreal wasn't reasonable. The two argued about the finish in Montreal and the legalities of their respective positions all day Sunday and well into the night before finally agreeing to do a DQ finish in Montreal." Regardless, none of this changes the fact that the mess was entirely of Vince's making and he was entirely at fault for how it went down.

[cm funk]

The whole "Bret's contract was too expensive" story has always sounded a bit weird to me. I don't know what the exact annual amount was, but was it really the crippling financial burden Vince made it out to be? Was letting Bret go to WCW really the only answer?

If I recall correctly the WWF made a loss of $5m dollars that year. Bret's contract (was it $2m-ish?) represented a near halving of that deficit, if one assumes that PPV revenues wouldn't have changed as a result of Bret's absence. So I suppose that one could indeed justify it as a cost-cutting measure, consdering Bret's base salary was so far ahead of anybody else's.

 

I recall 20y/$20m, but I can't remember if that was the actual or kayfabed #

 

On the dates thing I was just going by what was written in this thread, which was the first I ever heard of that. I took it as Bret's contract stipulated a # of dates per month and they had been used up. JDW says it was just that he wasn't booked on any shows after Survivor Series. I don't know what the context was that Bret said it in.

 

On Michaels v. Bret, I think KJH is right on the money. Bret had just hit his 40's and had been around and pushed as a main guy for a long time. Michaels was a pain in the ass backstage but he was younger, a much more dynamic performer, and had way more heat at the time.

[Dylan Waco]

Michaels had more heat on him than Bret? After USA v. Canada? I know DX was over at the time, but I'm not buying that.

 

Vince always had an unhealthy man crush on Shawn and saw him as a guy who should be the next big draw. My suspicion is that Vince would have done just about anything to try and make reality mesh with his vision. Shawn got hurt, Austin fell into his lap and that was that

[Loss]

Bret cooled off post-Summerslam because of how he was positioned, and Shawn/Undertaker was the hotter feud. Shawn was also getting people to chant for his death at Bad Blood, and we all know about his night in Europe at One Night Only. So I would say that by that point, Shawn had surpassed Bret in terms of getting a really hate-filled reaction, but I don't think he was hotter than Bret was pre-Summerslam.

[Bob Morris]

Just addressing a few points:

 

* One can argue until they run out of breath what is and isn't "reasonable" but as far as the contract was concerned, both parties had to agree to it. Bret and Vince ultimately agreed to a DQ ending... and if I'm not mistaken, Shawn wins by DQ when Davey Boy and Owen interfere. Clearly, Vince wanted Bret to lose via pinfall or submission whereas Bret wouldn't agree to that, but if I am correct that Shawn was to win via DQ, that Bret was OK with losing to Shawn if no pin or submission took place.

 

* I know a lot of scenarios got tossed out as Bret and Vince argued about the match, but the idea that Bret would just hand over the belt to Vince the next night on Raw came in the 11th hour. Prior to that, proposals ranged from Bret losing the title in a four-way match at the next IYH, with Ken Shamrock pinning Bret to send him out of the match early, to Bret dropping the belt to Shawn the next night on Raw.

 

* As far as Eric Bischoff goes, giving away the results of Raw may have been viewed by some as dirty pool but there wasn't anything Vince could legally do about it. As far as Luger goes, he wasn't under contract yet still working for WWF and Vince was naive enough to believe he'd re-sign, hence the SummerSlam angle. And Luger didn't appear on a episode of Superstars he was supposed to be on, so WWF had to have known Luger was heading to WCW at that point. Regarding Madusa, Vince fired her and never bothered to ask her to bring the Women's belt back. For what it's worth, Madusa has said she didn't want to do the angle of dropping the belt in the trash can but Bischoff made her do it. Regardless, all Vince had to do was tell her to bring the belt back (and I imagine he'd be able to find a legal justification for doing so) but because he failed to do so, it's on him.

 

At any rate, Vince and Bret have mended fences, Bret and Shawn have mended fences and Bret remains consistent in saying he never should have left... in his own way, admitting he should not have taken Vince's suggestion to go talk to WCW and try to work things out with Vince.

[El-P]

At any rate, Vince and Bret have mended fences, Bret and Shawn have mended fences and Bret remains consistent in saying he never should have left... in his own way, admitting he should not have taken Vince's suggestion to go talk to WCW and try to work things out with Vince.

Which begs the question : what if Bret had stayed with WWF ? It can mean huge changes. There's no way Austin mania doesn't happen, but what's with Mr. McMahon ? And despite Shawn being on top until WM14, then he's forced to leave because of injury, and Triple H on his own doesn't have the huge political power yet, does that mean Bret gets back into the light by the Summer of 98 ? If McMahon vs Austin still happens (as the seeds were planted before Bret left and the infamous "Bret screwed Bret" promo), does Bret Hart, as a heel, gets in position as McMahon's corporate champion (that could have been awesome) and renew his feud with Austin ? Bret wasn't hot about the new direction of the company, does that mean that the stuff gets less raunchy ?

When you think about it, Bret not leaving could have opened a lot of interesting possibilities. Bret vs Rock would have happened...

[Death From Above]

That's kind of an interesting sub-point. There's also the thought that a lot of the raunchy/offensive stuff Brett didn't like has seemingly been assigned to Russo, you wonder if at some point it would have come to a head before October of '99. And if Bret was still working and involved in anything hot, it would have been much easier to cut Russo loose than Bret. WWF were willing to let Russo leave by October of 1999 anyway, so there doesn't seem to be any reason to think they'd have fired Bret over Russo if Bret had been willing to stay. And WCW would have very likely still wanted Russo regardless.

 

You look at the lack of depth on a card like Wrestlemania XV and it's not as if they couldn't have used another guy in a top slot at the time.

[NintendoLogic]

If Bret had stayed, they most likely would have had him put over Austin at Mania, right? And if Bret is defending at Mania, there's no need for him to drop the strap at Montreal. Which means that Shawn never defends the title against Undertaker at the Rumble. Which means that he never injures his back in a casket match. Which means that he isn't forced to take a four-year hiatus. In that scenario, how likely is it that Shawn jumps to WCW and takes Hunter with him?

[Jingus]

Shawn was still in a program with Taker anyway, so it's 50/50 on whether he might've still been in the casket match at the Rumble.

[Cox]

I believe Shawn was under contract for a long time, I want to say at least 4-5 years. Considering Vince didn't let Shawn out of his contract, even after he retired, because he was worried about him showing up in WCW, I think it's safe to assume he wouldn't have released him unless Shawn gave him no other choice. And considering how much of a shithead Michaels during most of his short-lived WWF returns in the late 90's, I don't think Vince would have fired Shawn. I mean, look at how long it took him to fire Matt Hardy, and Hardy had a much worse drug problem and TNA isn't anywhere near the problem WCW was in the late 90's - and they still hung onto Hardy until they really had no other alternative.

[Johnny Guitar]

I believe Shawn was under contract for a long time, I want to say at least 4-5 years. Considering Vince didn't let Shawn out of his contract, even after he retired, because he was worried about him showing up in WCW, I think it's safe to assume he wouldn't have released him unless Shawn gave him no other choice. And considering how much of a shithead Michaels during most of his short-lived WWF returns in the late 90's, I don't think Vince would have fired Shawn. I mean, look at how long it took him to fire Matt Hardy, and Hardy had a much worse drug problem and TNA isn't anywhere near the problem WCW was in the late 90's - and they still hung onto Hardy until they really had no other alternative.

You're right. After Hall & Nash left. Nearly all the people who had to re-sign that year (Shawn, Taker, Owen, Davey Boy), did so for 5 years.

 

On a purely selfish level one of the things that annoyed me about Montreal is all the great matches, feuds and angle's we were deprived of with Bret leaving.

 

Obviously the main one is the blow off with Austin at WM 14. But after that. There was feuds with Rock and Foley. Who were 2 guys he liked. Especially Rock. Of course they ended up main eventers anyway, but a feud with Bret on their way wouldn't have hurt. By the time those were over, along with probably some more matches with Austin & Taker. Guys like Angle, Jericho & Benoit would have been in the company. They'd have all been better off working with Bret, than they were HHH.

[Log]

They'd have all been better off working with Bret, than they were HHH.

We've been doing a lot of "what if..." lately, but this made me think of another. Would HHH have risen to where he is if Montreal hadn't happened? To me, it seems his suggestion of "screwing" Bret was his first power play (for lack of a better term). Hell, if Bret and Vince don't have a falling out, Bret might be a high front-office guy.

[Grimmas]

They'd have all been better off working with Bret, than they were HHH.

We've been doing a lot of "what if..." lately, but this made me think of another. Would HHH have risen to where he is if Montreal hadn't happened? To me, it seems his suggestion of "screwing" Bret was his first power play (for lack of a better term). Hell, if Bret and Vince don't have a falling out, Bret might be a high front-office guy.

 

I believe Bret had a 20 year deal, which put him in creative once he retired from the ring.

[El-P]

Obviously the main one is the blow off with Austin at WM 14. But after that. There was feuds with Rock and Foley. Who were 2 guys he liked. Especially Rock. Of course they ended up main eventers anyway, but a feud with Bret on their way wouldn't have hurt. By the time those were over, along with probably some more matches with Austin & Taker. Guys like Angle, Jericho & Benoit would have been in the company. They'd have all been better off working with Bret, than they were HHH.

In other words, we were the one getting screwed.

[cm funk]

Also Owen likely never gets put in the Blue Blazer gimmick. That was one of the things that made Bret so bitter for so long, the thought that Montreal indirectly caused Owen's death.

[Death From Above]

In other words, we were the one getting screwed.

It's hard not to think that any random "Bret doesn't leave WWF" scenario wouldn't turn out more entertaining than his abysmal time in WCW. What an amazing waste that was.