Bret Hart or Daniel Bryan Danielson?

[MoS]

The consensus best WWF wrestler of the 90s against the consensus best WWE wrestler of the 2010s. Both known for being a purist's delight, while also being top stars who were never fully embraced by the WWF/WWE machine. Who was better?

I think it's Bryan. If anyone is interested, I actually ran this poll in the main forum a few months ago, and laid down my arguments for why I think Bryan is better. It would be nice if a lot of extremely knowledgeable posters posting in the GWE thread would weigh in on this. I laid down my arguments in this thread - 

I think it remains a fair comparison and it would be interesting to listen to you guys weigh in on this  

[Boss Rock]

Both have similar strengths in being incredibly technically sound and being able to carry lesser talent to great matches. But I think Bryan trumps Bret in near every category.

Peaks and volume Bryan runs away with it. I know that Bryan has the advantage of working with a ton of great workers, but he also rounds out his resume with legitimately great matches against the likes of Miz, Wyatt, and Triple H. And while Bret has some great matches, Bryan's peaks are higher.

When it comes to versatility, Bryan might be better than just about anyone (I'd consider arguments for Funk). Fiery underdog, ruthless heel, pissed off ass-kicker, and even cowardly heel at times. Almost every great Bret match I've seen has him as a babyface or defending champion.

Both are terrific offensive wrestlers, but Bryan's ability to wear more hats I think offers more variety than Bret. Selling is really the only area I don't have a strong argument in favor of either.

[Makai Club #1]

Both are geniuses in their own right. Both adapt to their opponents really well and were able to come up with some great moments within those matches. Both had well regarded heel runs - Bryan in ROH (I have a pet peeve about heels being cheered so I don't consider myself that WWE heel run a success, through no fault of his own) and Bret in 97 which was instrumental for making getting one he was feuding with (Austin) into a path to superstardom. 

There are plenty of parallels between the two in regards to their WWE runs. They were always the fan favourites and pushed to the top before being cycled back down before being pushed back to the top again with WWE constantly trying to find other people for that position only for it not to work out (Diesel and Shawn Michaels, who was supposed to drop the title to Bret remember, for Bret. Batista and recently Edge for Bryan). Being a trusted stabiliser is a big, big plus for me. 

 

The difference in volume of great matches does go to Bryan. Similar to Flair, you can probably pick out any match of his and it's very good whereas Bret picked his moments, didn't always go out to have a great match and sometimes not always delivering when he tried but something about Bret's overall work gives off a better and more memorable impression on me. This is a criticism that I have with Bryan. He has many great matches but matches that I'm always thinking of and willing to actively seek out are few and far between. Bret has those key matches that I will watch once every few months. And it's not just the best of the best either. I'll always watch the Pierre Ouellet match and it's probably not that much better than the twentieth best Bryan match. Let alone the Owen, Austin, Diesel matches. 

 

I'll go with Bret Hart. 

[Grimmas]

Comparing workers that started before 2000 to workers who started after 2000 is so difficult. 

The post 2000 crowd literally had the goal of having great matches, while that was not really the goal pre 2000. You really have to dig into a lot of things.

I had Bret > Bryan in 2016, but as stated above they are really similar. No idea how I will vote in 2026 between the two.

[NotJayTabb]

This is a battle of my current #1 vs current #2, and I can see my opinion wavering several times before 2026. At the moment, I'm pumping for Bret. But only just