Undertaker is a good argument but this is one good argument against 50 other arguments why the Screwjob may have been a work.
I will try to stay on topic because I had to write an essay about it why most of it doesn't make sense but here are some points you have adressed it.
I would be happy to hear those fifty arguments if they truly exist.
You say there was no motivation for Bret, well, most people don't know it but around the mid-1997 all the way to Survivor Series Bret became one of the most disliked wrestlers in Canada.
No, he wasn't. Go back and watch the Raws in 1997 in Canada and the ovations for Bret Hart rivaled any ovation that Hogan, the Rock or Austin ever got.
Bret was for most fans a rolemodel, one of the most honest athletes, they loved Hogan, Hall, Nash, Savage but Bret was something else, he was one of the last wrestlers that represented love, passion, tradition in pro wrestling and reading online that Bret would leave like everybody else for more money was a slap in their face (especially because more Canadians were more WWE than WCW because it was a company from the south) so Bret received "You sold out chants" everywhere in Canada.
Now you're just making stuff up. It was well known in 1997 that Bret Hart left the WWF because Vince McMahon could no longer afford his contract. It was publicly known that Hart even told Vince he would accept less money or deferred money to stay with WWF. It was well known at the time that it was Vince McMahon who encouraged Hart to approach WCW.
That was one of the reasons why Bret at the end of his WWE run wrestled mostly heels who insulted Canada or was involved in patriotic angles, to make fans cheer for him. Bret was only lucky to wrestle Shawn Michaels who was the biggest prick back then who humped and picked the nose with the canadian flag otherwise Bret would have the "Brock Lesnar WrestleMania XX" reactions live on PPV where you couldn't edit the chants. Bret would be even today known as the guy who sold out like every other wrestler but the Screwjob overshadowed it and made the fans like him again, so there was motivation.
None of this is remotely true. The main guys Hart wrestled in the months leading up to his him leaving were Americans, both heels and faces.
About the other point, Bret had creative control, Vince was scared Bret would leave with the belt like Madusa
,
People say that but he had no reason to believe this. It was very well known that after the Madusa incident that Turner Broadcasting forbade Bischoff from ever showing a WWF title on television ever again. Even if this was not the case, Vince knew Hart long enough to know he was a man of integrity.
Bret said he would have no problem to lose the title to anybody except of Shawn even if it's Brooklyn Brawler, Bret said even if he loses the title to Shawn he would not do it in Canada...
You are merging information together. Bret Hart was willing to drop the belt to Michaels as long as it was not in Canada. He likely would have dropped it to someone he respected, such as the Undertaker, in Canada. His main problem was Michaels in Canada.
Hart offered to lose the belt to anyone else on Raw the day after Survivor Series. When Vince refused, Hart offered to surrender the belt on Raw and be given a chance to apologize to the American fans for being a heel.
The reason why I post this, there is something that makes no sense
You book the PPV venues in advance so it was known for months that Survivor Series will be in Canada. The last PPV before Survivor Series was Bad Blood that had HBK vs Undertaker that was not only the first HIAC match but it was also the #1 contender match for the WWE title at Survivor Series. There was no title defence that night because Bret was involved in a tag team match so it was obvious Bret wouod defend the title at Survivor Series so why make HBK the winner and #1 contender?
Undertaker was not made number one contender because his championship run resulted in low PPV buy rates and lagging sales. It made more sense to follow with the Kane/Undertaker feud than to put Taker back in the title picture. Simple as that. Taker was always more known as a wrestler who took one other opponents that seemed unbeatable more than someone who should always be in the title picture.
Furthermore, Hart vs HBK was one of the biggest feuds of all time. It also encompassed the entire 1997 of WWF. No other match as the main event would have made sense.
You cannot assume simply because HBK won that match the Screwjob was a work. That is not just a leap in logic, it's a Schwinn bicycle being able to jump over the grand canyon leap of logic.
Of course there is a lot more that makes no sense.
No, there really isn't.
Do you know the best argument for the moon landing being real? The fact is that there were 400,000 NASA employees involved in the Apollo program. The USSR tracked the Apollo missions. In the 50 years since, not one person has come forward from the program and revealed it was fake.
Watergate involved less than 100 people and it took two months before people started talking. To this day, not a single person involved in the Screwjob have come forward to say it was a work. And you know what, plenty of people have motivation too. Hell, when Earl Hebner got fired, if the screwjob was a work, the first thing he would have done when he came to TNA would be to reveal it. But no one ever has.[/QUOTE]
