What If? - The Screwjob Never Happened

[bullyballmm]

So Austin was the heel (but the crowd loved him anyway)

Reminds me of a certain female superstar...

 

[Jacob Fox]

So Austin was the heel (but the crowd loved him anyway)

Reminds me of a certain female superstar...

 

[Jacob Fox]

Not trying to troll here because I consider the Screwjob a work and most fans are so oversensitive when someone calls it a work like a religious guy when you tell him that God doesn't exist. The reason I had to post this is because 1998 looked the way it did is because of the booking in 1997 involving the booked Screwjob.

And I want to add for the record, me saying the Screwjob is not a work is not e being oversensitive. I am scientist and I always seek the truth, even if it is not something I want to hear. And the Screwjob being a work is not supported by evidence.

 

[DualShock]

And I want to add for the record, me saying the Screwjob is not a work is not e being oversensitive. I am scientist and I always seek the truth, even if it is not something I want to hear. And the Screwjob being a work is not supported by evidence.

Let's say it was not a work and it was real, can you give me the answer to this because it doesn't make any sense
If you were Vince McMahon, had a champion who says he is willing to drop the title to anyone in Canada except of one guy why would you book that one guy as the #1 contender for the PPV in Canada? You say Undertaker as champion = low PPV buyrate, would you rather choose a bad champion for 2-4 weeks or the trouble for weeks with champion and challenger arguing with you, bookers, writers, road agents and referees about the ending and the fear of a wrestler taking your belt with him?
Why book Bret vs. HBK when it could be easy avoided? They booked the Patriot as #1 contender 1-2 months before and you think a popular main eventer like Undertaker is a bad solution as a champ for one day as replacement for HBK to avoid all the trouble?

Is it coincidence that a wrestler who complained kayfabe the whole year in promos that he was screwed by WWE gets screwed at the end of the year? Why was the Bad Blood PPV (the last PPV before Survivor Series) the last PPV with Vince McMahon on commentary? What was the purpose of Michael Cole doing an interview with Vince McMahon at Survivor Series about the safety of the match with Bince sayimg how he will make things right and then Cole asking him all of sudden who will win with camera zooming to his face and Vince smiling like the Mr. McMahon character saying "I don't know". Why was Vince involved in the main event match screaming at both guys fighting despite that there was no shootfight taking place and both guys wrestled safe with scripted moves? The whole night involving McMahon looked like a typical heelturn in wrestling and the storyline for the birth of the Mr. McMahon character.

If the Screwjob didn't took place what was the purpose of the Wrestling with Shadows movie? That would be the lamest documentary ever.
Let's play the chicken or the egg game, if the Screwjob didn't t took place what would be the content to fill 90 minutes and on the other side if the documentary wasn't filmed with all the cameras backstage how much would the fans realize what went down in the main event and backstage after the match?

 

[Geese]

Let's say it was not a work and it was real, can you give me the answer to this because it doesn't make any sense
If you were Vince McMahon, had a champion who says he is willing to drop the title to anyone in Canada except of one guy why would you book that one guy as the #1 contender for the PPV in Canada? You say Undertaker as champion = low PPV buyrate, would you rather choose a bad champion for 2-4 weeks or the trouble for weeks with champion and challenger arguing with you, bookers, writers, road agents and referees about the ending and the fear of a wrestler taking your belt with him?
Why book Bret vs. HBK when it could be easy avoided? They booked the Patriot as #1 contender 1-2 months before and you think a popular main eventer like Undertaker is a bad solution as a champ for one day as replacement for HBK to avoid all the trouble?

Is it coincidence that a wrestler who complained kayfabe the whole year in promos that he was screwed by WWE gets screwed at the end of the year? Why was the Bad Blood PPV (the last PPV before Survivor Series) the last PPV with Vince McMahon on commentary? What was the purpose of Michael Cole doing an interview with Vince McMahon at Survivor Series about the safety of the match with Bince sayimg how he will make things right and then Cole asking him all of sudden who will win with camera zooming to his face and Vince smiling like the Mr. McMahon character saying "I don't know". Why was Vince involved in the main event match screaming at both guys fighting despite that there was no shootfight taking place and both guys wrestled safe with scripted moves? The whole night involving McMahon looked like a typical heelturn in wrestling and the storyline for the birth of the Mr. McMahon character.

If the Screwjob didn't took place what was the purpose of the Wrestling with Shadows movie? That would be the lamest documentary ever. if the Screwjob didn't t took place what would be the content to fill 90 minutes and on the other side if the documentary wasn't filmed with all the cameras backstage how much would the fans realize what went down in the main event and backstage after the match?

You are engaging in hypothetical "What if's" at this point. Asking twenty questions with full knowledge anyone with a social life isn't going to answer any of these questions. Scott Hall has been saying the screwjob was a work have no substantive evidence to back it up. I have a hard time believing The Patriot would ever be in contention for the WWE World title. He was a mid-card wrestler in WWE and WCW. Vince McMahon pushed Undertaker as champion that same year at Wrestlemania 13 and the ratings weren't exactly shyrocketing.

 

[bullyballmm]

You are engaging in hypothetical "What if's" at this point.

Dude look at the title of this thread lol.

The one thing I don't get is this - why do people think a wrestler having "creative control" in their contract actually means anything? Vince is still the ultimate decision maker at the end of the day, and if he disagrees with something Bret Hart wanted re: creative, I think he would have rather gone over Bret's head and cop any monetary loss from a lawsuit than let Bret get his way.

So either Bret didn't want to drop to Shawn AT ALL, attempted to employ his creative control, and Vince went over his head anyway - and Bret just decided to let it go and not sue.

OR

Bret was convinced to do the job (even though it wasn't what he wanted) but only on the condition that it's a screwjob so that Bret looks like a strong babyface before he goes to WCW. All Vince wanted was a) The title on Shawn Michaels, and b) Getting out of the ridiculous contract that he offered Bret. He wanted Bret to go to WCW because he knew he couldn't afford him.

The latter argument results in a win-win for both Bret and Vince (as well as Shawn) and resulted in one of the most memorable moment in wrestling history. I am sure Bret would have wanted to be a part of that.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Montreal Screwjob was a work

 

[Geese]

The latter argument results in a win-win for both Bret and Vince (as well as Shawn) and resulted in one of the most memorable moment in wrestling history. I am sure Bret would have wanted to be a part of that. I wouldn't be surprised if the Montreal Screwjob was a work

Montreal screwjob was a work? Based on what? Complete conjecture from wrestlers in the industry and a good number of them have an ax to grind with Bret. Montreal screwjob become one the most memorable moments in wrestling history because fans don't want to move on and have been debating this issue to death for the one thousandth time. It's hard for me to believe it was a work when Bret didn't have any working relationship with the WWE for eight years after Montreal was over.

 

[bullyballmm]

Montreal screwjob was a work? Based on what?

Umm everything else that I said in my post? You don't need evidence, because there is no real evidence either way - if you point to something Shawn says in one of his autobiographies, for example, the people who come in believing Montreal was real will take it at face value, while those who believe it might be a work could say that Shawn is still working.

So we have to resort to logic as I did in my post. Hart was in WCW after Montreal because that was the plan. He had an injury not long after, and he probably didn't return to WWE on screen was to keep up the work (while also allowing him to help indy promotions during his time away from WWE/WCW)

But if you want evidence - why have all that footage for Wrestling with Shadows if it wasn't a planned work? That documentary is like Vince's prototype for the modern day documentaries they make and air on the Network.

What about Earl Hebner coming out this year saying he thought Hart was in on the work? Obviously the only people who really know are Vince, Bret and possibly Shawn, and they have nothing to gain and everything to lose by revealing that the Screwjob was a work. That's why evidence of it being a work vs. evidence of it not being a work is hard to come by.

 

[DualShock]

You are engaging in hypothetical "What if's" at this point. Asking twenty questions with full knowledge anyone with a social life isn't going to answer any of these questions. Scott Hall has been saying the screwjob was a work have no substantive evidence to back it up. I have a hard time believing The Patriot would ever be in contention for the WWE World title. He was a mid-card wrestler in WWE and WCW. Vince McMahon pushed Undertaker as champion that same year at Wrestlemania 13 and the ratings weren't exactly shyrocketing.

No "what if", more like rhetorical questions. Asking why choose the only guy of the whole roster the champ has a problem to work with and lose in his country, where discussing the ending of the match will cause trouble and headaches is not a " what if" situation, more like a mystery why not avoid all of this (that only makes sense if all of this was planned = a work).
As for the Undertaker/Patriot part, of course the Patriot was never in contention but if the WWE can promote a PPV with the Patriot in a title match why not with Undertaker who was already in 1997 a main event player? Nobody talks about a long Undertaker title reign, more lile a solution (1 day, a few weeks) to avoid the trouble and not booking Bret vs HBK in Canada.
[automerge]1568895551[/automerge]

Umm everything else that I said in my post? You don't need evidence, because there is no real evidence either way - if you point to something Shawn says in one of his autobiographies, for example, the people who come in believing Montreal was real will take it at face value, while those who believe it might be a work could say that Shawn is still working.

So we have to resort to logic as I did in my post. Hart was in WCW after Montreal because that was the plan. He had an injury not long after, and he probably didn't return to WWE on screen was to keep up the work (while also allowing him to help indy promotions during his time away from WWE/WCW)

But if you want evidence - why have all that footage for Wrestling with Shadows if it wasn't a planned work? That documentary is like Vince's prototype for the modern day documentaries they make and air on the Network.

What about Earl Hebner coming out this year saying he thought Hart was in on the work? Obviously the only people who really know are Vince, Bret and possibly Shawn, and they have nothing to gain and everything to lose by revealing that the Screwjob was a work. That's why evidence of it being a work vs. evidence of it not being a work is hard to come by.

There are some misconceptions about the Screwjob where the fans believe the Screwjob MUST be real:
The Screwjob made the Mr. McMahon character:
When you look back, Vince McMahon became more involved on WWE TV the year before and was already somehow controversial. He was officially revealed as the WWE owner for the first time in 1996 despite owning the place for many years. He was criticized and portrayed as a controversial figure by many the whole year 1997. Jim Ross, Vince Russo on Livewire, Bret Hart, Nation, DX, Paul Bearer, Austin. Watch some Raw promos and interviews from 1997 when a wrestler talked and pointed at McMahon who had an angry look. McMahon also became more physically involved, taking bumps from Austin & Bret and he started yelling at wrestlers when he didn't like their Attitude starting to be more agressive. The McMahon character was one year in the making before Survivor Series and the Screwjob was his heel turn.

Bret left angry the WWE because of the Screwjob:
Bret was supposed to leave WWE anyway because of more money, that is something that makes somebody happy and not angry. The question was only when and how. Bret left without being pinned or having the words "I give up" coming out of his mouth. That makes him even more happy and even less angry.
What was he supposed to do? Cut a promo on Raw where he vacates the title? "I am a proud champion and I love you fans but I will vacate the title and leave because it's all about da moneeeey"?

The Screwjob was something bad and terrible and the fact that nobody involved revealed the truth shows it was real because it was so horrible they had to say the truth:
It wasn't horrible at all, nobody died, nobody's career was killed, everybody did benefit, Bret involved. The reason why Bret did suffer after the Screwjob was not because he was screwed, it was because WCW used him terrible. Watch his momentum all the way from his announcement after Survivor Series until Starrcade 1997. Not even Hogan had that momentum when he signed with WCW.

Montreal screwjob was a work? Based on what? Complete conjecture from wrestlers in the industry and a good number of them have an ax to grind with Bret. Montreal screwjob become one the most memorable moments in wrestling history because fans don't want to move on and have been debating this issue to death for the one thousandth time. It's hard for me to believe it was a work when Bret didn't have any working relationship with the WWE for eight years after Montreal was over.

You forgot that since the Screwjob Bret had many health problems and tragedies and there was still bad blood because of his brother Owen. Ironically you posted a hint with "the Screwjob became so memorable" because all the people involved at first enjoyed the momentum because of the Screwjob (around the years 1998 & 1999) and had no reason to reveal the truth but after many years they realized the fans still talk about this and it became so big they didn't want to destroy the illusion and take away their part from wrestling history, they would gain nothing from it if they reveal the truth.
Also, if the Screwjob was real then that what happened at Survivor Series would be injustice and a wrestling crime but if it was a work then nobody got hurt and there would be no reason to tell the truth because nobody suffered and you don't hear wrestlers explaining the storylines telling what went down was not real so I don't know why people think the proof why the Screwjob is real is because nobody has officially confirmed this. That's like saying Vince really hated his son because he has never confirmed that they were just pretending in 2001 to hate each other and that it was all a work. The only people who "suffered" in this story were the fans who believed all the time it was real but you forgot it's just pro wrestling and not the possible truth about 9/11

 

[Geese]

You don't need evidence, because there is no real evidence either way. But if you want evidence - why have all that footage for Wrestling with Shadows if it wasn't a planned work? That documentary is like Vince's prototype for the modern day documentaries they make and air on the Network. What about Earl Hebner coming out this year saying he thought Hart was in on the work? That's why evidence of it being a work vs. evidence of it not being a work is hard to come by.

Actually, if you think it was a work you do, in fact, need evidence to back up your claims. Not dabbling in conspiracy theory. Wrestling with Shadows was an independently produced documentary and the directors would need access to all the footage from Montreal and they would need to interview Bret and Vince. Evidence of it being planned is hard to come by because it wasn't a work.

 

[bullyballmm]

Actually, if you think it was a work you do, in fact, need evidence to back up your claims

In science, the null hypothesis is the defaul position, that the person making a claim has to counter with evidence.

In wrestling, apart from the major exceptions of something like Jerry Lawler's heart attack, Owen Hart's death, or Roman's leukemia, everything else in ring is considered a work. Therefore something being a work is the default, null hypothesis.

Vince, Bret etc. saying there was a screwjob does not make that the null hypothesis, as like I said, if it was a work, they would not want something as big as this being revealed to be a work.

Therefore It is the job of those who claim what happened in Montreal was a shoot to provide the evidence to convince me otherwise.

@JacobFox what do you think I have to say about this?

 

[Geese]

In science, the null hypothesis is the default position, that the person making a claim has to counter with evidence. Therefore It is the job of those who claim what happened in Montreal was a shoot to provide the evidence to convince me otherwise.

False. The onus is on the presenters to document evidence point-by-point to the general public that their theory is grounded in reality. Therefore, it is the job of people who claim the Montreal Screwjob was scripted to provide evidence which shows beyond a reasonable doubt that it was a work. Otherwise, the screwjob was real.

 

[bullyballmm]

False. The onus is on the presenters to document evidence point-by-point to the general public that their theory is grounded in reality. Therefore, it is the job of those who claim the Montreal Screwjob was scripted to provide evidence to show beyond a reasonable doubt that it was a work. Otherwise, the screwjob was real.

So why do people who make the claim that the Montreal Screwjob was real get to claim the default position and not have to provide evidence? That doesn't make any sense and you didn't address my point that in the wrestling world, kayfabe/works is considered the null hypothesis unless there is evidence that there was a shoot instead.

 

[Grievous 3D]

That was last moment that I truly enjoyed the WWE main roster...

I remember being so disappointed for Becky when she was ruled
out for Survivor Series. She was still likable at that time...and this
was before "The Man" cringe had started.

Ugh...

Anyway...On Topic...

The thing I don't understand about the Montreal
screwjob is it just seems so simple to avoid...

Have the match at Survivor Series end with a wild
brawl & then the next night on RAW book a rematch...
BUT have Ken Shamrock win his way into that match
by winning the opening match of the night...maybe
he defeats Triple H or Owen Hart?

Kind of like what they did with Daniel Bryan at Mania 30...
only on a smaller scale of course.

Then you have the main event triple threat match for
the title with Shamrock pinning (or submitting) Michaels
to win the belt.

Then Bret leaves for WCW...while Michaels moves
into a feud with Shamrock & wins the belt from him.

It protects Bret (& his ego) in his final match, hopefully
elevates Shamrock to a main event player & gives Michaels
a new opponent to feud with.

Problem solved.

 

[Geese]

So why do people who make the claim that the Montreal Screwjob was real get to claim the default position and not have to provide evidence? That doesn't make any sense and you didn't address my point that in the wrestling world, kayfabe is considered the null hypothesis unless there is evidence that there was a shoot instead.

The folks who claim Montreal was real wins the default position because the truth is on their side.

Wrestling is a work but we know from interviewing the wrestlers that certain incidents are real and wasn't scripted. For instance, we know Rick Rude didn't like Lanny Poffo and the only reason he thinks Lanny had a job was because of his brother Randy Savage. We know there was bad blood and it wasn't kayfabe. We know the Sid Vicious-Arn Anderson stabbing incident in the hotel lobby really happened and it wasn't kayfabe.