Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart???

[Daniel F'n Bryan]

Basically which guy did you prefer from 1988 (When Shawn became a full time superstar in the WWF) to 1997 (When Bret left the WWF). Thats it plain and simple who was better regaurdless of who they were outside of the ring. If you wish to ellaborate on who you picked and why then please do so. Let the voting begin.

I gotta go with Shawn. I know its been said countless times throughout the past 20 years but Shawn made EVERYONE look good. He had the best matches from 94-97 when both guys were in their prime (Shawns an exception because quite frankly once he hit his prime it NEVER ended untill he retired and theres nobody else that can be said about). When I hear anyone mention any of those years Shawn instantly comes to mind for his matches with Bret, Razor, Diesel, Taker, Mankind, Sid and Vader among others. I can simply name more great HBK matches from that time then Bret Hart matches. I love both guys and theyre both in my top 5 but Shawn simply entertained me more throught that 9 year period then Bret did.

[Deleted]

Shawn is probably the most over rated wrestler of all time. Shawn needs a good opponent to put on a good match, Bret can work great matches with anyone.

Some of Bret's matches with the likes of Hakushi are pure gold, and none of Shawn's matches will ever come close to the magic that Bret had with Owen, Bulldog, Austin and Curt Hennig.

Shawn could never work as well with a guy like Yokozuna, but Bret had two incredible Wrestlemania matches with him. Even Razor, Bret put on a way better match with Razor at the Rumble in 93 (and KOTR) than Shawn did with his countless matches with him.

Bret was so good that he went out and even wrestled 2 or three matches in an event, all different and all great, Shawn could never do that.

[robinsonben36]

I couldn't disagree more with your statement that Bret could have great matches with anyone and that Shawn couldn't. I honestly can't think of a bad match Shawn had from 1993-1998 or 2003-2006. And the fact that in between those eras, he had a major back injury, took over four years off, lost his hops and still was getting A+ quality work out of everyone really tips the scales in his favor in my opinion. They're probably #1 and #1A in the ring in the history of wrestling, so I don't mean any of that as a slight to Bret at all. He was fantastic in his prime as well.

I think the big picture story for them is that Bret was more technically sound in the ring (by a longshot) but that Shawn was better at working a crowd (by the same margin) but both accomplished incredible things.

[Deleted]

the wrongfully titled "copout" option for me!!!

enjoyed both equally always have.

[Raine]

Bret wins for me just based on his 1997 run in his Hart Foundation vs Austin/USA feud.

Never could really relate to Shawn as he was more aimed towards women & kids (hence the MSG reation at Survivors 96), never forgave the way he gave up title after title in the 90's instead of doing the honourable J.O.B.

[mikey1974]

Bret for me!

i LOVE Shawn, but Bret just had something about him. he could put on great technical matches,or have a knock-down brawl. he had that whole "Cool Hand Luke" type of persona, and cut promo's that got down to the bottom line quickly.

Shawn had an unparalled charisma,and could make anyone look good. but he never felt like "The Guy" to me. Bret did for me. from 1992-1995 he was the Best in the World, in my opinion.

[Deleted]

Bret Hart.

I don't think Bret ever had a bad match.

However, I do love Shawn Michaels but for some reason his antics (even in the ring) in the 1990s just made me not care too much for him. I think about him having a temper tantrum in the middle of the ring against Vader at Summerslam 1996 and again against Sid at Survivor Series 1996 and it just sours me on the whole HBK experience.

His return from 2002-2010 was awesome though.

Bret Hart is my pick.

[Brad]

Apr 29, 2012 5:30:06 GMT -5 @cabbageconkers said:

Shawn is probably the most over rated wrestler of all time. Shawn needs a good opponent to put on a good match

I'll say it again...... This guy. SMH

I think Bret is one of the best of all time but to say Shawn had to have a good opponent to have a good match is absolutely ridiculous.

WM 23 begs to differ. Just for one example

[Jamal]

Between that time period, its Hart pretty easily.

[cordless2016]

Bret was the man. Better in the ring and underrated on the mic. HBK was good but Bret appealed to a bigger world audience.

[Deleted]

As much as people (including Vince) and fellow superstars don't want to admit it...Bret Hart was THE guy from 1993-1997. Period. I've said it a million times.

Bret gets overlooked because he was unfairly expected to fill Hogan's shoes after he left which was impossible. He was also expected to carry the entire company on his back (which he did) during a time where wrestling was no longer popular and guys like Mantaur, Duke Droese and Isaac Yankem were on the card. Vince tried to replace Bret with Diesel, Lex Luger and Shawn Michaels but neither could carry the belt or the company the same way Bret could in the 1990s.

Period.

[kazoosandstreamers]

Haha, very close.
Bret may be in my top 5, but HBK is in my top 2.

Sooo, HBK!


Edit- Crap, I didn't notice we were comparing them during a certain time period.
Hmm, in this case, I'll copout or might give the edge to Bret.
He was pretty much the man during that time.

[Deleted]

Apr 29, 2012 5:30:06 GMT -5 @cabbageconkers said:

Shawn is probably the most over rated wrestler of all time. Shawn needs a good opponent to put on a good match, Bret can work great matches with anyone.

Some of Bret's matches with the likes of Hakushi are pure gold, and none of Shawn's matches will ever come close to the magic that Bret had with Owen, Bulldog, Austin and Curt Hennig.

Shawn could never work as well with a guy like Yokozuna, but Bret had two incredible Wrestlemania matches with him. Even Razor, Bret put on a way better match with Razor at the Rumble in 93 (and KOTR) than Shawn did with his countless matches with him.

Bret was so good that he went out and even wrestled 2 or three matches in an event, all different and all great, Shawn could never do that.

You've gotta be high if you think Shawn couldn't work bigger guys...and Bret's matches with Yoko were nothing amazing at all.

I'm a big fan of both guys, so it's hard to choose.

[Daniel F'n Bryan]

Apr 29, 2012 13:33:54 GMT -5 @bashcrashwiley said:

As much as people (including Vince) and fellow superstars don't want to admit it...Bret Hart was THE guy from 1993-1996. Period. I've said it a million times.

Bret gets overlooked because he was unfairly expected to fill Hogan's shoes after he left which was impossible. He was also expected to carry the entire company on his back (which he did) during a time where wrestling was no longer popular and guys like Mantaur, Duke Droese and Isaac Yankem were on the card. Vince tried to replace Bret with Diesel, Lex Luger and Shawn Michaels but neither could carry the belt or the company the same way Bret could in the 1990s.

Period.

I've said the same thing about Bret for as long as I can remember. From 93 to 95 he was THE man and Vince didn't want to accept that. But to say that he was THE man in 96 is absurd. Shawn was THE guy that year. And to say that Shawn couldn't carry the company in 1996 is a valid point but I think many people need to realize something. Two of the WWFs biggest stars had just up and left and did something that not many people did before and that was show up in another company and pretty much take over the whole place storyline wise and behind the scenes. Shawn deserves more credit for 96 then he gets because everyone seems to not take Diesel and Razor leaving into account.

[Chicago]

I have long debated which is my favorite wrestler of all-time, and up until recently I might have given the slight edge to Shawn Michaels because of his entire body of work (especially post-2002 comeback).

However, if we're talking up until 1997 only, it has to be Bret Hart.

Bret could carry ANYONE to a good, if not possibly great, match and didn't need The Kliq's influence in order to maintain his position within the company.

To me, he'll always be The Guy for the WWF in the New Generation Era in terms of both workrate and overness with the entire crowd, meaning marks and smarks of all ages, races and genders.

Also, from figures I've seen/read about in the past, Bret's WWF Championship reigns sold far better than HBK's "Boyhood Dream" tour in '96, thus meaning he was the better draw overall prior to the Attitude Era.

[Deleted]

Apr 29, 2012 13:48:17 GMT -5 Daniel F'n Bryan said:

Apr 29, 2012 13:33:54 GMT -5 @bashcrashwiley said:

As much as people (including Vince) and fellow superstars don't want to admit it...Bret Hart was THE guy from 1993-1996. Period. I've said it a million times.

Bret gets overlooked because he was unfairly expected to fill Hogan's shoes after he left which was impossible. He was also expected to carry the entire company on his back (which he did) during a time where wrestling was no longer popular and guys like Mantaur, Duke Droese and Isaac Yankem were on the card. Vince tried to replace Bret with Diesel, Lex Luger and Shawn Michaels but neither could carry the belt or the company the same way Bret could in the 1990s.

Period.

I've said the same thing about Bret for as long as I can remember. From 93 to 95 he was THE man and Vince didn't want to accept that. But to say that he was THE man in 96 is absurd. Shawn was THE guy that year. And to say that Shawn couldn't carry the company in 1996 is a valid point but I think many people need to realize something. Two of the WWFs biggest stars had just up and left and did something that not many people did before and that was show up in another company and pretty much take over the whole place storyline wise and behind the scenes. Shawn deserves more credit for 96 then he gets because everyone seems to not take Diesel and Razor leaving into account.

I'd still say that Bret was THE guy all the way until he left in 1997. While HBK did have a run as World Champion in 1996 so did Sycho Sid. I think Bret was still considered as being the top guy in the company even if he was MIA during most of 1996 (although he still competed in overseas tours and Kuwait). Shawn's run was okay and it probably seems better than it actually was because Bret was not around during the entire run.

That's not taking anything away from HBK either. He was excellent from 2002-2010 but we are talking about 1988-1997 here. Shawn (at that time) was unprofessional in the ring and was not the face of the company for the majority of that time. Shawn may have held the belt for 8 months in 1996 but that doesn't come close to Bret Hart's dominance from 1993 all the way until 1997.

[Deleted]

Apr 29, 2012 13:55:18 GMT -5 @bashcrashwiley said:

Apr 29, 2012 13:48:17 GMT -5 Daniel F'n Bryan said:

I've said the same thing about Bret for as long as I can remember. From 93 to 95 he was THE man and Vince didn't want to accept that. But to say that he was THE man in 96 is absurd. Shawn was THE guy that year. And to say that Shawn couldn't carry the company in 1996 is a valid point but I think many people need to realize something. Two of the WWFs biggest stars had just up and left and did something that not many people did before and that was show up in another company and pretty much take over the whole place storyline wise and behind the scenes. Shawn deserves more credit for 96 then he gets because everyone seems to not take Diesel and Razor leaving into account.

I'd still say that Bret was THE guy all the way until he left in 1997. While HBK did have a run as World Champion in 1996 so did Sycho Sid. I think Bret was still considered as being the top guy in the company even if he was MIA during most of 1996 (although he still competed in overseas tours and Kuwait). Shawn's run was okay and it probably seems better than it actually was because Bret was not around during the entire run.

That's not taking anything away from HBK either. He was excellent from 2002-2010 but we are talking about 1988-1997 here. Shawn (at that time) was unprofessional in the ring and was not the face of the company for the majority of that time. Shawn may have held the belt for 8 months in 1996 but that doesn't come close to Bret Hart's dominance from 1993 all the way until 1997.

I agree, the only thing I disagree with is that Bret really was "The Guy" starting around Summerslam 92. That was him losing the title so he could win the world title and carry the company.

I think Vince didn't like the thought of a scientific flagholder, he liked monsters and muscles, which is why he tried with Luger and Diesel.

[K5]

bret by leaps and bounds - his character, the canadian pride, the technical skill, the element of family, etc.

bret hart was my childhood hero.

[punksnotdead]

Shawn Michaels.

This debate is like Democrats vs Republicans, I'm staying the out of it. You guys want to talk about religion after this?

[cordless2016]

and Bret's matches with Yoko were nothing amazing at all.

Yoko's matches w/ Bret were the best of his career. Yoko never had a better match than the one w/ Bret at WM9.

And Bret was THE MAN from 1993-1997. If you look at the whole era, Bret was the man who was drawing the fans, and while wrestling as a whole had lost its popularity in the US, Bret was still one of the biggest draws ever outside of the US.

Even in 1996 when Bret missed most of the year, the two biggest grossing months for the WWF that year were January and February...when Bret was champ. Shawn has to be given credit for doing his best as champ after Razor, Nash, and Bret all left, but the fact is that Shawn never really appealed to the men. His basically appealed to women and kids. His matches were great, but he was also known for throwing tantrums in the middle of matches as well.

And I believe Bret's return in the fall of 1996 drew Raw's highest rating since Shawn had won the title (I believe this is true). When Bret returned, the main storyline became Bret/Austin, and not HBK/Sid. Bret came back and was still on top. And throughout 1997, it was all about Bret and the Hart Foundation. Hell, they were even more important than Taker, who was champ, for most of 1997. 1997 revolved around Austin and the Hart Foundation, while Shawn and Taker seemed to be role players in that feud.

Vince can try to deny it all he wants, but the bottom line is that Bret was THE MAN from 1993-1997. Yoko, Lex, Diesel, HBK, Sid, and Taker were all given shots at taking Bret's spot, but in the end, Bret always ended up back on top. I feel alot of people overrate HBK because literally everything he did during his second run was considered the best thing ever by the WWE and fanboys, when in reality from 2007 to his retirement, he was very hit and miss. Shawn was great at times, but Bret was always great and got the best out of every opponent he had. I also feel that alot of todays fans never saw Bret during those years, and only say Shawn because of what he has done in recent years. At the time, there was no question who was the best.

Its just sad how badly his WCW run was botched because he could have had dream matches w/ guys like Sting and Goldberg.