Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?
It seems a lot of people in this thread are forgetting the fact that Bret had creative control for the last 30 days of his contract, so legally he could do whatever he wanted. If he said he didn't want to drop the title to Shawn in Canada then that was well within his rights.
The creative control stipulation in his contract was something that Vince McMahon had himself agreed to. It was a dirty move for him to do what he did and the only reason anybody ever took Vince's side was because they wanted a job with the WWE/to keep their jobs or had it in for Bret.
And this is why wrestlers should never have creative control over their character because Bret could have refused to do the job for HBK. Nobody in today's WWE has that type of power. Say if John Cena or CM Punk refused to do a job today, they would either get suspended or fired on the spot. Vince shouldn't have did what he did though. If Bret didn't want to do the job, then Vince should have found some way to either write him off Survivor Series, or have him give up the belt before he took off to WCW. Yeah Bret said he would have dropped the belt the next night, but what if Bret changed his mind. What if Bret showed up on Nitro the next night after Survivor Series. Bischoff at the time would have done anything to get one up on Vince. In the end, all parties are at fault.
People complain about newer talent not getting over, but what they mean is that their favourite isn't getting over, everyone else can go to hell. I'm for as many people getting over as possible, it would improve the show and the more over people there are, the more avenues there are to push new talent, yes, your favourites are more likely to get pushed if there are more over people to feud with.