Originally Posted by Mike Zybyszko
And again, Bret Hart did the same thing to Shawn Michaels, but you conveniently don't have a problem with that. Beating Hogan wouldn't have changed anything as far as Bret Hart's career was concerned. He was a hall of famer with or without a win on Hogan. And BTW, It wasn't just Michaels, Bret was also refusing to lose clean to Austin, Rock, and HHH as well. That is why the Kliq hated his guts.
Bret refusing to lose to Austin - source?
Bret refusing to lose to Rock - the more common story is Shawn and HHH lobbying for Bret to beat Rock to put the brakes on him. In any event, Bret wrestled Rock on TV and lost by DQ.
Bret refusing to lose HHH - nonsense. Bret lost to HHH on TV, allegedly on the back of Shawn and HHH convincing Vince that Bret ought to prove he was willing to do a job. Bret duly lost. It made no sense, except in furthering the Bret/Shawn angle; otherwise there would have been no reason for that job to be done and Bret would have been justified in questioning it.
Originally Posted by Greenlawler
I am not trying to be a jerk here guys but seriously, read the posts before responding. The OP is very clear about what he wants to know, and while I am open for debate, the answer is NO ONE meeets the criteria of the OP.
I always think of Rick Rude's career as being quite heavily affected by Hogan's alleged refusal to work a program with him BUT that does not fit OP's criteria - particularly because there was no feeding there.
Jake seems to have been the nearest to meeting the OP's criteria. Savage should be the definitive answer (title run overshadowed, jobbed numerous times, had his finish made light of etc) but Savage was so good it didn't derail his career.