Maybe a different angle?
By Scott Keith on 22 December 2012
Hey Scott,
I hate myself for this, but what happens if the 1997 Hart Foundation continues? The pro-Canadian/anti-American angle was some of the best TV the WWE has ever done, and I just wonder what would have happened to that group if the events that transpired never occured… In short, without the Montreal screwjob and the other obvious issues, how would the pro-Canada/anti-USA Hart Foundation angle ended?
I hate myself for this, but what happens if the 1997 Hart Foundation continues? The pro-Canadian/anti-American angle was some of the best TV the WWE has ever done, and I just wonder what would have happened to that group if the events that transpired never occured… In short, without the Montreal screwjob and the other obvious issues, how would the pro-Canada/anti-USA Hart Foundation angle ended?
PS: Honestly, I've heard stories about a hair-pulling incident, but that aside, as a pretty decorated amateur wrestler, couldn't Bret Hart destroy Shawn Michaels in an actual fight?
PPS: Ricky Steamboat vs Tito Santana: Who is the better worker and is it close?
1. Steve Austin beating Bret Hart to win the World title at Wrestlemania was always the destination. Basically the Harts would have replaced D-X's role in the show, I imagine, and then the group would have splintered for good. Makes sense.2. Wrestling and street fighting are two totally different things. The early UFCs showed that even an elite wrestler like Dan Severn could only do so much in that environment. Bret was never known as a tough guy, which is one reason why they were able to execute the screwjob on him.
3. Steamboat, and no, it's not even close.