|
|
Post by Bill Hart on Sept 9, 2007 11:55:54 GMT -5
In your opinion who was the better WWF Champion? I say Bret Hart. Hogan was a great champion, but Bret brought in a whole new style of wrestling. His era was more about athleticism. It was more important to have a good match instead of storylines. Bret took on all challenges and he wasn't afraid to put people over. He is the greatest champion there ever was.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehitman29 on Sept 9, 2007 17:23:42 GMT -5
Bret was the best champ in the history of wrestling.
|
|
|
|
Post by defdave on Sept 10, 2007 7:12:01 GMT -5
Bret certainly was great. But without Hulk Hogan, there wouldn't have been a Bret.  Of course you know I'm an avid, proud Hulkamaniac, but aside from that, I think the history book will show that Hulk Hogan had the biggest impact on wrestling as the WWF World Heavyweight Champion. He put the butts in the seats, for lack of a better term. More so and for longer than Steve Austin, The Rock, Randy Savage, and even Bret Hart. And don't get me wrong, I loved all of those guys as champions (except for Steve Austin....the whole face/heel gray area disturbed me), it's just that Hulk Hogan for many years was the icon, the standard bearer of what a champion should be. But you do make great points about what Bret brought to the table as a champion. |
|
|
|
Post by Jim1025 on Sept 10, 2007 12:00:48 GMT -5
I'm with dave. Bret might have been the greatest technical wrestler to hold the title, but no one made as big of an impact as Hogan. He brought wrestling into the mainstream in the 80s. Without him, the WWF would have not have been as big as it was then. He didnt need to be a technical masterpiece, because he had so much personality and charisma. He held the title for four years between 1984-88, so that alone tells you how over he was as champ.
|
|
|
|
Post by Piperfan on Sept 10, 2007 15:48:56 GMT -5
Bret was the better wrestler, but Hogan was the better champion. Being a great champion in pro wrestling is a lot more than just being a great wrestler.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill Hart on Sept 10, 2007 17:10:08 GMT -5
All good points. Your right about Hogan being the best personality, but the question was who was the best champion. Bret had many more title defenses than Hogan. He treated the title with more respect than anyone. He made the belt seem more important than anything, because he made you believe the belt was the most important thing in the world to him and it probably was. Hogan cared more about the fans and celebrity. Bret's world was all about being the champion and proving to everyone he should be the champion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phenom32 on Sept 11, 2007 17:02:31 GMT -5
Hogan was a better champion, because he seemed unbeatable, Bret didnt have that. Hogan was that heavyweight that no one could touch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill Hart on Sept 12, 2007 9:22:36 GMT -5
I believe Bret had that unbeatable factor too. The question was if there was anyone who could out wrestle him. He may have lost more matches than Hogan, so that may have made him seem more beatable, but that's just because he wanted to put more people over.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehitman29 on Sept 13, 2007 18:54:40 GMT -5
Being a great champion isn't about being unbeatable. It's about heart and courage, it's about performance, it's about storytelling, so many factors. While I will never put down what Hogan did for wrestling and how great he was. Bret Hart was a champion in a true sense of the world. He was also a true world champ that defended his title around the world while Hogan basically defended his title more in the US...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill Hart on Sept 18, 2007 18:47:16 GMT -5
Exactly
|
|
|
|
Post by hulkrules on Sept 19, 2007 12:47:47 GMT -5
Bret is one of the greatest champions of all time but when Hulk won his 1st title it changed the wrestling industry forever....Brother!
|
|
