El-P Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 It's another in the long line of great "what if's?" in wrestling. So many different things could have sprung from this. I know the inspiration for "The Clique" was Buddy Rodger's group of workers, back in the 50's. I've always wondered if this some half assed attempt to form a union, post steriod trial. As Vince was arguably at his weakest back then. Bret, Shawn, Nash & Hall, with Owen, Davey & Kid as a group would have had Vince by the nuts. they were basically all his stars. Except Undertaker. Added to that people like Austin and Foley when they showed up, who Bret and Nash where high on. Taker also had his group at one time. Taker, Yoko, Fatu, and a few other names I don't remember. That could have had a huge effect on the company for sure. Just incredible leverage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLIK Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Taker also had his group at one time. Taker, Yoko, Fatu, and a few other names I don't remember. Kama & Mable for sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rovert Posted October 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Wasnt that the "MSK"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Log Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 God, that group could've squashed the Clique. Who'd wanna fuck with them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocco Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Taker's group vs the Clique should have been a War Games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 This is the first I've ever heard of that being a group. Where did that info come from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rovert Posted October 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 This is the first I've ever heard of that being a group. Where did that info come from? I think Rikishi's shoot interview. It was deeply kayfabed on & off TV in this unspoken "Undertaker is a locker room leader"/Samoans will fuck you up way. I think some members had MSK tattoos too. More drinking buddies than anything like the Kliq being marks and throwing hand signals on TV. I really think the three letters were MSK but Ive found nothing online. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 A subscriber could check the archives but Wade said in the Torch at back during the height of the Clique vs everyone/"Titanic Sports" period that there were one or two organized opposition groups who showed solidarity by wearing similar articles of clothing or something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregor Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 I wouldn't have guessed that Mabel and Undertaker were friends. Did Undertaker play a role in his depush/release after Mabel injured him, or is that just something I assumed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 I wouldn't have guessed that Mabel and Undertaker were friends. Did Undertaker play a role in his depush/release after Mabel injured him, or is that just something I assumed? Well, it was an accident. The whole "Taker's Crew" thing is talked about in detail in the Godwinns' shoot interview, now that I think of it, as they were part of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Log Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 I wouldn't have guessed that Mabel and Undertaker were friends. Did Undertaker play a role in his depush/release after Mabel injured him, or is that just something I assumed? Well, it was an accident. The whole "Taker's Crew" thing is talked about in detail in the Godwinns' shoot interview, now that I think of it, as they were part of it. The Godwinns too!?!?! They could've made the Cliq their bitches. I don't understand this. What kept that from happening? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slickster Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 It was the Bone Street Krew. IIRC, every member (Paul Bearer included) got a 'BSK' tattoo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 I wouldn't have guessed that Mabel and Undertaker were friends. Did Undertaker play a role in his depush/release after Mabel injured him, or is that just something I assumed? Well, it was an accident. The whole "Taker's Crew" thing is talked about in detail in the Godwinns' shoot interview, now that I think of it, as they were part of it. The Godwinns too!?!?! They could've made the Cliq their bitches. I don't understand this. What kept that from happening? Probably because they seemed to get along fine. I need to dig up my old Photobucket account, but I have a pic of the Clique and the BSK hanging out together (Steve Austin is in the group shot as well). It wouldn't shock me at all if the BSK weren't put together to get Taker pushed more, but rather as locker room police officers, for lack of a better term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 It's really not terribly complicated: * Bret was right * Vince was wrong * Shawn was wrong Actually, being "wrong" in this case was the most right thing that could have possibly happened for Vince and co. I wish I could be wrong that successfully once in my life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 That's true and I personally have always suspected that Vince new he could run with himself as a some sort of tweener/heel in the aftermath and that it would have positive effect on his business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smkelly Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 And Dylan, your analogy is really embarrassing. Nope. It's 100% correct. Yeah, El-P, I don't see where the problem is with Dylan's analogy. It is spot on. And I thought Bret's 'creative control' was a less-autonomous version of the Hogan bearer. I recall clear terminology - 'unreasonable demands' being one of them. Losing to Shawn in Canada wouldn't have ruined Bret's legacy in Canada, irregardless of it being his quote-unquote "last WWF match ever". I think Bret's hatred for Shawn Michaels blurred the lines of 'reasonable conduct' and 'unreasonable demands'. But, nevertheless, the way Vince and Co. covered their asses was very typical of an egotistical giant. The meme of, "Bret would have taken the WWF title to WCW" is ridiculous. Bret didn't want to leave the WWF. I often question the authenticity of Bret's bio, but he explained that he was willing to turn down a multi-million dollar contract to stay with the WWF. That's loyalty. But things of 'moral standards' means little to a man like Vince McMahon. But after fourteen years, I see fault in both men, and at varying degrees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 That's true and I personally have always suspected that Vince new he could run with himself as a some sort of tweener/heel in the aftermath and that it would have positive effect on his business. Certainly when he took a Stunner at MSG he likely thought that. Perhaps even earlier than that when he had the occasional physical confrontation with Bret. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragemaster Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 The meme of, "Bret would have taken the WWF title to WCW" is ridiculous. A Lot of people seem to to think that Bret had too much honour and integrity to take the title to Nitro. But it was reported in a 1992 issue of the observer, that he was in talks to take the intercontinental belt to wcw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 I wouldn't have guessed that Mabel and Undertaker were friends. Did Undertaker play a role in his depush/release after Mabel injured him, or is that just something I assumed? No, I believe that was Kevin Nash's doing. Mabel gave Nash a bruised sternum in their SummerSlam '95 main event. When a rematch was booked at a Raw taping in late 1995, Nash balked at working with someone so reckless, which meant that Nash got to squash in a few seconds. After a last brief appearance at the '96 Royal Rumble, Mabel didn't work for the company again until he returned as Viscera in early 1999. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 And Dylan, your analogy is really embarrassing. Nope. It's 100% correct. Yeah, El-P, I don't see where the problem is with Dylan's analogy. It is spot on. And I thought Bret's 'creative control' was a less-autonomous version of the Hogan bearer. I recall clear terminology - 'unreasonable demands' being one of them. Losing to Shawn in Canada wouldn't have ruined Bret's legacy in Canada, irregardless of it being his quote-unquote "last WWF match ever". I think Bret's hatred for Shawn Michaels blurred the lines of 'reasonable conduct' and 'unreasonable demands'. It was "reasonable creative control," specifically defined as Bret and Vince having to agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted October 16, 2011 Report Share Posted October 16, 2011 The meme of, "Bret would have taken the WWF title to WCW" is ridiculous. A Lot of people seem to to think that Bret had too much honour and integrity to take the title to Nitro. But it was reported in a 1992 issue of the observer, that he was in talks to take the intercontinental belt to wcw. That was always Bret's gimmick to a degree. He loved playing himself as this white knight in a den of thieves when it came to wrestling. He still does to a large degree. IMO, WCW was throwing money around at the time. Is it really that hard to believe they wouldn't have thrown him a couple of extra million to bring the title belt onto Nitro. Is Bret really going to turn down some cold hard cash for a company that he was leaving anyways? Like I said, it's easy for Bret in hindsight to say he would've never done it. The WWF should've managed his dates and contract better and not paint themselves into that corner. But they did what they thought they had to to protect themselves. I think it's a clear situation where everyone was in the wrong. Vince and the WWF should've managed his contract better and Bret should've been more willing to play ball on dropping the belt. I really think Michaels, as much as I hate him, really doesn't matter here. It's Vince and Bret's deal, Michaels really didn't owe Bret anything and Vince was signing his checks. I honestly don't see why Michaels would refuse to go along with it considering Bret was leaving the company and wasn't really a friend or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted October 16, 2011 Report Share Posted October 16, 2011 The only problem with that is that the only reason Bret was going to WCW in the first place was because Vince shit on the contract he signed with Bret. A contract where Bret took less short term money, for more long term security. At that point if Bret had taken the title to Nitro he would have been engaging in a righteous act against someone who essentially fucked him out of an agreed upon deal. Whether Bret would have taken the belt and thrown it in the trash (something I think is HIGHLY unlikely) is irrelevant. Vince would have been a hundred percent at fault no matter what had happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted October 16, 2011 Report Share Posted October 16, 2011 So answer this then. You're in Vince's shoes, this is a disaster, what do you do? Do you pull this stunt on someone leaving the company but have the belt or do you sit on your hands and hope it doesn't blow up in your face. Bret throwing the belt in the trash on Nitro would've been a huge blow to a struggling WWF. That's been my point the whole time. I hated Vince/Shawn for it a long time but the older I've gotten the more I see Vince's side and why he did what he did. I'm not saying what he did was right. Just that in his shoes, I probably would've done the same thing in his position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted October 16, 2011 Report Share Posted October 16, 2011 Vince didn't put a gun to Bret's head and told him to fuck off and negociate with WCW. Once Vince didn't want/think he could honor Bret's contract, they got to terms with each other so that Bret could get a fat contract with the concurrence who, at the time, was kicking WWF's ass. Its funny you picture Vince "fucking" Bret on his contract when in the reality, it's not exactly wat happened. Bret went to get the biggest money deal he ever had in his career instead of the 20 year deal. Seems ok to me. Bret agreed. He could have refused and sue Vince for breach of contract. Vince didn't "shit" on Bret's deal. Bret was ok to go to WCW and get a fat paycheck instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted October 16, 2011 Report Share Posted October 16, 2011 And I agree it's way easy to say in hindsight, "Oh, Bret would/could never have taken the belt on Nitro." The MNW was dirty, with the hatred Bret had for Michaels, and the way Vince handled things (basically letting Michaels do all he wanted), who knows what might have happened. Again, not excusing Vince, but there's no way he's 100% responsible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.