Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Are the problems in modern wrestling Mick Foley's fault?


joeg

Recommended Posts

I would honestly argue that Mick Foley has had an enormously positive influence on the world of (post-)modern pro wrestling:

- Wrestling autobiographies (and wrestling books in general) that are genuinely interesting to read, teach you something, and do not insult the reader's intelligence.

- (some) Wrestlers not taking themselves too seriously, and being able to have a laugh at their own expense once in a while.

- (some) Top wrestlers trying to connect with the fans as real people, rather than looking down at us from atop some kid of marble pedestal.

- (some) Wrestlers - and promoters - listening to their fans and taking those opinions into consideration.

- (some) Promotions being quite open and honest about the histories and backgrounds of their wrestlers.

- Everyone - even the very big guys - working a more exciting style with some big high spots. (I don't think anyone is trying to do this, exactly, but it would be insane to try and blame Foley for the go-go-go non-stop spots style. You can throw the blame for that, and head-drops, somewhere else. That blood is not on Foley's hands. He was a huge bumper and if - like me -  you cringe at huge bumps and unnecessary risks, OK, that is at least partly on him. But he was never a flashy offense guy. He generally built dramatically to a huge spot that involved him taking a ton of punishment and/or a monster bump. Certainly, the unprotected chair shots are an issue. That I could live without. And, obviously, Shane's bullshit stunt work is all on him wanting to get a Foley pop. But, on the other hand, the positive trend of big men in North America pulling off ring-to-outside dives and working a more exciting style in general was definitely influenced by Foley and Sting. I count that as a huge positive). 

- Man... Foley's comedy stuff worked like a charm. It is in no way his fault that there is so much bad acting and worse writing out there today. 

- Likable regular-dude characters (like Danielson sometimes plays) are influenced as much by Mick Foley's "Mick Foley" character as by Dusty Rhodes. 

- Relatably goofy characters (like the Young Bucks) are definitely Mick Foley's spiritual offspring. Jim Cornette and his followers might count that as a negative. I think it's one of the best things about wrestling these days.

- Dude did not invent stiff striking or taking stiff shots, but he certainly got it over with the mainstream audience in North America.

- Pioneered the use of dirty socks as a weapon.

I could go on, but I have to head out to work. Overall, though, I think the current pro wrestling landscape would be way worse without Foley's influence. The good far, far outweighs the bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cad said:

He's 99% to blame in the sense that as the big boss he approves everything, but apportioning blame like that is pretty simplistic. Wasn't his MO famously to avoid mentioning wrestler's pasts elsewhere? I doubt he came up with the idea of highlighting a guy's work in Japan. Doubt he even knew all that much about it. IIRC when he introduced himself to Foley he said something like, "Hi, Mike." The original Mankind push was more his style, monster heel coming in, looking dangerous for a few months to build to the big match when the face takes him down.

The NWO blurred the reality line in an entirely different way. Their appearances felt more real than the rest of the show, and that was for only a very brief time. They weren't encouraging a peek behind the curtain.

Oh, I forgot the book. His was the first and most influential one.

Even if we're going to argue that Vince's blame is over simplifying things, he literally signed off on everything that made it to TV. Mankind sitting down with JR and telling the story about being Mick Foley, then, was McMahon approved, which means Vince gets the blame and the credit (just how, according to Foley's books, Vince wants it). 

The popularity of big stunts and violence can be laid at Foley's feet, sure, but those were already gaining steam thanks to ECW and tape traders anyway. Mick didn't invent the deathmatch, after all, he did them because he was good at them and it paid the bills. 

I don't think you can peg these issues solely on him, though, nor do I think that these are necessarily the "ills" of modern wrestling. I'd be far more willing to blame whatever performer you currently dislike than somebody who retired 20 years ago, at least. Nobody's making Nick Gage jam thumbtacks and broken glass in his back, nobody's putting a gun to Joey Janela's head and saying "dive off the ladder or I squeeze the trigger." These are adults doing what they need/want to do in order to make money in their profession of choice, and you follow the money.

 

The audience existed pre-Foley, he just happened to do it the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2020 at 7:37 PM, Matt D said:

Seriously. Can we just blame Shawn Michaels instead?

Yes.  Everything I hate about modern wrestling can be traced directly to Michaels.

(To be clear, I don't hate modern wrestling.  It's just that the things I do hate about it are Michaels' fault.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2020 at 3:01 AM, Big Pete said:

I also don't think you're giving wrestlers enough credit. If they sat down and watched Mick and the only thing they got out of him was that he was goofy and he took crazy bumps then they'd have to be the biggest bunch of simpletons on the face of the earth. Mick is somebody who by rights should have just been a guy on the roster and yet he's one of the biggest names to ever come out of the sport. What made Foley so good is that he was a details guy who could take a spot and get more mileage out of it because he could find a way to connect it to his persona.

I once did a podcast with the Beer City Bruiser where he talks about showing trainees the Mick-Shawn IYH Mind Games match to explain how to flow from spot to spot and make the big bumps meaningful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that line about Foley making all his bumps count and tie them directly into his personal is the critical element missing in most modern workers. They seem to mostly subscribe to the idea that the spectacular bumps ARE the point.

But nah. Foley always knew the point was to USE the bumps and the matches as a means to enhance the persona. To get his character over. Because he always recognized the value in being over as a character first & foremost. Because one you are established and over, you can get by with so much less.

It's physical economics. It's knowing your worth and maximizing the bumps. Modern workers are missing the forest for the trees, because they rely on the bumps to get the matches over. Not their characters. They put no stock in the character development anymore.

The goal shouldn't be to get the matches over. Matches come and go. But that's what this ratings-chasing mentality has bred into this generation of workers. Everyone wants the stars. Everyone wants the applause. And they don't mind wrestling to an audience of practically nothing but their peers if it means they get a pat on the ass and an "Atta boy" in the back. It's so fucking backwards when you think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding was that Meltzer gets the "blame", and I understand that viewpoint, if not the human urge to apportion blame.

So my question is, has Meltzer been more influential than Mick (or Vince or Shawn)? Supplementary questions: Can we "blame" Sayama and Dynamite, or even Ricki Starr for today's flippity-do-dah and acrobatics? Do we need to blame them, or poor ol' Mick? I'd have thought the Young Bucks are to "blame" for Young Bucks matches, (just as an example), not some guy trying to make a buck decades ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blame nobody but the performer. People can disagree with critics and their reviews, and it happens constantly with other forms of performance. If some schmuck getting into the business thinks carving themselves up is what audiences want to see then let them, if they think gymnastics and lame comedy is the way to go then all the more power to them. Trends come and go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...