Source: TNAWrestling.com
In an opinion column that was, in my view, long overdue, Mick Foley directly attacked the over-reliance of wrestling fans on the Wrestling Observer newsletter’s opinions to form their own opinions. In the column, which was posted on TNAWrestling, Mick Foley made the following comments:
On Turning Sour on the Wrestling Observer:
“Oh, how the mighty had fallen! Although I had long appreciated the reporting skills of Observer founder Dave Meltzer, and felt like I needed to keep abreast of my own line of business, as time went by, I found I actually enjoyed reading it less and less. Probably because the criticisms kept mounting. Week in and week out, I would turn in what I knew were good promos, only to see a single line from a promo analyzed and derided, to an extent that no work of oration would escape unscathed from.”
On the Observer’s “Nit-Picking” Attitude:
“But gradually, it seemed to me, that The Observer started developing a distinct feel of nitpicking, that “oh, yeah, you expect me to believe that” cynicism of someone who no longer enjoys pro-wrestling – and my desire to learn about the inner workings of my own business were replaced with the desire to not feel like a piece of garbage every time I took a look.”
On Why He Wrote this Column:
“For better or worse, The Wrestling Observer is as close to The Times as we’re going to get. If Dave Meltzer says it, most people accept it as being so. And call me naive or over-sensitive, but I don’t want the official record to reflect that my TNA years were a time of great sucking. So let me do my best to refute the public record.”
On the Use of “WWE” in Promos Being Automatically Bashed:
“But it certainly seems in this person’s opinion, that any promo that refers to WWE in any way is met with overly harsh criticism – like it’s cast off as being a loser from the moment those magic initials are uttered, or sometimes just implied. Indeed, even mentioning “the other company” or “another company” seems to bring forth a reprimand. Something like “do they have any idea how minor league it looks”…..etc. etc. That seems to be the most common complaint; that we make TNA look minor league by acknowledging WWE in our interviews. In some cases, this criticism may have some merit. But I feel like many of my promos have been good and been cast off immediately just for mentioning WWE.”
On the Observer Bashing the Initial EV2.0 Promo:
“Dreamer talked of seeing a company he loved turning into something he didn’t recognize, and ultimately something that he didn’t even enjoy (even though he cried a couple times at the end of that run as well). He talked of seeing people he cared about losing their jobs, and how he hesitated to make a change in his life because he had two kids to think about. Emotional stuff, right? I thought so. But according to The Observer, it made TNA look “minor league, for allowing fans to think, or know, that wrestlers can make more money in WWE. I only said a couple lines in that in-ring segment, noting that the last time fans had seen me, I was being fired by Eric Bischoff. I felt like I had to mention the obvious, but according to Dave, it made me look bad (I’m paraphrasing, not quoting here) because fans tune in to see larger than life stars, not guys who have to worry about their job.”
On Why it’s Okay to Mention WWE:
“I don’t blame WWE for not acknowledging TNA. They are the largest wrestling company in the world, and have absolutely no reason to mention number the competition. But, in my opinion, that hardly means that any mention of WWE should come across as minor league. It seems only natural to refer to one’s own history within that company, or to have that history referred to in order to establish credibility with a fan base that is more familiar with stars that have been established there. Of course, TNA needs to establish stars of their own, and as time goes on and those stars, such as Beer Money and the Motor City Machine Guns become better established in the eyes of casual fans, it stands to reason that the mentions of WWE should become fewer and farther between. But we’re not quite at that point yet. Not in the eyes of casual fans, and not in the eyes of the people who make things happen in overseas markets, where so much of the future success of TNA lies. Until that time, I think it’s fair for the stars who have been there to compare and contrast both groups without being automatically castigated by the wrestling press.”
Same Point as Above – Continued:
“I think there just might be people out there who might be interested to know that they could check out Jeff Hardy instead of Drew Macintyre, RVD instead of Shaemus, Ric Flair instead of Dolph Ziggler and Mick Foley instead of Zack Ryder. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with those aforementioned WWE guys, and in truth, WWE has thus far done a better job of getting their new items established on the menu of popular acceptance. But TNA has so many of the guys who brought fans to the WWE table to begin with. We absolutely need to let hungry fans know that we are still available for consumption – just at a different location than the on they’re used to.”
Foley’s Summation on the Topic:
“I firmly believe that my work in the last two years has been far better than at least one modern day historian has given it credit for being. I’ve been around long enough to know when one of my promos hits the mark, sails a little wide to the right , or misfires completely. I’m aware that I simply can no longer make folks feel what I feel inside every single time, and that my best days in the ring are a long way behind me. But I also know that most of my microphone work is still good, and not deserving of the derision it’s been given since coming to TNA. I know that Tommy Dreamer gave a hell of a promo in the ring, and I know that guys who gave their blood, sweat and tears to help build a company like World Wrestling Entertainment have earned the right to talk about their past employer without making their current one look minor league.
If you’d like to read the entire column (there is a lot of information that I left out), feel free to click here.
William B. West says
Meltzer contradicts himself so much it is laughable.
He criticizes TNA for mentioning WWE as sounding amateurish. His implications is TNA will never be bigtime because of this.
For being such a great wrestling historian, he forgets quickly that this was a staple of the WWE during the Attitude era. They constantly compared themselves to WCW. It worked.
As with any politician, new product line, or brand name you have to compare and contrast what you are selling with the established standard. It is a proven marketing method.
The more Meltzer types away the more he shows his ignorance for wrestling and business in general.
Lord Koz says
I’ve never had much respect for Dave Meltzer. Even real journalists who cover major world events should be looked at with highly skeptical eyes; those who cover the factually murky world of professional wrestling should be held in far more doubt. Especially when it’s obvious that they inject their personal views into practically everything they write.
Joe says
Thanks for the comment, Lord Koz. I think you hit the nail right on the head in terms of what I dislike about Meltzer’s “reporting.” Namely, that he injects his personal opinion into almost everything that he writes without explicitly stating, “In my opinion/view.” This creates an internet wrestling world where webmasters just copy and paste what he writes and, in the process, spread one man’s opinion as fact.
Drives me nuts.