$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Dec 12, 2007 12:27:19 GMT -5
Again, that landmark Foley title run that popped ratings and changed the tide of wrestling lasted 20 days. Or 3 episodes of Raw. Then he had another couple of weeks with the belt. He was a supporting player, to Rock and Austin on those shows, and Taker.
In Raw history, he is well behind all of them, and HBK as well.
|
|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Dec 12, 2007 12:30:48 GMT -5
Hey Cactus Jackoff, I didn't say Foley was bigger overall than HBK. Like I figured, you didn't understand. You understand plain English about as well as I understand one of your garbled messes. I mentioned Foley's importance to the success of Raw. I think Captain summed it up pretty well.
While I am more than the casual wrestling fan (who has been watching wrestling since before the days your uncle jerked you off in the closet, I might add), it's the no-brained casual wrestling dopes that keep the product going.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Dec 12, 2007 12:37:46 GMT -5
He contributed as a supporting player. He never led the show. His title reigns amounted to nothing in the grand scheme of things - one month out of the 150 plus in the Raw era. That renaissaince that followed his title win was spearheaded by Rock and Austin, and Taker. Foley was a supporting player. HBK and his DX run alone had him more in the mix through the Raw era - thats not even getting into the other things HBK partook in, and the great matches he had (which Foley never did)
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 12:39:28 GMT -5
Oh shit, give up the I didn't uinderstand your point. You're agreeing with Balls. That pretty much sums it up for me but then take into account you're putting all your eggs in Foleys one win basket. First off, it didn't have to be a supporting role like Foley in that spot. It could have been anyone. The change wasn't so much due to Foley winning, the fact that there was a new champ and leaked on the cmpetitions show did that. The guy in the ring had little to do with it.
And again, Foley thrived in the attitude era. Brought to you by your friends at D-Generation-X. Not, a stuntman. And again, Tom was never arguing ratings, it was rankings. Somehow a short term title run that made viewers switch is second to a guy who made it possible for the business to succeed in that new enviornment.
Are you going to say the Beatles are repsonsible for rock and roll and not Chuck Berry next?
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 12, 2007 12:57:23 GMT -5
First--regarding HBK and DX. While he WAS very good there, the prime of the DX run came after HBK left the WWE.
HBK's body of work kills Foley's? That's a bit strong, but none of us are saying that over a career, Foley was more important or better. Foley could take a bump better than anyone, and that made for some exciting moments, but when you look at overall talent, HBK wins no doubt.
I just don't consider him better on RAW specifically. Whether it be in the ring, or as a clown, and that clown aspect is VERY important, Foley impacted the history of that show more than HBK. And yes, the swaying of the ratings is vital for this specific point of the conversation.
We're not talking about careers. Just impact and place in RAW history.
And as important as the HBK/Hart feud was, to me, it just doesn't compare to the angles Foley worked. Maybe it was because I wasn't that big of a fan of either Michaels or Hart. I was a big HBK fan from the time he threw Jannetty through the window until about 5 or 6 months into his face turn after that. He was awesome during that time but then he got a little stale for me. But much of that run came before Raw.
James, I know we're talking about your boy, but again, no one is bad mouthing his career. You can't. It's a shame you can't actually talk about this stuff without getting into a big time rant.
You don't need to go into HBK's accolades. They trump Foley's. No one is arguing against that.
When you say Michaels was one of the most influential wrestlers of the 1990s, you would be right on the money. But there's bad with that too. His reign as the top dog was the time when Nitro took over. It was not ALL HBK's fault but under his watch, WCW was simply more interesting.
His involvement in turning the tide back to the WWE was far less than Foley's.
Captain nailed it. HBK's big value in turning the tide back came with DX.
Foley as a supporting player? Arguably, but he was a MAJOR supporting player. He was never the top guy, but he was the guy that had a major impact ON the top guys and was a vital cog in the return of Raw to prominence.
As a career, HBK wins hands down. Like I said--Foley is dead last on that list when it comes to career impact. But not when you factor in Raw alone.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Dec 12, 2007 13:08:38 GMT -5
Very well explained, and well said. But hokum nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 13:59:24 GMT -5
Balls, in case you missed it, the rant is how people who hardly keep up with wrestling can just say so assuringly something is either this way, not that way. I never talked about Michaels carreer, I only mention it as a side note. I talked about his impact on Raw, which weather I was a fan of his or not, I'd say the same thing regardless cause I'm a fan or wrestling overall. When the Rangers sucked in hockey, I stayed a fan. when the Cowboys sucked, i stayed a fan. When Michaels left, I stayed a fan of wrestling just the same. I know what the fuck i'm talking about, doesn't matter if he's my personal faveorite or not. You can't argue with history.
I still said Austin and Rock had a bigger part, and again personally I'd put HBK third although I couldn't say someone would be wrong if they were to say HHH or Taker ahead of Michaels. I just can't sit here and listen to people go by numbers when in the grand scheme of things, it's the progression of the business that will attract viewers and ratings. And no ones disputing they weren't in the toilet when HBK was champ, but I'm not going to give credit to Foley for one fucking thing, one night, that again, had less to do with him and more to do with WCWs fuck up. Over somebody who had a MAJOR PART in bringing wrestling to the place it is now? Foley, while in the middle of everything AFTER Michaels left, only played a SUPPORTING ROLE. Backseat to Rock, Taker, Austin, and Vince. Without HBK carrying the load when the ratings sucked, who knows what would have happened. And again, i'm only going by Raw stuff, but take into account that other shit Michaels has done, HBK had a bigger part in Raw, and WWE history period, to be put below Foley on any list, poll or opinion. That is of course, if you know fucking wrestling. If you don't, then I could see someone making that mistake.
Bottom line, when I think of Foley and Raw I think of one title chnge, comedy skits with Rock and a sock. When I think of some of Raws best matches, I think of Michaels. Some of Raws most shocking moments...HBK. And yes, Raws funniest, HBK is in the list as well as Foley, but we all know HBK had a sock gimmcik first. Foleys best match was with HBK so let's not go crazy and put a bump machine over HBK.
How's that rant Shatner-boy?
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 12, 2007 14:04:35 GMT -5
And James, you couldn't be more off base. I have followed Raw since the get-go and was watching this stuff when you were in like 3rd grade if that. You are entitled to your opinion no doubt, but when someone disagrees with you, they are no less educated and certainly no less intelligent.
You have a thing for HBK. We get it. But having a great career does not necessarily mean you had a huge impact on Raw specifically. Hogan's career dwarfs HBK's and Foley's combined. But I wouldn't argue that Hogan's impact on Raw was as substantial as either of them.
I agree HBK is a bigger part of WWE history. And he has been a major part of Raw, but on Raw alone, he can't touch Foley. You can continue to turn your nose up, but that only makes you look bad. You could make some decent points if you lost the attitude.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 14:07:03 GMT -5
Yeah, the attitude how age is everything pisses me off? Or the attitude how my opinion gets shitted on cause of a favorite of mine is involved in the discussion? Even if I wasn't a fan, I would say the same thing the same way. I get it I do, you get this shit in the yankee threads so you try to pull it here on me. But you're off base cause if you watched from the beginning, you would know HBK was in more memorable Raw moments and matches than Foley. but keep trying to use the same argument that my guy is in the middle of the discussion and age as you're only defense. Bring up monents and matches instead of numbers, socks and gimmicks.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 12, 2007 14:10:16 GMT -5
Not at all James. The point is that you are copping an attitude with people who disagree with you. In this case, not just me. And again, you are wrong about Foley and HBK. HBK has had a more memorable CAREER, but in the limited universe of Raw history, Foley wins out. The guy was so vital to so many things. HBK's impact on Raw has been decent, but not nearly as big. His initial run was when the ratings slid. He contributed to the return with the start of DX. And he currently remains one of Raw's top faces. But overall, he's no Foley--on Raw alone.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Dec 12, 2007 14:14:29 GMT -5
Eh, Balls, 70% of that "memorable career" came on Raw. He was never a Smackdown talent.
We watched his best work outside of some fun Rockers matches unfold right there on Monday Night Raw.
Dummy.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 14:24:56 GMT -5
The attitude isn't cause you disagreed with me. capitan did and I didn't give him shit. How about I cut the attitude when people ditch the holier than thou attitude shit with me. And you're not making an argument, your just saying statements. I can say the same thing just plug in HBK where you put Foley. So people can disagre with me, but I do and I'm some asshole? How about you present an argument.
I can't think of one memorable match on Raw Foley has ever had besides the title thing(which wasn't a stellar match). His memorable moments came when the Rock was standing next to him, and showing Vnce a sock before Austin pulled a fast one over Vince. Michaels...hmmm lets see. The match with Owen stands out as a really good tv main event and then...Raw goes off the air with dead air as Michales faked a concussion. That's memorable and was more than shocking at the time(btw all hatched by HBK) than anything Foley did when shocking was expected. And the beauty of the dead air ending, NO ONE KNEW IF IT WAS REAL OR FAKE! And anyone who said they knew it was a work is flat out lying.
All Foley has ever done is take beatings. Nothing he did compared to that HBK thing. And should I go into the DX run and chair shot to Taker leading up to Hell in a Cell? What is one thing that stnds out that Foley did that trumps anything Michaels has done on Raw, in his short time on the show. Shit, 93 to 98 isn't a good chunk of time at all. And 2002 to 2007 soon 2008, that's no longer than a trip to AC. Michaels was a centerpeice of Raw for years, he was all over the fucking intro years ago. Foley was just in the mix of super duper stars in Rock, Austin and Taker. Nothing Foley did on Raw can top HBK's Raw stuff. Name one thing?
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 12, 2007 14:38:26 GMT -5
Not at all Tom--I think much of his career came pre-Raw. He turned heel in 1991. He won the IC belt in 1992. Raw was in its infancy when Diesel debuted. His face turn and title run was a highlight of his career, but not on Raw, as the ratings plummetted.
Being the centerpiece of a disaster is still a disaster. Foley was not just in the mix of the superduperstars, he played off them brilliantly. Name one thing? The boiler room brawl, This Is Your Life, the debut of Mr. Socko, "pick me Steve", the debut of Dude Love, the debut of Cactus Jack, the feud with Kane. SO MANY of RAW's greatest moments involved Foley.
Michaels in the WWE is a vital part of its history. But Michaels on Raw? Can't touch Foley.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Dec 12, 2007 14:42:06 GMT -5
Too bad only 1 % of the people who voted in that poll agree with you on Foley's impact.
|
|
|
Post by grover on Dec 12, 2007 14:48:41 GMT -5
HBK gets the nod over Foley for being a part of the Bret Hart scandal alone, and taking that and being the 3rd guy along with Austin and Vince to help the WWF hit 6th gear. They never looked back once they got going, and Austin and DX were huge cogs in that Monday Night War. Foley's huge moment came with WCW on it's death bed, and after Austin, Vince, Hart, HBK got the ball rolling.
Foley had some awesome moments (only one awesome match though) but it came when he was paired with the Rock, Austin, Vince, ect. He needed them, they didn't need him.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 14:49:53 GMT -5
You named all comedy moments except one, which wasn't far from his Cactus Jack work in ECW. And I agree, things that involved Foley were huge, but they weren't centered around him like HBK. And the numbers don't take away the body of work Tom brought up. Cause you're going to tell me when the Hart foundation was going against DX, the HBK/Hart feud is less than Foley and who..KANE? Come on. HBK used Raw to blur the lines and help make the product we know now.
You talk about infancy of Raw, HBK is reponsible for the infancy of the Atittude era, the era Foley played a supportive role in. Like Tom said, HBK only had PPVs and Raw, there was more of an outlet when Foley was at his peak. See what bugs me is how HBKs entire stint on Raw is dwarfed cause he left before the big boom. the moments he was involved in that didn't have a lot of viewers HAS to count for something cause that made it possible for Foley and the other guys to run with the fucking ball HBK made for them.
All those moments you said were good, memorable stuff, Raw staples in that era, but it takes balls and guts to push the enevelpoe like HBK did, when all that shit was taboo in wrestling. That overshadows Foley stuff cause it was brand fucking new then. If you say HBK has a part in WWE history then he has to on Raw as well, it was the only show Vince had and HBK did what he could with what he had. Foley had a heap of talent to work off of, Michaels worked without a net. It's way more meaningful than comedy skits and backstage brawls Foley had.
|
|
|
Post by grover on Dec 12, 2007 14:50:42 GMT -5
Being the centerpiece of a disaster is still a disaster. Foley was not just in the mix of the superduperstars, he played off them brilliantly. Name one thing? The boiler room brawl, This Is Your Life, the debut of Mr. Socko, "pick me Steve", the debut of Dude Love, the debut of Cactus Jack, the feud with Kane. SO MANY of RAW's greatest moments involved Foley. No, you mean so many of the non-wrestling bits you watch instead of actual matches involved Foley, which is why you're pulling for him. You don't really watch wrestling for wrestling, and have said so.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 14:52:12 GMT -5
Thank You Grover for bringing up Montreal, the birth of Mr. McMahon, the evil boss Austin feuded with to put WWE on top. What happens they don't do that and Bret shows up on Nitro with the WWF belt?
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 12, 2007 15:09:53 GMT -5
Who cares that only 1% agree? You think that's a scientific poll? The poll is only relevant when compared to the people who voted in the poll, assuming everyone voted once on one computer.
Montreal was a PPV, at a time when there wasn't a brand split. That wasn't a Raw moment. While very significant in WWE history, it didn't happen on Raw.
HBK was not a major part of the attitude era. He was on his way out the door when WWE started its resurgence. He did far more to cause the decline than he did to bring it back.
And no doubt that many of Foley's greatest moments on Raw were the comedy. But that was the kind of stuff that MADE Raw come back.
AGAIN--this is NOT a knock on HBK's in-ring talent and impact on the industry as a WHOLE. When factoring that in, of COURSE HBK kicks Foley's ass.
|
|
|
Post by grover on Dec 12, 2007 15:26:16 GMT -5
No, Austin, the Rock, Vince and DX brought RAW back. DX and Austin helped the turn around from 97 leading to Austin/HBK Wrestlemania. During that time I would see WWF ads in the Daily News sports section all the time, and it was always a pic of HBK and the headline "Come see Shawn Michaels and Degeneration X at MSG..." I don't think I never saw one for Mick Foley.
HBK wasn't the cause of the ratings tumble, he was one of the few people worth watching along with Bret Hart, Owen Hart, and the Undertaker. WCW depleting the WWF roster was a major cause for the tumble, in fact it was the main cause. Sticking to stupid gimmicks(which is the people you want to see on an annual basis) and angles were another. If he was a major cause of that ratings plummet why would he be considered one of the greatest wrestlers of all time and part of this poll about greatest RAW superstars?
To further that point, WCWs demise came at a time when they saw talent jump to WWF, and they suffered from a depleted roster of their own as well as stupid gimmicks. Who was propping himself on top of WCW at that time? Hulk Hogan, who was using his pull as always to get the belt. A show can't survive with one guy.
If anything, Hogan is one of the biggest reasons WCW collapsed, and is more deserving of that accusation you are trying to put upon HBK. NO ONE says HBK had anything to do with WWFs plummet. It's well known that Hogan helped kill WCW.
Balls, you really don't know much about wrestling. Remembering The Goon fighting Duke the Dumpster and bringing up William Shatner every chance you get is not the same as knowing how wrestling works.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 15:29:16 GMT -5
I wasn't bring up Montreal as an example, but using that as a bridge into the Raw when Vince isn't announcing anymore, he's the boss, Bret screwed Bret. That was huge because of the role Vince plahyed with Austin, which had more to do with bringing WWF up more than Foley's comedy bits. And when you factor in, who the main guy was in Montreal was, fine, it wasn't a Raw moment, but without Michaels being the guy in the ring with Bret you don't have Vince being the evil boss and possibly the downfall of WWF if Bret brings the WWF belt to Nitro. HBK helped Raw survive till the big names could carry Foley.
And one more example, the night DX showed the curtain call footage was bigger than Rock this is your life. breaking kayfabe, talking right to Vince(which Michaels did during his matches), blurring the lines of wrestling world and real life. And I know that will never be on any list of most memorable Raw moments, but it had an impact, a much bigger one on Raw than a spike in ratings for a comedy bit with the fucking Rock N Sock connection. I'm not denying Foley didn't have great stuff, but the guy who got him there and made it possible deserves more credit than being thrown under the bus for Foley.
Bottom line is, if you said to Foley what you're saying to us, he'd thank you, shake your hand, tell you you that he appreciates the support but you're wrong. Then he'd go to Khol's to buy more flannels and sweatpants.
|
|
|
Post by thecaptain15 on Dec 12, 2007 15:41:11 GMT -5
I think the reason Foley was more important to Raw at the time is that he brought the casual viewer in and hence the boost in the ratings during that time period....Like it or not there are plenty of people that are like Balls and are not the "smart" marks and just enjoy the skits and bits.......This is where Foley was gold with the Rock and Sock and all his antics with Vince and the like.....As Justin said you can't go by internet polls because obviously the majority of folks that vote on them and visit those sites are the hardcore "smart" marks and not the casual fan. In fact all you have to do is look at the ratings now to realize that the casual fans are no longer watching and it is mostly the "smart" marks and kids watching these days.....
|
|
|
Post by grover on Dec 12, 2007 15:51:33 GMT -5
Actually, there are not many people like Balls, because Balls is a retard and usually wrestling fans like wrestling. The casual fan was a fan of Austin and the Rock, the same way they were Hogan fans in the 80's and Cena fans now.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 12, 2007 15:52:08 GMT -5
Grover--Foley was VITAL in the Austin/Rock time period. He may have been the third there, but he belongs in their league. And in pure impact on Raw, he kicks the crap out of HBK, who did more for the decline than anything else.
And you are giving WAY too much credit to HBK with the Montreal screwjob. Yes, he was in the match, and yes, he knew about it. But that was Hart and McMahon. HBK was just there. His role was miniscule compared to Hart and McMahon.
Hogan and Nitro has absolutely NOTHING to do with HBK on Raw. That's an entirely different issue, and I would agree that Hogan's politicking and protection of his spot was a factor in the downfall of Nitro.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 15:59:35 GMT -5
First off Balls: You have no idea the heat Michaels was under after Montreal.
Cap I kind of agree with you, but in my mind Michaels by himself couldn't get those ratings when he had very little to work with. Putting the candian flag up your nose and stuffing gauze down your pants making dick jokes wasn't the ratings grabber, at fiirst, but it caught on. Then with more talent in WWF things changed. And yeah, ratings went up when Foley was flying off cells and pulling socks out of his pants, but he wasn't nearly as responsbile for the growth of the industry and Raw in general as Michaels. Just becuase more people were watching nWo than DX, doesn't mean the things that happened aren't as important. cause that then steamrolled into what helped Foley and the like thrive and make WWE and Raw specifially the blockbuster that it is today. And again, a ratings boost for one week Foley did something funny with Al Snow can't be put on a higher level than the things Michaels did to keep WWF alive in my opinion. Not only did it help keep WWF from sinking, it opened the doors to the things Foley, rock and Austin were then allowed to do. The DX presidential speech anyone?
|
|
|
Post by grover on Dec 12, 2007 16:06:35 GMT -5
"he kicks the crap out of HBK, who did more for the decline than anything else."
Prove it. I backed up my claim with what various wrestling sources have said. How is it that he can go from being the main cause of the decline to spearheading the resurgence? Sorry, but the recent HHH/HBK DX didn't last for months longer than most people thought it with a guy who you claimed almost sent the company under.
And Hogan has everything to do with it, because it's a fair and reasonable comparison. You making that claim means if someone else had the belt things would have been fine. Me bringing up hogan shows that even wiht the biggest name in the sport ever, you can still go under. You saying it doesn't means you have nothing. You have no proof to back up your claim that HBK was a direct result of the ratings drop. Please go find some objective proof citing scources within the industry claiming HBK was the main reason WWE almost went under.
Someone who doesn't watch wrestling for the actual wrestling, and had to wait for the OC to get canceled in order to watch the best wrestling show out now has no say in anything having to do with wrestling ever again.
|
|
|
Post by thecaptain15 on Dec 12, 2007 16:11:57 GMT -5
James I do agree that HBK did not have a lot to work with that is for sure....
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Dec 12, 2007 16:12:46 GMT -5
For a time his best opponent was Double J, and the two got a 4 star match out of each other at a PPV.
He was a master of making chicken salad out of chicken s h - t
Foley could net get a 4 star match if you put 5 of his matches together and combined stars.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Dec 12, 2007 16:17:50 GMT -5
Yes, their In Your House match was great, and that was an IC Title match. And Tom, Foley and Michaels at Mind Games was Foleys only 4 star match.
Grover, don't expect proof from Balls. i've been asking for some all day. He makes a claim, and that's it. Give example after example, he still has nothing. It's stupid to expect a discussion from him.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Dec 12, 2007 16:28:09 GMT -5
HBK did not spearhead the resurgence. Who said that? He was a very small part of it. DX did far better AFTER HBK left it. HBK was champ, Raw fell to second. You can make excuses all you want, but that's the bottom line.
And James, your claims are not backed up. When asked for examples, I rattled off like 5 in 2 seconds.
We are not talking about Hogan at all. He has nothing to do with anything in this conversation. Hogan's alleged participation in the decline of Nitro doesn't change that Foley impacted Raw's history more than HBK.
Michaels kept the WWE alive? HA!
|
|