From a television stand point, I'm against no time limits. How could you set aside a block of time for a show with no time limits? But in theory, I love the idea. Not on every fight, but on special occasions it would be nice.
Bring back the nuances of MMA
- Thread starter TheGOD
- Start date
From a television stand point, I'm against no time limits. How could you set aside a block of time for a show with no time limits? But in theory, I love the idea. Not on every fight, but on special occasions it would be nice.
look who's talking.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 652
- Reaction score
- 0
You do know that the UFC used to have a ton of trouble finding places that would sanction their events?
I already told you that they should choose what's best for them. And are you saying there's a greater likelihood for grabbing clothes if a fighter is wearing tights than if they're wearing shorts? I think you just made an argument in favor of tights and AGAINST the shorts, my man.
Yes, and now they're established and have more pull. Besides, this isn't JUST about the UFC. It's about MMA as a whole. I thought only casual fans thought the UFC=MMA.
Dang it, pop. I TRIED to make you proud of me! Nothing's ever good enough for you.
It pertains to them as well. Your speed reading needs work, pal. Just go off what I wrote, not what you think I would've written had you actually decided to read it.
The only problem I have with the gi is what could be grabbed by the opponent? The fighter wearing it? What about those times when it starts to come off?
Fuck off, mod.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 652
- Reaction score
- 0
You realize that pull goes away reeeeal quick if we start getting politicians talking about human cockfighting again?
And yeah, just try getting your event sanctioned anywhere in the US if you try to have soccer kicks in your org.
Yeah, and all that "ban rap" nonsense the politicians latched on to did a lot of good too, didn't it? If what Cain did to Bigfoot didn't get the politicians razzled, then neither will the UFC allowing knees to the head of downed opponents in Brazil...or wherever. When the UFC does a show in Nevada, it would be the Unified Rules version that they would be seeking to get approved, nothing else.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2005
- Messages
- 14,102
- Reaction score
- 116
Why would the UFC change their rules depending on locale? If a bunch of MLB teams went to another country to play an exhibition game, would they decide to change the rules of baseball? Of course not. Consistency is a good thing. They've already picked certain aspects--a cage, no kicks to a downed opponent, etc.--and they should stick with them.
They already have that shit. Some of the UFC's most beloved fighters made a name for themselves doing that.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 652
- Reaction score
- 0
Mostly those went away after the rule changes. And what about fox? All those international cards are going to be broadcasted on their networks?
ayiio
Black Belt
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,046
- Reaction score
- 0
They should come out with big cross on their back or wear just one glove.
And punch to the nuts should be legal.
Once again, I'm talking about nuances and embracing uniqueness. The nuances of MMA don't have to match the nuances of other sports. I don't watch baseball, but I've heard they determine home field advantage during the playoffs based on the outcome of the Allstar game (something like that). No other sport does that, yet it doesn't stop MLB from embracing a unique element of their sport. In soccer they add stoppage time to the end of the game. They don't do that in football. Still, as an example, "the paint" used in basketball is wider(at least it was not too long ago) for international play than it is in the United States. I wouldn't doubt if international rules are different in every major sport than they are in just America. Olympic boxing uses different attire than prefessional boxing.
They could be PPVs if it's too risque for network television.
