Agreed. This is the first time I've ever seen USA Today even have an article on the UFC.Seems like all the articles and posts crying about the lack of promoting are in fact, promoting the fight.
This fight sells big time and conor collects a fat payday with minimal effort outside of fight night and fight prep
I could care less about any of the other shit as long as they are opposite eachother on fight night. With that said have Ferg ready for 5 rounds just in case.
True but is also 1-2 losses away from losing that aura.This article proves one thing: If you know what you're worth, and youve got the talent to back it up, no one can touch you.
Conor is a case study of how marketing wins. Love him or hate him...the guy moves the needle
Wait, did Dana really say Conor/Khabib will break 2m buys?
Conor is terrified that his Rousey moment is at hand.
He's right.
Its allright that he doesnt put up with all the shit the ufc demands but as a fighter he does have media obligations. If he gets beaten by Khabib and Tony back to back his stock will plummet and wme wont give a fook about him anymore and they wont put up with his shit.
Or 3... Conor negotiated far less press and it makes no difference and it sells well and he wins anyway ...Means one of two things imo. It's Conor's 'Rousey' moment, or the fight won't go ahead at all. I'm swaying towards the latter.
No media. But there's a USA Today article about it? How often does USA Today cover individual MMA fights in articles?https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mm...o-ufcs-biggest-headache/ar-BBMVrz7?li=BBnba9I
We've still got a month for this to turn into a media frenzy, but yeah, it's weird that there's no media tour for the biggest fight in history.
EDIT - *UFC* history.