Is MMA About "Putting Asses In Seats" or Athletic Competition?

[Italian Brock]

The ONLY correct answer is...

ALL SPORTS are about the competition. It's the business side, and our love of watching sports, that fucked it all.

Once the baseball owners realized that they could draw bigger crowds. Simply by installing some lights. Thereby, seriously increasing revenue. It's gone down the shitter ever since.

The UFC is not a sport. It's a company. And the moves they made to secure money for themselves ( Reebok ). At the expense of the athletes making them the money. It's been a little hard to take.

MMA is about the sport. The UFC is about putting asses in the seats. Not, just that, though. Putting asses in the seats strictly to their benefit, first, and foremost.

So stupid.. without a business = sports is just a pass time= would not be televised= sports wouldn't really matter.. money exposes sports to the world

 

[Mikey Palangio]

You can't have one without the other. Go all the way back to Pride 1, all those fucking people packed into the Tokyo Dome to see the pro wrestler, Nobuhiko Takada, a guy who couldn't even fight. All of the shows after that Takada was what drew the money that built the company, he was even doing worked matches. There was no Pride without Takada, there was no Takada without worked matches. The attraction was what financed Pride, so that Fedor could fight at such a huge stage in front of 50,000 people and make real money doing it. Fighters and fans don't understand where the money comes from. People don't just give you money to do MMA, you have to draw every single penny by somehow convincing people to get up on a Saturday night, take off work, find a babysitter, make the trip and pull out their wallets to buy a ticket with their hard earned money.

People get up to watch Wimbledon and etc

It didn't happen over night. A lot of people worked hard to make winning Wimbledon something to be proud of. To the point that people will watch the Wimbledon finals REGARDLESS of whether the most marketable athlete competing or not.

Plus, when an athlete wins Wimbledon, his or her marketability skyrockets.

This is what the UFC should doing right now, that is, trying to make winning the UFC belt mean something, regardless of whether or not it is a marketable fighter competing.

Once winning the UFC belt starts to mean something, profits will be made. More profits than what is being made now. When people care about the competition, they attend the shows, they watch it on TV, and that brings the heavy hitter sponsors, who bring in more money than the fans (casual or hardcore).

 

[randomalias]

If it didn't put asses in seats, it wouldn't exist.

 

[Mikey Palangio]

It's too violent to ever become a mainstream sport.

If Boxing loses its big stars then i could see it overtaking boxing long term but it wouldn't get bigger than any league sport.

Most UFC fights are not even that violent. Plus, the more skilled fighters become, with improved strength and condition, the less violent the sport will look.

UFC fighters get hit with silly shots way too often. It is just poor technique. That will improve when better humans start to train and compete.

 

[Rizz]

You make a good point. The UFC essentially has a monopoly over the sport and they know this all too well. They use their position to essentially exploit fighters to a large degree and weild their so-called power very irresponsibly.

I do hope that Bellator gains enough credibility to challenge the UFC as a competitor so we can return to the good days of having different equally respectable fight orgs, but I do think Bellator need some serious re-branding before they get to that stage.

You did not notice that you called the UFC a monopoly and you named one of their competitors in the same post? If they were a monopoly they would not have any competitors. People just throw out the word monopoly without thinking about its actual meaning.

 

[Mikey Palangio]

You're right UFC and MMA are synonymous to the average person. In fact, a lot of people don't know what you're talking about if you mention MMA, so you have to say "you know UFC"

But whilst your point is correct it only reinforces the notion that the UFC have a huge responsibility to deal with here. They are representing an emerging sport which is yet to become properly established in mainstream consciousness. A sport often dismissed as 'freak show' and 'cock fighting'. They need to inject a healthy dose of legitimacy to the ranking and contendership process of risk losing serious credibility amongst the wider sports community altogether. Let alone piss off a whole bunch of fans who dedicate so much time & money to following the organisation.

I think they are failing at it.

I am beginning to think of the sport as WWE without the scripted ending, and I am a reasonable casual UFC fan.

 

[Mikey Palangio]

Actually had this discussion with a friend at work today. In my opinion MMA is STILL OK and about real athletes competing to see who has the better fighting skill to be the best in the sport. That being said, I believe the UFC is where the problem is. They are more so concentrated on MONEY than anything else. It also doesnt help that since Conor McGregor made such a huge amount of money now every fighter wants to make more money. Also another factor is the Reebok deal which every fighter hates. They counted on sponsorship money for most of their training expenses...So Money is the focal point in the UFC alone. UFC is about butts in seats first. The know owners have a 4 billion dollar debt to pay. I wouldnt be surprised if Bellator didnt surpass the UFC in the future because fighters are more happy there. You dont hear about money fights because they are doing well with sponsorship alone that UFC fighters are not able to have. The UFC is a cluster fuck right now. I would be willing to bet Dana White will be gone in a year or two.

Dana White needs to go. His fans will praise his "success" based on the U$4B sale of the UFC, but I strongly believe that a better promoter could have double that by creating an even bigger fan base.

The UFC will need to realize that paying fighters more is a part of investing in the sport. You can't have your HW champ keeping his part time job for the benefits and pension plan.

It doesn't look good.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a 50-50 or even 50-45 profit split. Equitable collaboration is always better than greed, in the long run.

 

[Irishwhiskey119]

You make good points.

But there is a way of doing both. I think at the beginning of every endeavor, it is important to establish reputation and integrity. All the profits should be used to invest in the growth of the sport, in terms of paying the athletes, improving training and marketing the sport.

The UFC as the leader of the sport seem to want to make a quick profit and compete with other sports that have a longer history.

It can take a sport 50 or more years to blow up. This is not time to be thinking about profits. It is time to establish the sport as a legitimate athletic competition.

It is time to be establishing the competitive framework of the sport. For example, how do fighters get title shot? What is the responsibility of the champion when it comes to title defense? What are the rules of fighter rankings? and etc

These things need to written down on paper and strictly adhere to.

We're saying the same thing.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Both

Thank you. How is this not obvious? This is true of every pro sport on the planet.

 

[CasualMMAFan]

Let's be honest here, if it was about the competition - it would be akin to Taekwondo in the Olympics

 

[king of theRing]

All I hear is "putting asses in seats" "he is not a draw" "he doesn't move the needle" and blah blah.

What is this sport even about? HAHAHA

Why even have real athletes in the sport, why doesn't the UFC just get pretty boys and girls who can act with average fighting skill, and make that the sport?

If guys want it like that, don't expect big money in return

 

[unfinishable]

I remember a time when Dana and the Fertitas were true fans of the sport, but they sold out. Now it's about providing content and ratings over anything else. They expanded way to quickly and brought in undeveloped divisions just to be able to fill more cards.

 

[defcon5]

asses in seats and while you're doing that make damn sure fighters accept the matches you want not what they want.


at least for now, which is a long time in WME's case

 

[Thepaintbucket]

It's called having a balance and standards. The UFC is slowly eroding at both of those in recent years. Straight out the window. Pure greed to sell the company and now WMEing is doing it to pay bills off.

Dana White and his mobster bros always said they wanted this sport to become a legitimate mainstream sport. They even said it's neck and neck with Soccer. Yeah, not even close. But I guess fans pay for this stupid shit.

 

[chavdarb]

Do you imagine Socker or Football or any legit sport having some boss setting up title contenders.
All sports even individual ones have strict separation of governing bodies and promoters. Most importantly the rules of how you compete and become champion are well defined. UFC serves as both federation, promoter and employer of fighters and there are no rules set or framework like in sports of how you become champion or contender. You might be fired at any given time or stopped from pursuing better offers.

 

[filthynumber1]

asses in seats
http://guyspeed.com/women-on-bikes-gopro-camera-on-seat/

 

[Codpiece]

People get up to watch Wimbledon and etc

It didn't happen over night. A lot of people worked hard to make winning Wimbledon something to be proud of. To the point that people will watch the Wimbledon finals REGARDLESS of whether the most marketable athlete competing or not.

Plus, when an athlete wins Wimbledon, his or her marketability skyrockets.

This is what the UFC should doing right now, that is, trying to make winning the UFC belt mean something, regardless of whether or not it is a marketable fighter competing.

Once winning the UFC belt starts to mean something, profits will be made. More profits than what is being made now. When people care about the competition, they attend the shows, they watch it on TV, and that brings the heavy hitter sponsors, who bring in more money than the fans (casual or hardcore).

The problem I see with your example is that it ignores the fact that tennis has existed in some form or other for hundreds of years, is played by people of all ages in most every country, is socially accepted and viewed by children and adults alike and is televised basically everywhere, especially during 'grand slam' tournaments.

MMA is in a very different place as a sport. The participation rate is far, far lower than in other sports, even in North America - alongside Brazil by far the nation with the strongest interest in MMA. Kids do not, and in some cases can not, watch fights. It isn't sanctioned in many locations globally. It isn't aired on high profile channels as daytime TV.



MMA is a sport. The UFC is a fight promoter and is in the business of entertainment. Does that mean that the UFC will sometimes not act with purity of competition in mind? Absolutely. Does the UFC capturing more public interest have a potential future benefit of growing the sport of MMA and deepening the talent pool in the sport? Highly likely.

It's ugly, but that's business.

 

[flairleguccijoints]

People get up to watch Wimbledon and etc

It didn't happen over night. A lot of people worked hard to make winning Wimbledon something to be proud of. To the point that people will watch the Wimbledon finals REGARDLESS of whether the most marketable athlete competing or not.

Plus, when an athlete wins Wimbledon, his or her marketability skyrockets.

This is what the UFC should doing right now, that is, trying to make winning the UFC belt mean something, regardless of whether or not it is a marketable fighter competing.

Once winning the UFC belt starts to mean something, profits will be made. More profits than what is being made now. When people care about the competition, they attend the shows, they watch it on TV, and that brings the heavy hitter sponsors, who bring in more money than the fans (casual or hardcore).

Anna Kournikova never won a ladies single title in her career. Why do we know and remember who she was? No one gave a rats ass about her tennis ability and she made millions for tennis tournament promoters, marketers and even other tennis players despite not winning one title. Wimbledon finals viewing numbers fluctuate based on who's in the finals, no different than most sports. Blame capitalism.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Mma is a sport.
The McUFC is a fucking joke

 

[Mikey Palangio]

Anna Kournikova never won a ladies single title in her career. Why do we know and remember who she was? No one gave a rats ass about her tennis ability and she made millions for tennis tournament promoters, marketers and even other tennis players despite not winning one title. Wimbledon finals viewing numbers fluctuate based on who's in the finals, no different than most sports. Blame capitalism.

What is your point in relation to the statement I made? Are you supporting my argument or arguing against it?

I kinda get where you are going with the Anna Kournikova angle, but I am a little confused about why you quoted my statement, and then chose to use this angle.

Please clarify.