Influence. That's the only word that is needed. Watch other sports and you will see the same things going on.
Josh Hill on Dealing with his TUF Loss
- Thread starter math2tor
- Start date
Influence. That's the only word that is needed. Watch other sports and you will see the same things going on.
Behind the scenes, I'm sure Dana is grooming fighters the way the show and ratings need them to be.
All Dana has to do is put the word out and subtle things change like early ref stoppages or late ones, more stand up, etc etc.
Alabama's coach basically did that and now the refs are controlling the hurry up offenses. What makes you think UFC refs can't be influenced or can't partially influence the way the fight rhythm is going.
All Dana has to do is put the word out and subtle things change like early ref stoppages or late ones, more stand up, etc etc.
Alabama's coach basically did that and now the refs are controlling the hurry up offenses. What makes you think UFC refs can't be influenced or can't partially influence the way the fight rhythm is going.
Nice rebuttal, because you know you can't actually tell me when Hill clearly had an opportunity to land big GnP but decided not to.
Dude, this is why there is a commission. If Dana could tell refs what to do then UFC is no longer a fair and regulated sport, is it? Millions of dollars are wagered on the outcomes of these fights, just a single rumor that Dana told a ref to stand a fight up early or stop a fight early would topple their entire company. You have 2 people telling you that you are wrong, yet you won't listen. Maybe some others will chime in.
This isn't other sports. The major sports leagues are the employers of both the players and the referees. The UFC is is only the employer of the fighters. The athletic commission employs the refs. Has Dana made it clear he wants more action and stand up fights? Yes. Thats been made evident with the cutting of guys like Fitch and Okami. But the UFC does not have a say in how a referee goes about a fight. You dont know what you are talking about. Please stop
Dana's opinions do have an effect. You obviously don't know what you are talking about.
It's not as cut and dry, black and white as you think it is.
You don't think Dana's words have an effect on fighters and everyone else in the sport? Don't fool yourself....
I understand what you're saying and I guess a good example would be the NHL. Owners didn't tell goalies "Hey, let players score more on you because fans like high scoring games." Instead, the rules were changed to reduce the size of the goalie equipment and increase the size of the net. The commision can alter rules working with the UFC and others to achieve a goal, but you can't have Dana fucking White in the locker room whispering in a refs ear to "let them bang bro", that shit has scandal written all over it.
Well, obviously let's not make it that obvious but you get my point. But yea, Dana is sending a clear message that he wants fighters to bang. Follow the money....
BTW, a few years back I was scratching my head why all these wrestlers were boxing instead of trying to wrestle and I was thinking to myself that Dana/UFC probably wanted the fighters to box more for ratings. My suspicions have been answered.
"Mata Leao"
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2009
- Messages
- 339
- Reaction score
- 0
No, definitely not. Dana frequently criticizes certain refs and judges and it doesn't change them at all. Dana himself has said many times that it is the Commissions that regulates the UFC and that he has no sway over them, the judging or the reffing.
Now that being said, not all commissions are created equal. A commission like Nevada doesn't have to allow the UFC any influence at all due to the commission's size and importance. Smaller commissions can be indirectly influenced (and in some cases bullied) by the UFC or other important promotions. For example, I took Big John's ref course last year and one of the students was the former Executive Director of the California Commission. He said that he would not disclose the names of the refs he was planning on using until the last possible minute. This is because if a larger org had the list of refs and didn't like one or more of them then the promotion would try and put pressure on the Commission and even threaten to pull the event from the State. His way of counteracting this was by just not giving them the names until they were completely committed to moving forward with the event. But in the case of Las Vegas not even the UFC would have the power to force their hand.
"Mata Leao"
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2009
- Messages
- 339
- Reaction score
- 0
What makes me think that is that Dana has made many direct comments on how he wants fights to be reffed and judged (over years) and it hasn't changed anything. Dana has made several comments that the judging criteria and training needs to be changed; Executive Director Keith Kizer said that he disagreed and that the system is fine, and alas, no changes have been made whatsoever.
"Mata Leao"
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2009
- Messages
- 339
- Reaction score
- 0
On fighters Dana's opinions will obviously carry weight because he is the President of the company that they work for. Whether or not they will bend to his will is an individual decision.
With respect to regulators (commissions, judges, and refs), give me an example or two of that provide some kind of evidence that Dana's comments have significant influence on their decisions or the way they do their jobs.
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Messages
- 33,424
- Reaction score
- 5,686
After the 3-round war last week with two female strikers, it's not surprising to see Dana disappointed with the dropped tempo this week.
Not the worst fight on TUF, but the guys could definitely do A LOT better to keep the action going. There were plenty of opportunity to sneak in some dirty boxing or vicious GnP, but nothing came.
And they NEED to do better, when there are Top 10 guys being cut for "winning" without hardly throwing a punch the entire fight.
Not the worst fight on TUF, but the guys could definitely do A LOT better to keep the action going. There were plenty of opportunity to sneak in some dirty boxing or vicious GnP, but nothing came.
And they NEED to do better, when there are Top 10 guys being cut for "winning" without hardly throwing a punch the entire fight.
[QUOTE="Mata Leao";87943425]What makes me think that is that Dana has made many direct comments on how he wants fights to be reffed and judged (over years) and it hasn't changed anything. Dana has made several comments that the judging criteria and training needs to be changed; Executive Director Keith Kizer said that he disagreed and that the system is fine, and alas, no changes have been made whatsoever.[/QUOTE]
Dana (and the other UFC executives) can change it if they want. Whether Dana is just complaining or it's a real concern is the difference.
Dana (and the other UFC executives) can change it if they want. Whether Dana is just complaining or it's a real concern is the difference.
You keep repeating this but you dont give any evidence to support it.
[QUOTE="Mata Leao";87943591]On fighters Dana's opinions will obviously carry weight because he is the President of the company that they work for. Whether or not they will bend to his will is an individual decision.
With respect to regulators (commissions, judges, and refs), give me an example or two of that provide some kind of evidence that Dana's comments have significant influence on their decisions or the way they do their jobs.[/QUOTE]
I don't have examples nor do I follow the UFC backend operations closely but I do know one thing- money talks.
The UFC is a money maker and even if the refs/commission is not directly employed by them doesn't mean that they will not listen to the company that basically pays some of their bills. I'm sure the UFC has big enough influence to do some of the things you think they are not capable of doing.
UFC rules are not set in stone either. I'm sure UFC can alter their rules if need be.
With respect to regulators (commissions, judges, and refs), give me an example or two of that provide some kind of evidence that Dana's comments have significant influence on their decisions or the way they do their jobs.[/QUOTE]
I don't have examples nor do I follow the UFC backend operations closely but I do know one thing- money talks.
The UFC is a money maker and even if the refs/commission is not directly employed by them doesn't mean that they will not listen to the company that basically pays some of their bills. I'm sure the UFC has big enough influence to do some of the things you think they are not capable of doing.
UFC rules are not set in stone either. I'm sure UFC can alter their rules if need be.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2006
- Messages
- 16,143
- Reaction score
- 719
Hill fought a lot better in that loss than he did in the fight he won to get in the house. He deserves respect.
Do you have evidence that he and UFC can't?
Even at the most basic level if Dana has no control over refs and the commission, you don't think he can't influence his fighters?
"Mata Leao"
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2009
- Messages
- 339
- Reaction score
- 0
Okay, just wanted to confirm that you understand you are spewing nothing but personal opinion that is in no way based on any facts or evidence you have seen.
My evidence (however anecdotal) is that the rules are clearly defined under the jurisdiction of the regional commissions and that Dana and the UFC, in spite of numerous complaints and suggestions, have never demonstrated that they have any ability to sway any of the large commissions (or smaller ones for that matter).
You can go on about conspiracy theory all you want. Yes..."money talks"....and you know where there is a lot of money...Las Vegas. Since the UFC wants access to that money they need to play by that commissions rules. I would be interested in seeing any evidence to the contrary.
"Mata Leao"
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2009
- Messages
- 339
- Reaction score
- 0
That doesn't make any sense in the context of this discussion.
