UFC as Sport vs Entertainment

[kja456]

there's no doubt that the UFC is looking 100% on the money side.

but fortunately, if they make fights that are too ridiculous on a sporting level, they will probably lose some audience.

basically, it's the fans who choose whether the UFC leans more towards the money side or the competitive merit side.

If Dana thought that making a fight between a decrepit 80-year-old ex-champion and a famous YouTuber was the title fight that would attract the most fans, he would do it without hesitation.

but doing freak shows or celebs fights would probably drive away some fans from this sport. that's what prevents them to ignore totally the sporting merit

 

[Elvis.]

They will push the boundaries of the integrity of the sport as far as humanly possible in the name of profit, and if the price is right the will drop the entire facade and start counting the money .

 

[Yellowcrab]

They try to influence as much as they can, but they obviously don't control everything, so they can't push a fighter that is really bad. They can help with a smart matchmaking, but that's it.

However, now that USADA will be gone soon, i'm a bit more worried.

 

[SeattleFightFan]

The Sherdog AI picked out a couple of other threads with a similar topic, but they were both necros.

We are always hearing about fighters being draws or not being draws. Supposedly, Belal is super boring and thus a non-draw. Colby seemingly is a pseudo-draw, attracting only MAGA types. Chimaev, so it is said, is the next truly big draw, while Conor obviously is the all time draw-GOAT.

Being a draw or not is a real thing. Putting asses in seats is important, for indeed, the UFC is a business. But how should the sport and merit side vs the popularity and money side be balanced against one another?

The UFC seems to follow an approach where the ability to put asses in seats is given a lot of weight, but most fights seem to be merit based. My question is what should the ratio be? How much should merit count versus money?

100% Merit - 0% Money? (The pure sport advocate)
10% Merit - 90% Money? (If all you care about is fun fights)
50% Merit - 50% Money? (Possibly you want fighters to be rewarded for success, but also acknowledge that the UFC is a business)

Or what other ratio should be used? Personally, I'm leaning towards 75% Merit. I want the UFC to be a sport sport, but sometimes particular "unmerited" match-ups are highly appealing.

Here's the thing.

There was a time when #1 v #2 was the fight most viewers wanted to pay for, most of the time. Not always, just usually.

If that's not the case anymore, is it the promoter's fault for giving the viewers what they want?

I think it's a question worth pondering.

In the end, we still get respectable title fights about half the time, down from about 75% of the time. I wish it had gone the other way, but I'm about done whining about it.

 

[don't ask]

lots of people pretending that what's happening right now, which is worse than ever, is normal or necessary for MMA. The only thing it's necessary for is UFC pocket books.