All Purpose UFC/MMA/That Kind Of Thing Thread

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

Mr Wretch,

Let's just face it. The sport, this greatest of all sports, is simply on a higher plane, beyond the ken of the humble sports scribe. I believe that the sport editor at Mensa Monthly would be prepared to do a white paper on the piece and the Roland Barthes Institute can send its sports semiologist to de a thorough deconstruct on Royce G's loincloth.

YHS, etc

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

Nah. Were not a great sport yet. Just today, there is a public meeting with the California State Athletic Commission. Armando Garcia is coming under fire for suspending licenses of fighters indefinate for what seems to be petty reasons.

Fighter pay is still lower then expected in the pro leagues even though the leagues are making money hand over fist.

Hell, even if there's a handful of states who are open to MMA, we still have a lot of states who have outlawed it or are looking to outlaw it.

And the mcdojos. Don't get me started on the mcdojos.

Again, if some of us come on and seem a bit preachy, we're sorry. I think the real thing not only the fans want, but also the fighters is just a right to exist and sanctioned within every athletic commission. If the major wires doesn't want to cover us, that's ok. All we ask from the press is to keep an open mind and to not get caught up in the myths of either side.

Call it down the middle.

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

That is all reasonable.

What promoted the influx of people defending MMA wasn't the basic realities of the newspaper industry. I don't think anyone was seriously suggesting that MMA should be covered in the same was as, say, the NFL. I think what prompted the five page thread was the idea, put forward by some, that MMA is akin to “Dancing with Stars.”

The basic point that I, personally, was trying to make was that while it doesn't merit the same coverage as baseball it doesn't deserve to be ignored and treated as side show either. That's all. Nothing more.

I'm a big boxing fan. I would love it if every paper still had a full time boxing writer. However, I probably couldn't make an argument that every paper should have one. Sure, I'd like it if they did but that's just me. Boxing merits coverage. MMA, based on popularity alone, also merits coverage. The UFC card on December 30th headlined by Liddell/Ortiz will do in the region of a million buys. Dana White has said he's expecting, around, 1.2 million buys.

Neither boxing or MMA, at this point in time, merits the big time coverage boxing used to get in decades past. I don't think that anyone was seriously arguing that reporters from all over the nation should flock to the location of the latest UFC card in the same way they used to for boxing matches in the 1960's

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

fof --

Anyone who can drop a Roland Barthes reference is jake by me.

But fuck him and his unreadable bullshit.

Bowing humbly, etc.

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

Mr 12,

This is the only place that my semiology references don't get edited out. My copy usually has my editors reaching for their Barthes bags.

YHS, etc

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

Companion o' the shunned --

It's a jump ball who has had a worse affect on grad school -- Barthes or Herkimer and Adorno.

They ought to hand pieces out by both on the first day and send you home, telling you you can't come back until you can justify this crap.

Another of the locusts, etc.

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

But whither hermeneutics and the UFC?

And the Mixed PoMo Arts of Derrida? Lacan? Lyotard?

Not a Wushu heavyweight anywhere they couldn't deconstruct.

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

Jumping in late, but here goes:

If boxing is considered a sport, then MMA -- in particular the UFC -- must be considered a sport. The only differences between the two now is the shape of the ring and the style of fighting.

I've stopped on UFC broadcasts while flipping through the channels. It's regulated. It's sanctioned. It operates under strict guidelines. If anything, I'd guess its safer than boxing because the very instant one fighter gains a sizeable advantage, the fight is stopped. There is technique and strategy. No longer is it the no-holds barred bloodfest of its infancy. If cuts are bad, a doctor stops the fight.... just like boxing.

I would guess that the boxing world is very nervous about the UFC. While there are numerous regional show, I think its generally accepted that the best fighters -- in the US at least -- participate in the UFC. There aren't three federations with three different titles. UFC title holders are accepted to be the best as far as I know.

In short, I think UFC is a sport. And if it hasn't passed boxing already in terms of popularity, it won't be long.

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

Sirs, Madames,

I really fear where this thread is heading. Therefore I'm determined to fray it.

Look, go after Derrida, fine. I'm cool with that. But Roland Barthes was ahead of the curve on wrestling. His essay on the semiotics of the wrestling loser in Mythologies, well, let me just say that he stands as the Clyde Gentry of pro grappling. Anyway, Barthes wrote, and I quote: "Wrestling is not a sport, it is a spectacle. The virtue of wrestling is that it is the spectacle of excess." Here's my problem in UFC and MMA--not that it's too violent. Nay, that it is not violent enough. It is pro wrestling without spectacle and excess. More excess, I say, nothing succeeds like it. Excess, there's never too much of it.

YHS, etc

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom. William Blake.

What?

William Blake.

Whaddaya mean William Blake?

I mean William Blake!

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

I'm bring this thread back up for two reasons.

One, the big UFC PPV is Saturday.

Two, I was bored last night and watched Spike TV's UFC coverage. First, the hourlong preview of this PPV, then an MTV "Cribs" style show about Chuck Liddell and finally the Joe Rogan-hosted "Inside the UFC" program. If UFC is so popular, why is the biggest advertiser on these shows Girls Gone Wild? If UFC/MMA is as wildly popular as claimed, why aren't major corporations using it to reach the coveted 18-35 male demo?

 

Re: "60 Minutes" piece on UFC/MMA

The UFC still suffers from some perception problems. However events have been sponosperd by, for instance, Amped Mobile and Quiznos. They also have a strong relationship with a supplement company. There have been others as well.

On the last "Ultimate Fight Night" event (an evening of live fights on Spike) "Pizza Hut" and other big companies were advertising during the commercial breaks. "All Access" and "Inside the UFC" are, in some respects, throwaway shows. Ortiz/Liddell will do in the region of a million buys on PPV. The show with Chuck Liddell showing people around his house and driving his expensive sports car won't be a massive ratings winner.