San Francisco Chronicle refuses to cover MMA and UFC and UFC President bashes em

"Toney vs. Couture" = 375,000
"Edgar vs. penn" = 7,260,000

But go on with your argument, please.

 

Eh, that's not really fair though. Edgar and Penn have had two fights, and they've been spaced out, so chances are it's going to get more results.

The more interesting stat would be analyzing the coverage of the PPV event beforehand and I'm willing to bet Toney vs. Couture got more coverage only because it was a unique fight not because it was the more interesting one.

If you filter out the curiosity of seeing how fat and out of shape Toney was, I bet the results, purely on interest of fight level, aren't even close.

 

That's an ironic way to put it since the Chronicle doesn't have a Sharks beat writer.

You are talking about a paper with nine people listed as staff writers (one who does almost exclusively outdoors writing) that covers two colleges, two MLB teams, two NFL team and an NBA team. They don't have a writer that does preps for them full time. Antti Niemi's arrival in San Jose was covered by a sports editor and then a baseball beat writer (during the season).

With NFL training camps, baseball season and college football fall camp, I am guessing the staff is stretched pretty thin in August.

 

UFC should have taken precedence over every single other event that day. Period.

Can't give up your Giants beat writer for a day? Fine. Send a photog, hire a freelancer and make it your main story. To ignore it completely is to not do your job, which allegedly is to cover sports in the San Fran area.

 

Try again without the quotes. That way you don't include every individual cable listing for the fight card - which, as was pointed out, was called "Edgar vs Penn."

 

Even Dave Meltzer called Toney/Couture a "gimmick."

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2010/9/2/1666324/with-preliminary-estimates-for-ufc

http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/news/262001/Report-UFC-118-did-around-570000-buys/

I had originally predicted 750,000 buys when the show was announced, but I was counting on the boxer vs. MMA gimmick catching on bigger than it did. Unlike the 8/7 show, where the buildup made me rethink upwards, I was down to thinking 550,000 by fight time, thinking the only boost would be that ESPN Sports Center was playing up the boxer vs. MMA fighter angle, and that could lead to late curiosity buys. But when Toney showed up looking out of shape, I could sense people thinking back to all the bad boxing heavyweight matches with older guys that were such a turnoff. Plus, when Toney took off his pants and his underwear rode down, it made him a comedy figure instead of a really hated guy people wanted to pay to see get shut up by the beloved veteran who did show up in shape. The dynamic I expected to be there wasn't.

 

Forgive me for being blunt, but I'd like to know why?

The paper almost never puts local boxing or local auto racing on the front page. The UFC event was out-drawn that day by the A's in the neighboring building (and the A's are a terrible draw, out of contention and play in an awful stadium). They probably should have gone with a freelancer, but the Chronicle isn't exactly rolling in money.

It might make page two or three, but I don't see that taking the top spot on a weekend with a big Giants series.

(on another note, are there any journalists who write really elegantly about MMA? I've always felt that boxing got more love from the older crowd because of great old school writing. I was hoping that there was some sort of combat sports equivalent)

 

Like the UFC or not, the hosting of a major MMA pay per view in a city that had never previously done so is of historical value.

Sure, you can make a case it's a fringe sport. I'm OK with that but the fact is that it should have been the main story if for no other reason than the fact that it was the biggest sporting event in that city that day.

Yes, the A's may have attracted more people to their game but their venue is much larger.

How many people went to the fan expo that weekend? How many people attended the UFC event? Did it sell out? If it didn't, why not? If it was a bomb, (which it wasn't), what does that mean to the long term expansion of the league?

These are questions legit sports sections answer. To brush this off for a regular season baseball game that doesn't mean anything (If that was the decision) is poor editorial choice.

I admit, I'm biased. I like the UFC but even taking that away, how can anyone make a case to simply ignore the event? I mean, flat out ignore? Not even a mention on pages two or three? Really? Wow.

 

Haven't checked in on this thread in a few weeks.
I mentioned earlier that you would think the Chron would at least cover the "event" aspect of it, like a Grateful Dead concert, a home show etc.
Newspapers can't talk about "standards" in one sense after putting ads on A1 or integrating ads with their content.
The truth is, I imagine the MMA audience and the Chron audience don't intersect too much. One side wanted exposure to the other's audience, the other side didn't.

 

When did we start talking about soccer here?

 

Perfect analogy. I've been following this thread and I keep coming back to MMA fans being the soccer fans of the 21st century. Either you are 100 percent behind the sport or you are WRONG!

That is exactly the kind of ridiculous hyperbole that destroys your point. As I've said previously, I don't think them not covering it is all that big a deal because the Chron and MMA readership simply don't overlap. But you say the Chron's readership not only needs MMA coverage but needs it above the Giants (who, btw, were in a playoff-type series with Atlanta), 49ers, A's, Raiders and all the other things going on that were of interest to their readers. MMA might interest you and a lot of other people and you can argue that the Chron should have recognized it as such, but to say it would ever be the most important event to their readership is just stupid.

 

I don't like or really watch Soccer. I do, however, consider it a legitimate sport. I don't bash those that watch it.

I don't like MMA, the UFC, or any of the other sports like it. I don't bash those that watch it.

I will not, however, consider it a legitimate sport as long as the person in charge of it uses the words "fuck" and "dickhead" publicly like White did/does. If a person speaks this way openly they will not be taken seriously by the masses. He should show some measure of professionalism if he ever wants to be taken seriously by non-fans. Talk to your fan base this way if that's what they like. But speak this way, and the majority of your non-fan base will never give two cents what you or your "sport" thinks, cares, or does.