Very interesting article about UFC fighter pay and the future of MMA...

Jras0001 · 02-21-2006, 04:32 AM

I ran across this article and its very interesting. The guy makes great points and shows why the ufc doesnt pay its fighters any more than they do....short and simple: they dont have to yet.

also, there could be mma fights weekly on tv soon thanks to a new organization, if it gets off the ground....which im not sure it will with their "team concept" for mma. dont think that is going to go over well and the author explains why he thinks that as well.

there is a bit closer to the end about the TUF fighters and how their matches were made were probably biased to make the most money.

anyway, its a pretty good article and ill put the link under here for you guys to read. im interested in seeing your thoughts as well...i think the guy made a lot of good points.

http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/...=1612&zoneid=4

subgenius · 02-21-2006, 10:39 AM

Just some observations based on about half of the article, which is an interesting read (btw).

I like the sound of the IFL. There will always be issues when a new promotion gets launched. Having a huge monetary base to begin with can help a new promotion exist even when it is initially failing. I hope that the IFL has that type of base. Maybe a Ted Turner type of investor base. That helps.

I disagree with the criticism of the team concept. It can be handled in many different ways that can be highly marketable on TV. We have already seen one variation on the team-coach concept on TUF on Spike TV. That show had good ratings and reach national and international audience appeal. That is why I think that ESPN and FOX are looking into this and getting involved with the IFL. Sports Entertainment is about making money.

I would like to see a three or four month long IFL team tournament. It could start in January and run through to April with fights every week. At the end, the two best or the two remaining fighters fight for a title. It would be more like a GP that is stretched out over four months. During the off-season, the IFL could run team versus team specials.

I like the idea of having special MMA fighters as coaches of special teams. It is very different from Team Quest and the Miletich Camp and so forth. These teams would be actually a part of the IFL itself. Also, I see no reason why any one team should be forced to adhere only to a particular style. It is MMA, and we should expect that all fighters will seek to be well-rounded. I just cannot see Couture encouraging a fighter to be one-dimensional.

The teams would not really fight as a team, except that a fighter would always have his coach and team in his corner. I mean, unless they introduce tag-team MMA, the fight is 1v1, mano a mano, Hand-to-hand, "two men enter, one man leaves," "There can be only one," or whatever... I think that esprit de corps could help some fighters. I think that Nick Diaz could benefit from being on a team. He seems like a lone wolf...

I do not like that elbow rule. If anything could hurt the IFL's launch, then it could be that elbow rule...

lwbfl · 02-21-2006, 11:57 AM

The elbow rule hasn't hurt PRIDE. They want submissions and knock outs, not doctor stoppages. I love elbows, but I can the their point with them also. I hope the IFL comes out and is successful. I need more MMA!

Jras0001 · 02-21-2006, 01:49 PM

ya, i like having the elbow being able to be used but i can see why they took it out. As for it not hurting pride, at least they can knee to the head of a downed opponent where you cant in the ufc.

the only thing i have against the team concept is if the top fighters in a particular weight devision is on one team, then they wont be fighting each other. if there is a mechanic built into the rules that allow them to fight at some point, ill be ok with the team concept.

i dont think youll see people like randy pushing their team members to be one dimentional. i think thats going to be primarily a marketing tool. people familiar with mma knows that everyone cross trains and it wont be a real style vs style event.

i agree with the authors take on why the UFC isnt paying anymore to its fighters. I hope it gets some competition soon because in the end, that will make for better promotions in the future and lead to better fighter pay.....

[Danny] · 02-21-2006, 02:19 PM

The team concept is sooo gimmicky and totally destroys the concept of MMA. It's you and another fighter. Yeah, you have a camp backing you, but their matches don't ever affect you.

Too gimmicky for me. The only thing I like is the pay for the fighters. Other than that, I want it to go down in flames.

Jras0001 · 02-21-2006, 03:38 PM

well, i really like the one show a week of live fights on free television...that sorta perked my ears up when i read it....

subgenius · 02-21-2006, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Danny]

The team concept is sooo gimmicky and totally destroys the concept of MMA. It's you and another fighter. Yeah, you have a camp backing you, but their matches don't ever affect you.

Too gimmicky for me. The only thing I like is the pay for the fighters. Other than that, I want it to go down in flames.

I can relate to what you mean. It does seem like a hook to get people in, and then we won't see what we want to see. But, I think that it is a concept that can be successfull -- it already has success on the UFC TUF show on Spike TV. It has to be done right. I think that preserving that ultimate sense of one versus one will be paramount. But, I believe that they can work in team ideology without hurting the sport of MMA.

I think that the teams will be small. Think about it, there are not enough MMA fighters out there to fill more than a few large teams. I think that the teams will be like two-to-four man teams with one coach/manager. I can also see teams trading fighters. Teams could lose a fighter, and then have trouble replacing the fighter. As others noted, having all the best on one team may mean breaking that team up... That seems counter-intuitive to the idea of creating the teams to begin with.

subgenius · 02-21-2006, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jras0001

well, i really like the one show a week of live fights on free television...that sorta perked my ears up when i read it....

Me too. I am just glad that people are thinking more and more about MMA on TV. The UFC seems to have paved the way towards that point. I can almost see a time in the not too distant future when all the preliminary bouts are shown on TV and the main events are PPV only with like just four fights on the card.

That idea about HBO is to me the idea that is the most likely to actually happen. HBO Sports already has Inside the NFL and HBO Boxing events. Imagine if they produced HBO MMA weekly events, bi-weekly events, or maybe just monthly or bi-monthly events -- whatever. HBO is a premium cable network. It can get away with stuff that regular cable could not. And, regular cable already gets away with a lot.

Or, maybe HBO will get a partnership with the UFC? Could the HBO TV program Inside the UFC be a reality?

Jras0001 · 02-21-2006, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subgenius

I can relate to what you mean. It does seem like a hook to get people in, and then we won't see what we want to see. But, I think that it is a concept that can be successfull -- it already has success on the UFC TUF show on Spike TV.

i agree, the format has had some success, when it is marketed and presented properly. i think that they should leave an opening or some mechanic in the rules that lets the fighters somehow be able to fight a teammate if they happen to be the top contenders, similar to how the one season of tuf did their last fights...made the team mates fight. it could be something that culminates at the end of the season....when some or most of the other competition has been beaten and its down to a few people......