I don't feel like I got my $$$ worth

MadOne · 08-27-2006, 07:12 PM

It was better then UFC 61..
I enjoyed it.. it might be hard to say whats worth 40 bucks.. for diffrent people. Hell.. I pay 40 bucks in gas just to head out to town for few hours.

Straffe · 08-27-2006, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by williamN

Okay, I'll stop whining. $40 bucks really isn't that much. It is just those fights just didn't give me the adrenaline ruch that other cards in the past have.

I know what you mean my heart was pumping a little bit for babalu liddel fight but nothing close to the Forrest Tito fight. God was my blood pumping when i was watching that. O and also the BJ vs GSP was a good rush.

Grave · 08-27-2006, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lwbfl

I thought it was well worth it but MMA to me is like crack to an addict so maybe I'm biased. Plus, $40 is about 3/4 tank of fuel right now so it really isn't anything to me. I watched it for free anyway, but I'd have paid the $40 and watched it alone if I didn't have somewhere else to go. I thought it was a great card. If you didn't like this one, maybe you should stick with WWE.

I'm a wrestling fan and: WWE Sucks.

Its got Nothing these days but Diva-search crap, and other desperate attemps to keep afloat. Like resurrecting 1/4th of DX in the hope that it'll bring in more ratings....

stillstanding · 08-27-2006, 07:37 PM

You mean they brought D-x back again. Jeez i remember that when I was little. I agree, WWE to me is worthless. Sorry to be harsh, but all it is people fake hitting each other, running around from rope to rope and divas walking around showing their thongs. That right there is WWE in a nutshell.

Grave · 08-27-2006, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stillstanding

You mean they brought D-x back again. Jeez i remember that when I was little. I agree, WWE to me is worthless. Sorry to be harsh, but all it is people fake hitting each other, running around from rope to rope and divas walking around showing their thongs. That right there is WWE in a nutshell.

I don't have a problem with it being fake, as long as the storylines/gimmicks/characters are worth a crap. But WWE has been stale for a Looong time.

And as the ratings remain stagnant, what do they do? They just step up the diva-search fluff and other crap like "nightgown" matches. Its just sad.

Yeah "sex sells" but only to an extent. It can't substitute entirely for an otherwise CRAPPY wrestling show.

Even then i have porn if i want to see chicks, i'd never watch WWE for THAT...

Bomber · 08-27-2006, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lwbfl

If you didn't like this one, maybe you should stick with WWE.

What the hell does that have to do with anything? I don't watch WWE, not for free and certainly not PPV.

All I'm saying is, PPV has to rise above UFN because they're charging for it. Just because there's a title match doesn't mean it's worth my $40. Maybe if UFC was my only hobby I'd be psyched for any kind of mediocre show, but there are plenty of other things I like to spend my money on. I wonder what the numbers will look like for this card. A step backward I'm guessing.

Straffe · 08-27-2006, 07:53 PM

(WWF) died after wrestlmania 14. I use to be so in to that i cant believe i was so into it, i tried watching it not to long ago and was like wow this is the lame of the lame.

Grave · 08-27-2006, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straffe

(WWF) died after wrestlmania 14. I use to be so in to that i cant believe i was so into it, i tried watching it not to long ago and was like wow this is the lame of the lame.

WWF died the moment WCW died. Competition keeps people, companies, buisnesses,etc SHARP. And without competition and a reason to improve, they stagnant.

When WCW, the only real threat to WWF, died in '01. WWF's drive to improve and continue to be "good" died with it. Their brand of wrestling has been mostly crap ever since, a few sprinklings of good things here&there, but otherwise 85%-90% wrestlecrap.

lwbfl · 08-27-2006, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bomber

What the hell does that have to do with anything? I don't watch WWE, not for free and certainly not PPV.

What it has to do with is all these people crying about the events because there wasn't enough flash and drama for them. People need to realize that this is real, it can't be planned, and you can't always be flashy so some people are more drawn to drama, flash, etc and should look more toward highlight tapes, KO specials and fake fighting. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that, but don't expect it every time from every fight.

Bomber · 08-27-2006, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lwbfl

What it has to do with is all these people crying about the events because there wasn't enough flash and drama for them.

I guess you must mean someone else then, because that doesn't describe my objection at all. In a PPV, I want to watch the best and the most up-and-coming fighters, in matches that matter to me. I don't care if Diaz/Neer put on a great show. That's only part of the allure. Kongo is interesting enough for a PPV slot, but not against a newcomer. Griffin/Bonnar? Come on, that fight doesn't really matter. It's UFN quality. The undercard was a bunch of no-names. Even the undercard in a PPV needs some fights that matter. Aside from the title bout, this card was not important, regardless of the quality of the individual fights.

DaSpyderGrove · 08-28-2006, 02:57 AM

so franca is a no name?

stillstanding · 08-28-2006, 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bomber

I guess you must mean someone else then, because that doesn't describe my objection at all. In a PPV, I want to watch the best and the most up-and-coming fighters, in matches that matter to me. I don't care if Diaz/Neer put on a great show. That's only part of the allure. Kongo is interesting enough for a PPV slot, but not against a newcomer. Griffin/Bonnar? Come on, that fight doesn't really matter. It's UFN quality. The undercard was a bunch of no-names. Even the undercard in a PPV needs some fights that matter. Aside from the title bout, this card was not important, regardless of the quality of the individual fights.

Yeah, but isnt the quality of the individual fights the thing that make a card. I dont know about you, but i would rather see two no name fighters go at hard and show some heart and have a quality fight then watch two well known veterans lay on top of one another for 15 min.

tejas · 08-28-2006, 05:04 AM

was it worth 40 bucks? i dont know. i enjoyed it, was better than 61 at least. ill tell you one thing though, im sick and tired of paying for commercials. when im paying to watch i shouldnt be forced to see their pitch for that movie whatever it was. i went to the fridge and got a beer when that crap started. it looked stupid anyway what little i saw. if they put that junk on spike its ok cause its free, when im footing the bill, i have a problem with it. if they would knock off some of the advertising they could squeeze in another fight i believe. just my two sense.

Bomber · 08-28-2006, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaSpyderGrove

so franca is a no name?

I didn't say Franca was a no-name, I said the undercard fighters were no-names. But since you brought it up, Franca should have been fighting for contention in the LW division, not a UFC newcomer. I know Varner turned out to be a tough cookie, but the LW division needs a lot of sorting out among the existing guys we know to be in contention. Franca should have been matched with one of them and Varner should not have been on PPV card, until he proved a winner.

A PPV card should be used to establish who's up and coming, and who's in contention. All the fights on the PPV card should matter. Bouts like Evans/Lambert, Griffin/Ortiz, Stephenson/Edwards, Loiseau/Swick, Parysian/Sanchez, these are the types of fights that should happen on a PPV.... fights between two guys who are climbing the ranks. To sort out who should continue to climb.

Bomber · 08-28-2006, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stillstanding

Yeah, but isnt the quality of the individual fights the thing that make a card. I dont know about you, but i would rather see two no name fighters go at hard and show some heart and have a quality fight then watch two well known veterans lay on top of one another for 15 min.

See my post above. I love to watch good fights, but to get me to commit to a PPV card I have to care about most of the matches in an emotional way. A title shot, an important contention bout and a couple of bouts featuring rising stars on the main card and it's golden. The undercard has a lot more latitude and they can select a bout or two to show great fights by no name fighters.

lwbfl · 08-28-2006, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bomber

I guess you must mean someone else then, because that doesn't describe my objection at all.

Yes, you are correct. Seeing how you didn't even watch the event I could not comment on your outtake of it.

jmag · 08-28-2006, 10:00 AM

The free UFN helps me justify the $40 bucks as well. The awesome Sanchez Parisyan fight could have been on Spike or PPV, maybe could have been switched with Bonnar Griffin, but either way it adds. The TUF series looks good this season too. I think they are doing alot for the fans. I figure my PPV fee goes for all of it.

Crashsti · 08-28-2006, 10:05 AM

its been a long time since i bought a UFC PPV. a UFC event is really like gambling, sometimes you hit gold, others you lose everything. its part of the game when you're a real sport without fixed outcomes. thats why i use the internet to see who won, the forums to see how the fights were and then wait until it comes out on DVD. which unfortunately has'nt been in awhile since the UFC has'nt resolved their distribution problem.

Bomber · 08-28-2006, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lwbfl

Yes, you are correct. Seeing how you didn't even watch the event I could not comment on your outtake of it.

You seem to have a bit of a reading comprehension problem. I'm explaining why I didn't buy the PPV. How the fights turned out is beside the point. I want to be interested in the fighters and the matches before I buy.

Griffin/Bonner is UFN quality. Even if it turns out to be a good fight, in the big picture it simply doesn't matter because it doesn't settle any questions about contention. Bonnar is not in contention. Griffin may be, so he should have fought someone who also may be.

LB4LB · 08-28-2006, 11:25 AM

That's why I don't pay to watch the UFC. I simply go to a local Sports bar and watch it. Quit frankly, I thought the Diaz and Franca fight were the best. And I can't blame Chuck for giving a quick performance.

Jeez, the first loss to Liddell apparently haunted Renato for years, and this time Chuck breezed by him. How in the world will Renato get over that?