Friend of our site


MMA Headlines


UFC HP


Bleacher Report


MMA Fighting


MMA Torch


MMA Weekly


Sherdog (News)


Sherdog (Articles)


Liver Kick


MMA Junkie


MMA Mania


MMA Ratings


Rating Fights


Yahoo MMA Blog


MMA Betting


Search this site



Latest Articles


News Corner


MMA Rising


Audio Corner


Oddscast


Sherdog Radio


Video Corner


Fight Hub


Special thanks to...

Link Rolodex

Site Index


To access our list of posting topics and archives, click here.

Friend of our site


Buy and sell MMA photos at MMA Prints

Site feedback


Fox Sports: "Zach Arnold's Fight Opinion site is one of the best spots on the Web for thought-provoking MMA pieces."

« | Home | »

Putting the pieces of the puzzle together on UFC & Rampage Jackson

By Zach Arnold | September 4, 2009

Print Friendly and PDF

When reports surfaced that BJ Penn vs. Diego Sanchez was being moved to the Memphis event on December 12th, there was chatter that somehow this meant that UFC couldn’t get a network TV deal once again.

But what if the matchmaking move dealt with something far more serious?

You’ve seen the reports now claiming that Quinton “Rampage” Jackson will be filming the A-Team movie instead of fighting in front of home town fans against Rashad Evans on 12/12 in Memphis. If the reports are true, then Dana White’s frustration and anger in Portland over Rampage wanting to film the movie is completely and totally justified.

Since his arrival in UFC, something hasn’t totally clicked between Rampage and Zuffa. While Jackson has had some success, he hasn’t become that mega-superstar we were expecting. Chuck Liddell, Brock Lesnar, and Georges St. Pierre are all more popular than Jackson. The one upside for Jackson in filming the A-Team movie is that his name value will increase in the eyes of the general public. But that’s the only upside.

There are a lot of major downsides to this move. As a fight promoter, Dana White has invested a lot of time, energy, and money in pushing Jackson. I’ve criticized Zuffa’s tenacity in their push of Jackson on this site in the past, but I also recognize that this Fall was going to be the biggest push UFC was going to give Jackson yet. They set up their reality show around him fighting Rashad Evans and threw Kimbo Slice into the mix. The fight between the two men was set up perfectly for a ‘homecoming’ of sorts for Rampage in Memphis at the FedEx Forum, which is significantly bigger than the late Mid South Coliseum that Jackson used to watch wrestling taped at. If Rampage ends up picking the movie over UFC 107 in Memphis, it will be a move that costs him a lot. He will in essence be burning UFC by doing this, he will have wasted the time of a lot of people including Rashad Evans (who needs to bounce back after the Machida loss), and it will be a loss in terms of a fight with an opponent he can beat.

Steve Cofield asks why UFC is still going to Memphis if Rampage won’t fight on the card. The answer for this question is easy – it’s Memphis. Memphis is a town with a tremendous history for pro-wrestling and fighting. The crowd will be super-heated and will be 100% supportive of UFC.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 99 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

99 Responses to “Putting the pieces of the puzzle together on UFC & Rampage Jackson”

  1. Ivan Trembow says:

    Wow, Gina Carano got the lead role in a movie that is being directed by Oscar-winning director Steven Soderbergh. And unlike Jackson, Carano didn’t already have an agreement signed to fight on a specific date that she will have to back out of now.

    http://mma.fanhouse.com/2009/09/06/gina-carano-wins-starring-role-in-major-action-film/

    Also, Rashad Evans still hasn’t been been notified of the news that his fight is off. http://mma.fanhouse.com/2009/09/06/rashad-evans-not-yet-told-of-possible-ufc-107-fight-postponement/

  2. Zach Arnold says:

    I’m incredibly amused by all the pro-Jackson reaction on this. Not one person is looking at this legitimately from the eyes of UFC, which for all intents and purposes has ‘made’ Jackson a star in the States. PRIDE didn’t.

    If my employer went to me at the office and said, “Zach, I got a huge project for you, it’s a multi-million deal that can make all of us significant money, but you have to commit time to it and clear your schedule,” I’d turn around and take it immediately. If that project involved the employer giving me some sort of ‘real estate’ to promote me publicly and put me in a prime position to be the face of the company for that year, there’s no way I could look at them with a straight face after the first half of the project is completed and go, “You know, I got an offer to go film a movie, I’m just not feeling the project any more,” my employer would have every right to look down upon me as a quitter and someone who isn’t loyal to the company. Furthermore, they would have every right never to seriously push me again in a prime slot or ever make me the face of their company again.

    What Jackson did to White is, playing off a phrase, the ultimate fuck finish. The message is loud and clear – UFC is not this guy’s top priority and this guy’s word is not credible. UFC gave this guy prime real estate and a chance to make a couple of million USD on PPV in Memphis. Jackson gave his word to White and took it away. UFC was about to give him a second big push in his career.

    This was not a situation where Dana White was screwing around with Jackson when he wasn’t booked or in a program — Jackson was married to the Evans program for the majority of this year.

  3. Alan Conceicao says:

    I consider myself a fan of humanity first before being a fan of the UFC. Ergo, I support anything that Quinton Jackson does that might set himself up for a career after he’s done fighting. I understand what it means to Dana’s plans, and I don’t care.

  4. Mark says:

    But it’s not the ultimate fuck finish because he isn’t quitting, he’s simply delaying it. We are 3 months away from the Memphis event, they have more than enough time to push it back to January or February if they have to have Jackson fight in Memphis. It’s not like he’s springing this on them on December 10th or is going to be gone all year. TUF will still be fresh in the fans’ minds 2 months later unless it’s as dull as Jackson-Griffin’s season was.

    What does company loyalty get you in Zuffa? Even Dana’s best friend is forced to make a fool of himself on national television dancing for money for showing so much loyalty.

  5. Fluyid says:

    I guess they’ll have one of those long, drawn-out, pro wrestling style confrontations between Rampage and Rashad at the Memphis event.

  6. spacedog says:

    I love how Ivan has already done his typical ” I don’t have all the facts so I’ll invent my own, and then repeat them until I treat them as though they’re true.”

    Did Rampage actually SIGN a bout agreement? If not then his is not backing out of a signed fight. Semantics yes but it makes a difference. If you are going to hang the guy, hang him for what he did not what makes for a better read.

    Secondly, does anyone have any idea if Dana is behind this or not? It’s entirely possible that the offer came in after TUF started filming and the event was booked. Dana might well have looked at it and said go for it, we’ll just move the fight back. Any lost heat will be more than made up by the thousands of times the sentence “Ultimate fighter and UFC veteran Rampage Jackson” will be uttered during the media push for the movie.

    What ever the case, shouldn’t you get a bit more information before you turn on ‘page?

  7. IceMuncher says:

    “I consider myself a fan of humanity first before being a fan of the UFC. Ergo, I support anything that Quinton Jackson does that might set himself up for a career after he’s done fighting. I understand what it means to Dana’s plans, and I don’t care.”

    Imagine you ran a business. You hire a new guy, give him a job, and although he doesn’t bring much to the table at first, you show him the ropes and eventually build him up into a valuable company asset.

    Later, you plan a big project with him at the lead, but the guy doesn’t have the necessary background, so you invest the time and money needed to send him back to school for a year so he’ll be able to do the project. If he then left your company as soon as he finished his education because he was offered a better paying job at some other company, you’re telling me you’d honestly sit there and say “Well good for him, I’m a humanist.”

    Please.

  8. Mark says:

    But none of this outrage was around when Cung Le did far worse than Rampage is doing for his Hollywood career. So this is just a typical Cult of Dana bitch-session. Don’t you guys usually wait until Lord Dana cuts his fuck-filled promo about it first?

  9. Shane says:

    Dana has already cut the promo indicating his displeasure:

    “I hate it with a [expletive] passion,” White said when asked about UFC fighters who take movie roles. “‘You’re a fighter; you’re not a movie star.’ It’s so [expletive] funny because fighters want to be movie stars, and movie stars want to act like they’re fighters. ‘Get a [expletive] grip. You’re a fighter, and you’re a [expletive] movie star. Alright?'”

    “‘Guess what Rashad Evans is thinking about right now,'” White said he plans to tell Jackson. “‘He’s thinking about beating your [expletive] ass. He’s not sitting around thinking about how him and his mom used to watch the [expletive] ‘Love Boat’ together and (how) he wants to get the role of Isaac the bartender.

    “‘Get a [expletive] grip, dude. You’re going to make a lot of money. You ain’t going to make a lot of money playing B.A. Baracus on ‘The A-Team.’ Jesus Christ. This [expletive] drives me [expletive] nuts.’ So yeah, I’m not a big fan of fighters doing movies. When your career is over, if you turn into a movie star, that’s awesome.”

    http://mmajunkie.com/news/16003/dana-white-discusses-quinton-jackson-on-the-a-team-no-fan-of-fighter-thespians.mma

  10. Chuck says:

    IceMuncher;

    Them’s the breaks man. It is the employer’s problem if a person they invested in went off to get a better job. What’s so wrong with that?

    I’ll add to your one-sided story. What if the employer found someone more suitable for the job? You know what would happen? He would eat up the guy from before, chew him up, spit him out, and let him waste at the curb. Last I checked, most employers are only interested in people who can make them more money and could care less if they can ruin people on the way. See what I did there? I just made a one-sided argument, just like you did, and it wasn’t exactly fair of me.

    Business is a two-way street. You can’t expect employees to be like trained dogs with absolute loyalty. And you can’t expect employers to be cuddly teddy bears who’s hearts break easily.

  11. Alan Conceicao says:

    Imagine you ran a business.

    I don’t care about these stupid hypotheticals imagining such a altruistic world. Dana White signed Rampage because he’s a great talent as a fighter. Hell, you can argue they signed him to lose. They didn’t sign him because they were altruistically pulling some poor bum off the street to mold. If he wants to do something other than fighting, even if it pays less money at this moment, so be it. Its Rampage’s choice. If he’s not fulfilling some legal obligation, I don’t want to hear about moral ones.

  12. Ivan Trembow says:

    The difference between this and other cases it that Jackson has already filmed an entire season of TUF that is meant to build towards a PPV fight between the two coaches at the end of the season.

  13. Chuck says:

    Ivan;

    They are only pushing the fight back a month or two. It shouldn’t be a big deal. Hell, maybe Rashad Evans could use the extra training time. Same for Jackson.

  14. Alan Conceicao says:

    If he’s not fulfilling some legal obligation, I don’t want to hear about moral ones.

    Lemme reword this: As long as he’s not in violation of some legal obligation, I’m not interested in the moral ones. If he was, the fight wouldn’t be getting pushed back. That simple.

  15. spacedog says:

    Shane,

    That’s why I come to this site, there is always somebody to do the foot work for me/ set me straight. So Dana is not behind it, in that case Rampage may have made a bad career decision.

    It does not change my first point, that he did not back out of a signed fight agreement and that saying he did does not make it so (Ivan). Some accuracy is relevant when roasting people.

  16. Zack says:

    Hard to feel bad for the UFC when they put meaningful fights on hold and push them back all the time for the reality show. Quinton should’ve had the next crack at Lyoto instead of doing the show. They should’ve been fighting this month.

    Instead Shogun gets a magical title shot after beating Chuck and Coleman.

  17. Brad Wharton says:

    When all is said and done the point remains: The UFC should protect their interests in cases like these.

    Maybe this is the learning curve for them. I wouldn’t be supprised to see a ‘no movies between fights without our say-so’ clause in the big talent’s contracts from here on out.

    At the very least I’d be shocked if they didn’t have TUF coaches sign bout agreements before filming.

  18. Mr.Roadblock says:

    Zack,

    Quinton turned down the Lyoto fight for the Rashad fight.

  19. 45 Huddle says:

    Alan doesn’t care about mroals, how shocking.

    To me, the Gina Carano signing on for a movie news is actually a bigger deal then the Rampage one.

    Strikeforce is already hurting for main event stars that people care to watch. Taking Carano away from fighting for a few months is not good. And if the movie is a success, I guarantee she quits fighting. She doesn’t exactly have the fighters heart to begin with. Why wouldn’t she become an actress instead and get more money and less pain?

  20. Alan Conceicao says:

    The UFC can try to protect their interests by trying to tie up fighters even more, but then risks getting a disgruntled guy or two that leaves. If they had a case with Rampage, they’d execute it instead of bitching.

    As for the moral issues about this, its cage fighting. Bitching about this on moral grounds is like complaining that some porn star quit the industry before it got another double penetration picture it was owed out of some coked-up escort.

  21. Ivan Trembow says:

    I don’t know for sure whether the bout agreements were signed for the 12/12/09 fight, but at the very least they filmed a whole season of TUF to build up that fight on that date. Of course, they’ll still be able to have the fight; it just won’t be right after the season ends, and now they have a date booked in Memphis without the hometown star. Is Jerry Lawler available on that date?

  22. 45 Huddle says:

    Now is the time for Andy Kauffman to make his return….. Lawler vs. Kaufmann inside the octagon!!!

    Whether a fighter has it signed or not, they do have an obligation to the fight promoter. Especially in this situation where they filmed an entire season of TUF. It’s no different then a main event fighter should be doing a lot of press leading up to his fight. There are certain things that whether they are in the contract or not need to be treated properly. Rampage did not do that here. He had an obligation that he let slide… And took the booking of TUF on a false premise.

  23. smoogy says:

    I’m surprised at anyone who argues that it is “no big deal” for the fight to be moved back a few months. At this point the UFC promotional cycle is so huge and multi-faceted that bumping a big fight like Rashad vs. Rampage could have a ripple effect of bad consequences. For one, their demand for PPV-level attractions means that they may need another ad-lib main event in early 2010, like when they booked Jackson vs. Jardine this spring. They brought in a lot of talent in the last couple months, but Tito Ortiz and Vitor Belfort are the only true main-event fighters among them, and they only drew Antonio Rogerio Nogueira, Paul Buentello and Paul Daley in terms of complimentary PPV talent.

    I’m kind of blown away by the way the fans just give Rampage a pass on this stuff. First he turns down a title shot to go pal around with Kimbo Slice and film another season of TUF, then he decides he doesn’t want the Evans fight on the (informally) agreed upon date? And he wants to do movies instead? He is like a colelction of all the worst slanders directed at Fedor and Couture during their public censuring by The Dana, multipled by ten.

  24. sammyscaff says:

    Boo Fucking Hoo.

    The fight may be pushed back. Too bad.

    Go cry your head off Zach Arnold.

    We all know that Dana White does not like it when ANY fighter acts independently, whether it be by fighting for another promotion or not signing away all of video game rights for life. For once a fighter gets away with it. Deal with it.

  25. theYiffer says:

    Actually there is a moral, if you make a commitment, you follow though. I agree with Zach, this was a fuck-finish by Jackson, and I don’t give a crap what the legalities are. I get sick and tired of immature, lazy, irresponsible fuckers out there, like Rampage, who fuck other people just to jump on a whim. What’s worst than Rampage are all of the jackasses who concoct excuses for guys like Rampage. If he committed to the show and the fight, and then drops out in the middle of it all, then Rampage has just fucked Dana White and the UFC.

    As for the media, if they even bother to mention Rampage in conjunction with the movie, they’ll most likely use some vague reference, not bothering to make any reference to Ultimater Fighter 10 or the UFC. As far as the UK’s concerned, Zuffa has been losing money just creating a foot-hold over there. So unless Rampage is a mega-draw over there, who gives a fuck?! And since when the hell has the UK market ever made a movie successful?! (i.e.-Lot’s of cash…)

    As far as pushing the fight back “a couple months”, unless Kimbo’s smashing guys like bugs, who the fuck’s gonna remember what happened during Ultimate Fighter 10 by Jan, Feb, or March of next year? Viewership has historically dropped off towards the end of each season. If UFC’s lucky, the hard-cores may have some vague recollection. So by then, they’ve lost most, if not all, of the heat they wasted time and money just to generate.

    Without bashing the UFC and Dana, there is no way to excuse to the decision to run away to Hollywood. If Jackson had a brain, he would had rejected the bit roll used this current push by the UFC, providing him momentum, to set himself up for an actual career in films. The UFC has been over the years trying to turn him into a mega-star with possible main-stream appeal who can easily draw people. (That means name recognition by people other than us on the internet.) And he has the charisma to pull it off. Now that’s been pissed way…

  26. Mr.Roadblock says:

    I’m with Yiffer, Zach, 45 and ironically in this case Ivan. This is the first time in a long time we’ve been on the same side of an issue.

    Rampage is 100% in the wrong here. He’s out for himself. The guys who want to say he should be, because UFC will cut him one day you guys need to stop whining then about UFC cutting guys.

    This is bad business all the way around. UFC wanted him to fight Lyoto. Rampage didn’t want to. Probably because he knew he’d lose. So he asked for Rashad. Now he’s ducking Rashad. Right now he should be readying up for training camp. Running, ramping up his workouts and adjusting his diet for the start of Training camp in October. Instead he is opting out of the fight. Tells you that Rampage doesn’t believe in his own abilities.

    He is majorly screwing Rashad. Rashad had a shot at headlining a big time PPV. Rashad can’t do that right now without Rampage.

    I don’t respect people that go into business for themselves. Not when they were created by someone or something else. Rampage owes everything he has to UFC. Whether he wants to admit it or not. Let’s not forget Rampage avoided UFC and took what amounts to a fixed fight with Mat Lindland to avoid the competition in UFC. Then UFC bought his contract and acquired his services.

    I don’t have to imagine hypothetical business scenarios. I own 50% of a small business with my partner. If I got offered a movie role tomorrow and took it, it would ruin my business. I wouldn’t do that because it would adversely affect my partner. You can say I have an equity stake in the business I own and Rampage doesn’t. That’s true and that’s a fair rebuttal. But Rampage wouldn’t be anything without UFC. WIthout Rampage UFC would be just fine. That’s where I see Rampage as making a bad move. I think even with a few losses in a row UFC would provide for him. With one loss, Hollywood will cut him loose.

    At the end of the day Rampage is just another short sighted, stupid athlete. One that has shown his disloyalty and better save all he can because his days are numbered.

  27. Zack says:

    “Whether a fighter has it signed or not, they do have an obligation to the fight promoter. ”

    And in what cases does the fight promoter have an obligation to the fighter? Anytime there is a loophole in the contract the fighter gets fucked.

  28. Wolverine says:

    I find it hilarious that people think that it is Rampage, who turned down the title shot against Machida. I understand that fans can be upset about this movie thing, but it’s obvious that putting Rampage on TUF 10 was UFC/Spike decision.

  29. Alan Conceicao says:

    You guys keep talking about morality pertaining to cage fighting. Its hilarious, because you obviously don’t realize the inherent flaw there. Its like watching wrestling fans talk about how they love all the fancy moves that look like they cause injury steam every time a wrestler dies from steroid/painkiller mixing.

    Cage fighting is one of the ugliest businesses out there. If someone wants to put his career on hold to film a motion picture that could get increase his fame, good for him. Hell, at this point, I’ve heard so much crap from Dana about how everyone is screwing him that I half believe that Rampage doesn’t have the part at all.

  30. Brad Wharton says:

    I love the fact that the pro-Rampage side of this argument centers on the premise that “It’s an ugly buniness full of arseholes, so it’s fine for Rampage to do whatever he wants”.

    I’m not naive enough to think that you can’t get through life in a business like this without your fingers getting a little dirty, but the notion that fighters should be able to go back on commitments they make ‘just because’ it’s a bad, bad world…doesn’t that just perpetuate the cycle?

  31. GassedOut says:

    Smells like hype to me.

  32. sammyscaff says:

    Newsflash:::

    Its not a commitment if there wasn’t anything in writing. Period.

    All you UFC nuthuggers can suck a big one. You dont get what you want. Too bad.

  33. Alan Conceicao says:

    I love the fact that the pro-Rampage side of this argument centers on the premise that “It’s an ugly buniness full of arseholes, so it’s fine for Rampage to do whatever he wants”.

    Within legal grounds, absolutely.

    I’m not naive enough to think that you can’t get through life in a business like this without your fingers getting a little dirty, but the notion that fighters should be able to go back on commitments they make ‘just because’ it’s a bad, bad world…doesn’t that just perpetuate the cycle?

    What makes you think that Rampage not doing the movie would do something to cull that activity from the other side? If it wasn’t him, someone else would do something either real or imagined (see: CroCop) and then there would be justification for cutting some additional freedoms.

    The real talking point is that apparently the UFC doesn’t pay enough money to sway Rampage from not taking the movie. You don’t see athletes in other sports missing a month of activity to shoot an action film in which they are a bit player.

  34. Brad Wharton says:

    @ Alan:

    Within legal grounds, absolutely

    Well yes, obviously he’s doing nothing *legaly* wrong, I don’t think anyone is suggesting he is. That doesn’t make it *right*. Just because something is legally wrong

    Do you honestly think that he’s not let his fans and employers down at all?

    Example: Here in the UK there is no legal obligation to recycle. Does that mean I shouldn’t do it? As an individual, it matters little if I do or don’t, but if everyone felt that way…well, we’d all be swimming in you-know-what before long.

    Maybe thats not the best example, but the principle is sound. If every UFC fighter droped out of their bouts before the bout agreement was signed, where would the UFC be?

    Now, thats the UFC’s problem, not the fighters, but if the UFC goes down the pan or is forced to introduce watertight contracts, it’s the fighters that suffer.

  35. Alan Conceicao says:

    Example: Here in the UK there is no legal obligation to recycle. Does that mean I shouldn’t do it?

    Lemme ask you: Do you think there’s a moral equivalence to fighting in a cage and recycling soda cans as far as the effect on society goes? I can’t imagine you do.

  36. Chuck says:

    Well, considering that recycling is AWFUL for the environment (it’s not a natural process and uses chemicals) then I think you would be the morally correct one for NOT recycling. Recycling is only good so that stuff gets reused and so we won’t run out (fat chance of running out of aluminum within the next two centuries).

  37. Brad Wharton says:

    @ Alan: What does that have to do with anything? It was an example, not a literal comparison. In my example, ‘society’ was the UFC and not recycling because I’m not legaly obliged to was…well, you get the point I’m sure.

    I’m not saying that Rampage should or shouldn’t do the movie, if anything I believe that the UFC is more at fault for not getting the bout agreements signed…

    …but that doesn’t excuse the fact that it was a low blow.

  38. Alan Conceicao says:

    @ Alan: What does that have to do with anything?

    Demanding moral adherence to something as utterly devoid of morality as a bloodsport is ridiculous, just as it is when its applied to organized crime, pornography, and so on. He’s not an equal partner in the UFC, he wasn’t dragged off the street and created by the UFC, or is in any way comparable to any of these altruistic scenarios being put forth. Some of you people are legit crazy.

  39. Brad Wharton says:

    It’s a bloodsport now is it? Last I checked everyone is paying taxes like every other athlete/promoter in pro sports. The UFC is not exactly ‘Fight Club’ anymore.

    Again, thats not the point. I’m not saying there is some deep-seated moral obligation to ‘do the right thing’, just that it was a low move towards a promoter that has invested time and effort promoting him.

    I didn’t see many people queuing up to see Rampage vs Lindland way back when…

    You’re doing a great job of evading my original question: Do you think it’s a low blow or not?

  40. Alan Conceicao says:

    It is absolutely a bloodsport, just as boxing is. MMA is popular because of its brutality, not because of some oft-claimed artistry. Seriously. Look at the people who watch it if you think otherwise.

    Again, thats not the point. I’m not saying there is some deep-seated moral obligation to ‘do the right thing’, just that it was a low move towards a promoter that has invested time and effort promoting him.

    Obviously you’re claiming (along with everyone else) that there is a moral obligation. That’s what this is all based on. I disagree. I don’t see moral obligations in what is essentially and definitively an amoral activity. I don’t think Rampage has any moral obligation to get hit in the face at his employer/promoter’s beck and call than I do some young girl does of doing a DP scene for an adult film company in the Valley.

    Is it a “low blow”? I can’t claim I think something went south of the border if I believe we’re starting from below the beltline in the first place.

  41. Brad Wharton says:

    An amoral activity? It’s his job for god’s sake, it’s what he gets paid to do! Ok, so it’s a ‘bloodsport’…it’s a legitimate, regulated form of employment none the less.

    My point still stands, just because you think that MMA is a rough business, doesn’t mean that two wrongs make a right.

    You’re acting like Rampage filmed TUF and they asked him to do the Rashad fight as an afterthought. As far as I can remember, he turned down a shot at Machida to coach TUF…and fight Rashad.

    Fact: He knew he was expected to do the Rashad fight – he pulled out. That is a low blow.

  42. Chuck says:

    Brad;

    Of course MMA is an amoral activity, same as pro wrestling, kickboxing, defense attorneys (you could probably put prosecutors and ambulance chasers here too), science, pornography, morticians, feminism, cartooning (Any sort. Comics, animation, graffiti, you name it. Especially indy and erotica), abortions, etc. I can go on and on and on. Does being amoral make ANY of what I listed as being wrong? NO! It doesn’t (for the record, I am pro-choice)!

    NEVER confuse “legal” and “legitimate” with “moral”. Those terms don’t go hand-in-hand in the least bit. Moral is relative and subjective. What I list I listed for a reason. Everything I listed is or was considered immoral (not amoral), or even amoral to an extent, at one time or another. Whether it be by society, church groups, moms of America, people’s personal beliefs (I’m sure some think morticians are in the wrong for messing with dead bodies), you name it. Again, does it make any of that wrong? Not in the least. MMA is amoral, and that’s okay. Who cares what “the church” thinks?

  43. Alan Conceicao says:

    An amoral activity? It’s his job for god’s sake, it’s what he gets paid to do! Ok, so it’s a ‘bloodsport’…it’s a legitimate, regulated form of employment none the less.

    Just as a ton of legitimate, regulated forms of employment are that I don’t feel any sorrow for when employees decide to leave or do things outside the confines of what is “best for business”. What is best for business is these guys fighting until they are broken down scum and forgotten, as has been the case in boxing for eons. Added to the obvious fact that MMA is men fighting in a cage and it becomes doubly repugnant.

    You note that I am discounting what his appearance on TUF meant in the promotional scheme. I do not. I comprehend it full well. And I repeat that if this is what Rampage wants to do and he’s being compensated well, I have no moral issue with him doing it. None. Zero. Zilch. I hope he takes off as a film star and never fights again, and he can count his money as an old man.

    Now, maybe you can address my statement: Why is it that no other sport in the world does this happen to, but in MMA, it does to a multitude of guys? Particularly given the claims of how much money is being made here. Something doesn’t add up. Maybe if they wanted Rampage to stay, they should have offered him more money? My guess is, that’s exactly what happened. He went to them saying he had a film opportunity, got repudiated, and Dana went for the usual tactic of airing dirty laundry to try and get people on his side (after all, he is arguing for the common man!).

  44. Alan Conceicao says:

    Of course MMA is an amoral activity, same as pro wrestling, kickboxing, defense attorneys (you could probably put prosecutors and ambulance chasers here too), science, pornography, morticians, feminism, cartooning (Any sort. Comics, animation, graffiti, you name it. Especially indy and erotica), abortions, etc. I can go on and on and on. Does being amoral make ANY of what I listed as being wrong? NO! It doesn’t (for the record, I am pro-choice)!

    There’s a lot of people out there who talk about being fans of MMA for the athleticism or pagentry or bullshit like that. The truth is we watch MMA because it is a violent spectacle. Period. We watch because there is blood and broken bones and people being knocked into unconsciousness. People hate decisions because no one gets hurt and the “best” UFCs are the ones where almost every fight on the undercard is shown too because they were all 2 minute KO stoppages. Ask people to rank their favorite fights ever, and some dudes in Pancrase trading leglocks doesn’t come up. Frye/Takayama does though.

    In short, MMA is almost entirely devoid of morality. I would consider anyone who takes a child to see it or watches it with young members of their family to be an abhorrent human being. That said, I watch it. Does it make me a bad person? To some people, absolutely. Oh well.

  45. Chuck says:

    Well said Alan. I love the technique and pageantry, but brutality is entertainment. Period.

    If you (I mean people in general) claim that they only watch MMA for the gracefulness of it all, then stop watching MMA and start going to Brazilian Jui-Jitsu, Judo, Abu Dhabi, etc. competitions. And for striking, might I recommend amateur boxing. Not pro under any circumstance whatsoever (blatant commercialism is amoral and doesn’t benefit anyone nor the state except for the competitors. Fidel Castro has it right!), only amateur. Even then you will still get sloppy brawlers and sloppy guys afraid of getting hit because of the wonky scoring system.

    Ask anyone who they think are the most entertaining fighter in UFC. No one, except for “hardcore” fans, is going to say Demian Maia or Yushin Okami, I will guarantee you that. And some will say Machida only because everyone is now on the Machida bandwagon following his KO win over Rashad Evans.

  46. Oh Yeah says:

    Stop trying to paint everyone with a degenerate brush, Alan.

    Why would fans pay a premium to watch highly-skilled fighters go at it, when sloppily trained fighters are finished at a higher rate? Why does the UFC bother putting great fighters together at a high cost instead of washed up celebrities and freak shows?

    Many sports fans including myself enjoy basketball just as much as MMA. How in your twisted world can that make any sense at all?

  47. Oh Yeah says:

    Chuck, why would you recommend amateur boxing over pro? Sports at the professional level are nearly always far superior if you are looking for technique.

    And, you can’t just watch a BJJ match and then a boxing match and be just as satisfied as just having watched MMA. Each on their own is too one-dimensional. It’s like eating your dinner without first combining the ingredients and cooking it.

    The violence is part of the allure of MMA, but there has to be more. I roll my eyes when people wax on nauseatingly about gracefulness, “ballets of violence” and Lyoto Machida. But for me, it’s the competition, strategy, skills, urgency and dynamics of an MMA fight that make it interesting. There are dull moments, but one lazy move can cause the end of your night.

    Alan says that people like finishes essentially because they’re meatheads. But there’s nothing wrong with wanting a decisive ending for some closure.

    For the record, one of my favourite fights is Edgar/Griffin, and that one ended with the winner (Edgar) trapped in a kneebar. I enjoyed Nate blow Demian out of the water in 21s, but not more than that 3-round decision.

  48. Chuck says:

    Oh Yeah,

    I say watch BJJ for the grappling and boxing (I will count pro here, but I didn’t before to make a point on commercialism and capitalism) for the standing punching and technique because you will, generally, find better boxing skills in a boxing match and better ground work in a BJJ match than you will in most MMA matches. In most MMA fights (this is true of the fighters in general) the skill-set, piece by piece, is watered down and the fighters become better than the sum of their parts. That generally happens in any martial art where there is cross training (Bruce Lee’s Jeet Kune Do, Bartitsu back in the 1890’s, Bruce Tegner’s teachings, etc.). You will generally find better ground work in BJJ and even Judo (as long as the referees let the fighters do more than eight seconds of ground work in Judo) than in MMA; and that’s because that is the focus. It’s not always a quality issue. The more tools one fighter has, the more some of those tools will be watered down. And that’s okay, as long as those tools don’t melt, if you get what I’m saying.

  49. Alan Conceicao says:

    Why would fans pay a premium to watch highly-skilled fighters go at it, when sloppily trained fighters are finished at a higher rate?

    The argument has long been that skill is secondary to branding in the arena of MMA. Its unquestionably true. The most watched fight ever features the “Youtube fighting sensation”.

    Many sports fans including myself enjoy basketball just as much as MMA. How in your twisted world can that make any sense at all?

    I didn’t know fans had to single minded aspy types.

    Chuck, why would you recommend amateur boxing over pro?

    Because Amateur Boxing is effectively all technique. Knockdowns score as much as a clean jab. Head gear is worn to prevent trauma and knockouts.

    And, you can’t just watch a BJJ match and then a boxing match and be just as satisfied as just having watched MMA. Each on their own is too one-dimensional. It’s like eating your dinner without first combining the ingredients and cooking it.

    You’re projecting.

    The violence is part of the allure of MMA, but there has to be more.

    There isn’t, really. Its popular because its violent. Seriously.

    For the record, one of my favourite fights is Edgar/Griffin, and that one ended with the winner (Edgar) trapped in a kneebar.

    Well, a knee bar! There’s nothing violent about joint locks or everything that led up to it.

    Great fights are typically the most brutal ones: A guy gets cut badly and rallies! After a prolongued period of being beaten on and looking to be on the verge of dropping, someone pulls out a fantastic technique from nowhere and reverses everything! Two guys just throw down and see who can take more! There’s a common thread there. What could it be?

    Denial: Not just a river in Egypt.

Comments

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-spam image