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


Bloody Elbow


MMA Ratings


Rating Fights


Yahoo MMA Blog


Search this site



Latest Articles


News Corner


MMA Rising


Audio Corner


Oddscast


MMA Dude Bro


Sherdog Radio


Eddie Goldman


Liver Kick 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 | »

The MMA media and “agendas”

By Zach Arnold | December 30, 2009

Print Friendly and PDF

Luke Thomas at Bloody Elbow has a good article today answering charges from critics of Sherdog about their “anti-UFC” bias. The truth about Sherdog is that they are in the business of making money. They make money. Everyone else in the MMA media circles wants to make money, so they’re going to be bottom-line first before anything else.

The funny thing is that every time there is a media article about UFC going to war with the press, somehow one way or another this very site always gets mentioned in the conversation. Hey, if you’re going to do it, at least come over and do it directly.

To which I would like to know the following: What is the “agenda” that we have that is “dripping with disdain?”

Want to know what I care about? People who run a clean business and who treat the talent they hire fairly in terms of their marketplace value and their health & safety. If that is an “agenda dripping with disdain,” then label me guilty as charged.

For newer readers of this site, the “agenda” charge has been thrown at me more than I can remember since I’ve been writing years and years ago on MMA. If you followed me when K-1 had their corporate tax evasion scandal in 2002-2003, I was getting the “agenda” tag thrown at me… along with a lot of nasty phone calls from people who ended up later apologizing to me and realizing that there was a real story there. Same deal with New Year’s Eve 2003. Or if you followed me during the time PRIDE was collapsing, I practically had people on this very site accusing me of being on UFC’s payroll. Every time I go after a company or a fighter or an agent for malfeasance, the “agenda” charge is always thrown at us but it’s never defined. It’s just… there. Whatever it means.

Do I believe that more people should have been investigating Dream Stage when PRIDE was collapsing? Yeah. Do I believe people should pay attention to the brewing Xyience debacle? Yeah. Do I think people should care about the long-term state of UFC’s finances? Yeah. Doesn’t mean people will or that they will care, but if you’re in the media you should do your job and do it well rather than troll for the easy hits of “this guy is better than this guy!” or “this guy is selfish and only in it for the money!”

If “the agenda” is wanting more accountability in the media to ask tougher questions and have a broader focus on a number of issues in the business, then absolutely I would love to see that happen.

When an MMA writer said that Dana White can barely manage the media scrutiny now, truer words have never been spoken. I find that frightening because most of the media coverage in MMA is extremely friendly in nature. If you separate the message boards away from the people who actually sit and write articles and columns professionally, generally the tone you will find amongst most MMA writers is pretty positive. Jake Rossen is someone who I have known as an acquaintance for many, many years. Whether someone is an acquaintance or my best friend, I will always tell the truth when asked a question about that person and as far as I am concerned, Jake is a good columnist. Columnist, as in, he’s not a reporter. You can be one or the other (or occasionally a tweener), but usually the roles are defined. In his role as a veteran columnist, I’ve always had respect for Jake — to the point that he was a guest on our radio show for years. Of all the people in the world for a promoter to go after and do so in such a comical way, Jake Rossen would be one of the last targets I would have suspected to be at the end of a tirade like that. You see general managers, managers, agents, and players in team sports often harass beat reporters or columnists, but rarely do you see someone in the “Commissioner’s” role go the lengths White has gone to in the media to immolate others (including himself).

I do think the worm has turned here on White and not in a good way. In the past, these tactics used to legitimately scare off people and get the desired reaction. Now? White’s getting mocked, if not ridiculed. He’s being taken less seriously over time and eventually that will lead to a decline in his effectiveness as far as being a front-man is concerned.

The irony of White as a frontman is that he has a hard time handling criticism and those two things usually don’t go together. If the media turned on him tomorrow and decided to investigate various stories about UFC business practices, how do you think White and Fertitta would handle the situation? How do you think they would handle the pressure of a big media outlet like the Wall Street Journal focusing on what’s happening with Xyience and the story’s relation to Zuffa, the parent company of UFC? How do you think the reaction would be if there was a swarm of media at the (pending further notice) upcoming court trial in 2010 between UFC and Nobuyuki Sakakibara over the botched PRIDE asset sale deal and claims by Spectrum Gaming that Sakakibara couldn’t pass a background check? Something tells me that if Dana White was in the same position as Nobuyuki Sakakibara was in 2006 that he wouldn’t have fared any better with the intense spotlight of a scandal that big.

I’m already expecting the pot calling the kettle black responses, to which my response is — I don’t mind criticism (and I allow a lot of it on my own site), but misrepresentation is different. That I don’t tolerate.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 32 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

32 Responses to “The MMA media and “agendas””

  1. Diamond Dave Williams says:

    Zach, I do enjoy reading your site now more than ever, but by you agreeing that Dana White can barely manage media scrutiny now is hypocritical if nothing else. I have read many comments that challenged your points and rather than take the high road and possibly see another view, you are quicker than Dana will ever be at attacking the person and their point than you are to realize that there can be more than one right answer. Most long term readers of this site could easily view this story as an auto biographical staement on how Zach Arnold takes offence to how his points are periodically challenged.
    PS Zach this is not a shot at you, I just found the story amusing coming from you. It seemed more along the lines of a Erin Bicknell story.

  2. Dave says:

    No offense Diamond Dave, but I’ve been reading and interacting with Zach for many years now and honestly, I don’t always agree with Zach or whatever. That doesn’t matter, Zach has always been supportive and helpful to me and I’ve always tried to extend the same courtesy to him.

    Zach rarely gets into it on the comments section here, anyway, unless people are implying he is 45 Huddle again..

  3. cyph says:

    Okay Zach, I’ll address it here.

    Look over your site and tell me that FightOpinion is not biased against Zuffa.

    You have Alan Canceicao, a self-admitted Dana White and UFC haters writing for you. You have sometime contributor Ivan Trembow who hates anything Zuffa. There’s 45 Huddle in the comment section, the lone Zuffa punching bag taking the slings and arrows from your regular readers for daring to put up a positive spin on anything UFC.

    Just off the front page, there is a post on Dana White’s tirade, an article bashing UFC 108 and advocating boycott of the event, and another on the Fertittas ripping off Xyence share holders. That’s three negative stories on Zuffa.

    Furthermore, There are two posts on Dynamite and one promotional piece on Sengoku. Where is the promotional piece on UFC 108?

    This is just snap shot in time of the current front page for 12/30/09. So your site devoted only one article on the biggest MMA event of the week which happens to be negative and a call for boycott, but yet you have three other promotional posts on non Zuffa events.

    Perhaps you don’t have an agenda and everything here are mere coincidence. Unfortunately, the overwhelming negative articles without a counter balance view point, coupled with having known Zuffa haters writing for your site, doesn’t really help your site’s credibility on being unbiased.

    I expect this to be my only comment here as I expect to be flamed and called a UFC shill and Zuffa fanboy from the next 10 commenters.

  4. Alan Conceicao says:

    I’m not sure what’s funniest: That I’m advocating boycott of UFC 108 (I’m not: I’m sure you will love it cyph!) or that FO has an agenda based on commenters. I guess then BE is pro-UFC based on you and mmalogic’s participation there? LOLOLOLOL

  5. I’ve actually talked to the lawyers for PRIDE in Vegas. As far as I know that case is still alive, too. Xyience and PRIDE are inter-connected. The loan the UFC received to buy PRIDE came only due to the misrepresentation of Xyience as a strong sponsorship. The Fertittas had to know Xyience was in despair and according to the Trustee had to know then that they were going to take Xyience over and Bankrupt it, this during the time when they filed paperwork for the $250 million UFC loan saying Xyience was one of its strong sponsorships.

    Once the UFC bought PRIDE, which the loan paperwork would have had to mention also, there should have been something in the covenants to describe what would be done with PRIDE. If the UFC took PRIDE over just to destroy it, the covenants of that $350 million senior-secured-credit-facility are the smoking gun to prove it.

    In Folklore there is something called the law of three. Consider this:

    1. The UFC is accused of pumping up Xyience while the company is about to go belly up knowing they will sweep in and take it over, eliminate its debt, and use it as a pawn to get a huge loan all the while. They convince shareholders to subordinate to their interests and institute a semi-hostile takeover by PROMISING to rebuild and revitalize the company by their association and investment. Instead, they use the company six ways to Sunday to pad their own bottom lines. The Fertittas pay the company sponsorship Xyience owes the UFC first instead of outstanding payments owed to fighters and other creditors.

    http://www.lvrj.com/business/drink-maker-trustee-sues-fertitta-enterprises-affiliate-80403127.html

    2. The UFC PROMISES PRIDE officials interested in selling the brand that they are willing to further the brand and hold “super-bowl” type MMA events between the UFC and PRIDE. The UFC instead quickly dismantles PRIDE and picks and chooses certain fighters to bring to its own organization. They blame the Yakuza scandal and an impasse on television deals in Japan for PRIDE’s demise instead of their own incompetence and greed. The fact is the UFC brass and Dana White pocketed some of the $350 million loan as pseudo “dividends.” If they ever intended to continue the development of PRIDE they would have infused some of that cash into the newly re-organized entity.

    3. The Fertittas organized a buyout of the once-publicly-traded Station Casinos, no doubt making numerous PROMISES to get the job done. They even PROMISED to put almost $250 million of their own family cash into the company if a “pre-packaged” bankruptcy could be achieved before they went into full BK proceedings.

    In all three cases the Fertittas set something up to fail. Somehow the Fertittas managed to make money, even though in all three cases there were major failures. It’s an undeniable pattern, and it proves that there are some real scumbags running the UFC who maybe need to be in their own cages.

  6. Mark says:

    Wow, commenters = a site’s politics. Wow, you need to calm down and realize this is just the internet and not real life. (And BTW, there are far more pro-UFC posters than just 45. You have Roadblock, Ice Muncher, Wolverine, and others.)

    It’s a sport. It’s not politics that affects your way of life. To me debating is pure entertainment. I enjoy reading some posters here (even you, 45) so I like debating it because even if I disagree with their view most of them offer intelligent viewpoints. But I do not take this crap seriously as I have a feeling some people here do.

    As for Zach himself, it’s funny, he gets accused of being both things every single day: to some he’s pro-UFC anti-Strikeforce, to others he’s a Zuffa hater. And you know what? It depends on the story to see what comments he gets. So don’t you think that’s what you would call being unbiased? When Zuffa does something positive, he praises them to the point where people who don’t like them accuse him of being a kiss-ass. But when another organization has a good show he praises, suddenly he’s out to overstate the importance of non-UFC MMA.

    Zach, I do enjoy reading your site now more than ever, but by you agreeing that Dana White can barely manage media scrutiny now is hypocritical if nothing else. I have read many comments that challenged your points and rather than take the high road and possibly see another view, you are quicker than Dana will ever be at attacking the person and their point than you are to realize that there can be more than one right answer.

    Zach Arnold is the proprietor (tm Jeff Thaler) of FightOPINION a website about OPINIONS. Dana White is the head of one of the largest sports organizations in the country. Please find other examples of men like David Stern, Bud Selig, Roger Goodell, Gary Bettman, ect. acting like overgrown toddlers because somebody said something mean about them on the internet. I’m sure behind closed doors they get pissed and rant and rave about negative press, but in the spotlight they keep their dignity, something Dana White knows nothing about. I don’t think any sports figurehead has taken more heat than Bud Selig. The majority of baseball fans hate his decisions, he’s been accused more times than you can count of aiding and abetting obvious PED users for years, he got raked over the coals by congress while they simultaneously allowed their beloved roidmonster sluggers to dodge questions. Those are things to which some crappy writer saying you’re an idiot cannot compare to, but Selig has never had an immature public meltdown much less several.

  7. Black Dog says:

    My feeling is that UFC gets a damn sight more scrutiny, as well as criticism, because of a number of basic reasons:

    1. Their Size: In America, they are the biggest purveyor of MMA, they fancy themselves the major league of MMA, and tney certainly have the track record to prove it.

    2. Their Visibility: The PPVs are always examined, even before the buys begin. How many buys will UFC 1xx get, what’s a success, what’s a failure? Then there’s the fake reality shows, these too raise the profile.

    3. The Talent: No doubt about it, UFC has locked up a fair number of the best-known fighters. Here and elsewhere, the argument continues about UFC vs. Strikeforce in terms of the talent pool.

    4. Dana White: Say what you will about his personality (however many he may have), his leadership has kept UFC moving forward, and his own personal profile helps (at least for now, it does).

    My central point: The bigger you are, the more you’re going to get examined, the more you’re going to get picked on.

    I don’t think UFC has gotten a bad rap here (I can’t see any of the FightOpinion writers staying here if Zach was dictating to them what they could and could not write), any worse than anyplace else. If some people can’t take that UFC is going to get examined, then go read Kevin Iole, who fellates White at every opportunity.

  8. 45 Huddle says:

    Of all the stuff that Rich posted, not one of those things is illegal. It’s pretty much how businesses are operated in the year 2009. I really don’t see the issue with it compared to other companies. Now, it does say something about the American system, but that is not exactly The Fertitta’s fault.

    “3. The Talent: No doubt about it, UFC has locked up a fair number of the best-known fighters. Here and elsewhere, the argument continues about UFC vs. Strikeforce in terms of the talent pool.”

    Not just this, but how that talent is portrayed. There is a running joke that when a guy gets released from the UFC, he automatically becomes Top 10. Obviously that doesn’t always happen, but there is some truth to it. Guys are overly hyped outside of the UFC without really proving themselves. Alistair Overeem is a perfect example. He is less proven at Heavyweight then Junior Dos Santos, yet receives 10 times the amount of press.

    I get called a UFC schill because I view all of MMA based on the same standards, and it is typically only the UFC that meets that standard. Other people have a moving scale of what they find “acceptable” based on the organization that does it.

    If the UFC made Overeem vs. Fajita, they would be getting crapped on for it. But because it is DREAM, people have the attitude of: “Well, that’s the way they do things in Japan”. Who gives a flying f#ck. That fight stinks no matter who puts it on.

    So yes, I do think there is a major media bias. That sliding scale on what is deemed “acceptable” is exactly the bias I am talking about. DREAM or Strikeforce are not called out for the same things the UFC is.

    If you want to cover Strikeforce as much as you do the UFC, you better judge them based on the same critera…. But that just doesn’t happen…

  9. Alan Conceicao says:

    If the UFC made Overeem vs. Fajita, they would be getting crapped on for it. But because it is DREAM, people have the attitude of: “Well, that’s the way they do things in Japan”. Who gives a flying f#ck. That fight stinks no matter who puts it on.

    Well, both aspects are true.

  10. 45 Huddle says:

    And that’s my point. That is where the media bias comes into play. You can’t just say: “Well, that’s how they do things”.

    An unbiased media would view each organization based on the same criteria. They don’t, and therefore they are biased.

    That fact that people like Arnold and that guy from BE are trying to claim it isn’t is beyond comical.

    And don’t get me wrong…. The schills like Iole are just as bad on the other end of the sprectrum….

  11. The Gaijin says:

    If you’re going by the stance of commenters – BE is INSANELY “pro-UFC”.

    For example, I got shit all over for pointing out that people were going ga-ga over JDS vs. Yvel when they totally mocked and derided the Barnett-Yvel fight, which are for all intents and purposes the same fight in the same context, when announced. Of course, spin was added 7-ways from Sunday that (much later) it was turned into a no.1 contender’s match – but totally ignored the fact that people jumped all over it from the instant it was announced, even when I provided the links that showed my exact point. Not to mention they give mmalogic the LONGEST leash known to mankind for out-right trolling, insulting other commenters and making personal attacks on other posters [most likely because (unadmitted of course) he might be some kind of staff member/contractor/related party to Zuffa.]

    But Zach, just like BE cannot (completely) control the allegiance/bias that their commenters have, so why would you fault them for it or decide that it’s “their agenda” too?

  12. ULTMMA says:

    I’ve always found it funny that one of the handful of MMA news website turning a profit has always been labeled as biased.

    If, sherdog supposedly wants the UFC to fail wouldn’t they be biting the hand that feeds them? Over the past three years if the UFC doesn’t become as big as it has gotten here in the states than Crave Online and or ESPN have no reason to work with sherdog.

    This alleged biased didn’t stop the IFL, Elite XC, Affliction or Pride from going under. Nor has it stopped sherdog from covering the biggest MMA promotion on the planet objectively.

    Would this happen in other sports? Are websites covering the NFL, NBA, or MLB ever accused of trying to destroy the progress of their sports?

    Only in MMA.

  13. Mark says:

    It was a fight between two of the top HWs of the respective promotions. Good or bad the fight had to happen if you’re going to do Sengoku vs. DREAM because neither promotion has much in the way of heavyweights. I don’t think anybody has seriously hyped that fight. Nobody has any respect for Fujita, he’s just one of those guys like Mark Hunt that’s good for nothing but getting punched in the head. And yes, Overeem has some very vocal supporters online, but so what, that’s like 50 people on the internet. People who post videos of themselves farting on YouTube have more of a fan following.

    As for your endless whining about the media being unfair to UFC: why do you care so much? One moment everybody is a meaningless clown online, the next you’re acting like putting Overeem too high in some unofficial rankings matters. Who cares, your beloved UFC is destroying everybody when it comes to revenue and popularity so why can’t you just be happy with that? You keep complaining that everybody only wants to look at the negative side of things, well, so do you. I said this in my post here that’s still held up in moderation for whatever reason: stop taking the internet so seriously, bro. It’s a series of wires and cables that people use mainly for find pornography and insult strangers, not serious.

  14. The Gaijin says:

    “There’s 45 Huddle in the comment section, the lone Zuffa punching bag taking the slings and arrows from your regular readers for daring to put up a positive spin on anything UFC.”

    Just to provide another parallel, MMASupremacy over at BE is definitely the “45 Huddle” of the BE blog and he takes TONS and TONS of criticism, mocking and ridicule from 95% of the posters for daring to “put a positive spin on anything not-UFC” and is labelled an “anti-Zuffa” mark, etc.

    The sad thing is he’s about 99.8% more accurate in his “scoops” then mmalogic ever has been, but he’s labelled an idiot fanboy, while ‘logic is revered and “rec’d” to cloud 9 anytime he opens his mouth – too bad to anyone with a brain, it’s painfully transparent that he makes the exact same statements over-and-over again, just dressed slightly differently – but just because he throws around the words “metrics”, “demographics” and “Biz, biz, biz” – the unwashed masses eat it up and actually believe he’s some sort of important insider.

  15. Robert Poole says:

    I can’t express how much the people that whine about anti-Zuffa bias and Dana White himself look like complete idiots everytime they pipe up.

    Yes Sherdog hates UFC and wants to take them down… because that would only cripple their website viewership numbers, likely eliminate their partnership with ESPN and put most of them out of work? Makes sense.

    If Sherdog gives SF or Dream or whomever more credibility than you and your opinion deem worthy it’s because they need to treat the opposition with an unbiased level of equality for reporting and coverage sake.

    What’s the point of covering an event if you need to preface the article with a header that reminds people this is not as good or as big as a Zuffa event just to appease UFC fanboys?

    There’s three “negative” stories on UFC right now on the FO front page because they earned that coverage. When you get involved with a scandal, sorry the press you get about it will seem negative. Ask Tiger Woods about that.

    As for UFC 108 it’s a ridiculously weak card that might well have the lowest buyrate in years. That is a story, like it or not.

    Dana White opened his trap and complained loudly and in doing so opened himself up to more scrutiny. So he created that article and the “negativity” that goes with it.

    FO is just covering the stories as they are. If SF had anything newsworthy at the moment, positive OR negative, we might see them on the frontpage as well.

    People aren’t out to get UFC. They are out to cover the largest MMA group in the world and the one who has the most impact in the MMA community when it comes to fighters, sponsors, TV deals, etc. That will open you up to a ton of criticism. But it also opens you to undue praise. An average UFC show gets credit for being better than a very good SF show just because of the perception on websites put out by fanboys that SF or the competition is not first rate and thus their fighters are sloppier, less talented and somehow their fights are less skilled affairs.

    Dana White is a whiner. This isn’t opnion, it’s fact. He video blogs his gripes openly and complains constantly. When he does that he opens himself up for criticism and diminishes his credibility on subjects in which his whines might be warranted. Someone needs to tell him about the story of the Boy who cried Wolf.

    Rp

  16. 45 Huddle says:

    Kid Nate has banned a lot of people with a pro UFC opinion. He has even threatened to ban mmalogic in the past. I would hardly say it’s a Pro UFC environment. A lot of their articles try and justify small organizations actions.

    Imagine the stories that would happen on the various websites if…

    1) A UFC Fight Night had the same payouts as a Strikeforce Challenger Fight Card.

    2) UFC didn’t pay it’s fighters immediately after they were the one’s who failed to make sure they fight happened.

    3) The UFC didn’t show one prelim fight.

    4) UFC Champion didn’t defend his title for a few years and they didn’t strip him of the title.

    5) Hioki beating the eventual Sengoku Featherweight Champion in the semifinals, and then not getting an immediate title fight. If that happened in the UFC, they would be wrecked with 100 articles.

    The list goes on and on.

    Not only do the fans rationalize a lot of what Strikeforce and DREAM/Sengoku has done… But the media picks and chooses the topics they want to cover and either gloss over or completely ignore these glaring issues. While at the same time treating the UFC and Strikeforce like equals in terms of coverage.

    Sengoku should be completely ripped apart by the MMA Media. So should Strikeforce for DREAM. Both have corrupt refs, corrupt matchmaking, and some major issues. These things being ignored is another example of the media bias.

    Shall I go on and on and on and on?

  17. 45 Huddle says:

    “Good or bad the fight had to happen if you’re going to do Sengoku vs. DREAM because neither promotion has much in the way of heavyweights.”

    You are kind of proving my point. No, it didn’t need to happen. You are rationalizing it. This sort of justification for non-UFC fights is one of the constant biases going on.

    And Mark, you seem to be taking the internet too seriously. I’m talking about MMA on a MMA website. You are singling out one person and trying to disect what he thinks. Who’s taking the internet too seriously now?

    “What’s the point of covering an event if you need to preface the article with a header that reminds people this is not as good or as big as a Zuffa event just to appease UFC fanboys?”

    There is more then just coverage of events. There is the opinion pieces published on a daily basis that constantly go after the UFC more often then it’s competitors.

    The UFC is the only MMA organization doing the sport right. The rest are different degrees of failures.

  18. Mark says:

    You are kind of proving my point. No, it didn’t need to happen. You are rationalizing it. This sort of justification for non-UFC fights is one of the constant biases going on.

    No, justifying it would be pretending like it was good. I just gave a reason why they did it, as Fujita is a name in Japan from PRIDE/his pro wrestling and Overeem has been red hot due to his K-1 stint, but the fight was a waste of time because it ended exactly like everybody assumed. But if UFC did UFC vs. IFL in 2006 and featured a terrible Tim Sylvia vs. Ben Rothwell fight I’d say the same thing.

    And Mark, you seem to be taking the internet too seriously. I’m talking about MMA on a MMA website. You are singling out one person and trying to disect what he thinks. Who’s taking the internet too seriously now?

    OMG YOU ARE RIGHT! I’M NOW GOING TO LEAVE FIGHTOPINION FOREVER BECAUSE THERE ARE JUST TOO MANY HATERS HERE! See you in 2 and 1/2 weeks.

    There is more then just coverage of events. There is the opinion pieces published on a daily basis that constantly go after the UFC more often then it’s competitors.

    Opinion pieces don’t have to match up with your personal opinion, you know.

  19. Alan Conceicao says:

    And that’s my point. That is where the media bias comes into play. You can’t just say: “Well, that’s how they do things”.

    Of course. The worst are defenses of “worked” fights. Hell, I hate using “worked”. They’re thrown.

  20. Zack says:

    “If the UFC made Overeem vs. Fajita, they would be getting crapped on for it.”

    GSP vs Hardy is a similar squash match.

  21. Robert Poole says:

    45Huddle: The UFC is the only MMA organization doing the sport right. The rest are different degrees of failures.

    I think that is debatable. They are the biggest and most successful but they are not infallible.

    -They have put on some pretty underwhelming shows because they haven’t evenly allocated the top draws or accounted for potential injury issues.

    -They use shady business practices such as the Xyience situation or worse, when they treat their fighters poorly like with the video game situation or the BS they pull with sponsors

    -Dana White is the worst spokesperson the sport could ever have and he and his neanderthal attitudes about women and gays have pushed the sport into the same level of disrespect that Vince McMahon’s WWE receives more than the demographics of the sport itself.

    The opinion pieces are going to be more critical of UFC because UFC put themselves in position to be the lead dog in the sport and in doing so they will take heat for all MMA related issues and more heat for any slip ups or failures they might incur than the small guys.

    MLB takes all the heat for the steroid scandals, etc. Independent leagues don’t.

    It all boils down to this. If you don’t want to take the heat for everything in the sport, don’t angle yourselves as if you are the be-all, end-all of the sport like Dana and UFC does. Otherwise shut up and deal with the criticisms, fair or unfair, just like other major sports do. That’s part of the game you play when you aim for global dominance in your field.

    Rp

  22. Grape Knee High says:

    I’m more amazed that most of you people bother to read the comments over at BE; I can barely read the semi-literate, boorish musings of most of the commenters there. It is barely above Sherdog, just barely.

    I don’t agree with a lot of what Zach writes about, but he provides substance to MMA media that would be woefully unbalanced and shallow otherwise.

    However, I don’t see Jake Rossen in the same light. He has opinions, sure, but I think he’s just a guy expressing them. I don’t know that he has an “anti-UFC” agenda. He’s just a sports columnist, as Zach and others keep saying.

    The reason this is a new topic for most MMA fans, I think, is because I am always struck with a feeling that most MMA fans don’t watch other sports. They don’t listen to sports radio and don’t read mainstream sports papers.

    MMA media is kind and gentle for the most part compared to mainstream sports media. It really is.

  23. Alan Conceicao says:

    MMA media is kind and gentle for the most part compared to mainstream sports media. It really is.

    Aoki’s post fight antics today would be scorched by talk radio if you saw something similar in a football game. Anyone here remember when Warren Sapp threw a block on that Green Bay player’s blindside? Or when Richard Seymour stepped on a down player? Instead, people will say “its part of the sport” and Meltzer will call it a classic heel tactic.

  24. The Gaijin says:

    At GKH – what are you talking about? The commenters at BE are constantly back-slapping themselves as the smartest, most intelligent and saavy on-line mma fans around…

    That’s usually your first clue…then again they make 100+ “comments” a day and (of course) they train, so that clearly qualifies them for something! (A commenter blackbelt?)

    That’s not to paint everyone there with the brush, there are some really good, knowledgable and quality people over there but the collective arrogance among a growing group is aggravati
    ng.

  25. Mark says:

    On a side note, in the past 48 hours on Sherdog there has been 9 articles on UFC 108, 1 on Dana claiming boxing is worthless because it has too many Europeans, 2 on Josh Koscheck getting hurt and Mike Swick taking his place, 1 on Kimbo (Bas saying he shouldn’t go to 205) for 13 UFC articles.

    In comparison there are 3 on Dynamite, 1 on Mayorga, a Savage interview with Herschel Walker, and a “fighters to watch in 2010” which features a mix of UFC and non-UFC fighters for 6 (or 5 and 1/2 really) non-UFC articles.

  26. edub says:

    “GSP vs Hardy is a similar squash match.”
    No its not. Hardy is on an 8 fight win streak and just got done beating up a border line top 5 opponent. Fujita in contrast hasnt had a relevant fight let alone win in years and is 2-6 in his last 8 fights.
    So ummm yea… only thing similar is its a mismatch on paper, and they’re both pretty far apart that similar is probably the wrong word to use.

  27. edub says:

    Oh yea kind of a new poster here so what is BE? Bloody elbow?

  28. Grape Knee High says:

    Aoki’s post fight antics today would be scorched by talk radio if you saw something similar in a football game.

    And what about Albert Haynesworth? All these guys were literally CRUCIFIED by the sports media.

    Not only that, but owners, managers, coaches, refs; these guys never ever hear the end of it.

    I’m amazed anyone is actually giving Dana any weight in this. He’s just whining. If Steinbrenner started whining about the media treating him unfairly, I think they’d all tell him to STFU.

    I suspect that MMA fighters in particular are given a free pass many cases because the line between good fighting and good sportsmanship is extremely blurry, especially with the common wisdom of “fighting until the ref stops you”.

    There is no doubt in my mind, Henderson’s post-KO elbow on Bisping was disgusting, but I am in the minority because (according to most MMA fans) I probably am not masculine enough to truly appreciate this sport.

  29. edub says:

    “There is no doubt in my mind, Henderson’s post-KO elbow on Bisping was disgusting”
    Do you think he did it knowing he was out, or just trying to finish the fight? I agree its disgusting that if Dan truly thought he was out, but no matter what he said in the post fight interview I dont think Dan knew Michael was already knocked out.

  30. JRN says:

    45 Huddle:
    An unbiased media would view each organization based on the same criteria. They don’t, and therefore they are biased.

    I agree, to a point. I think the operative criteria should be: what the organization is capable of with the resources they have, what they’re trying to accomplish, and whether they’re being ethical and fair.

    Discrediting an organization for not being capable of being the biggest MMA promotion in the world, or for not trying to be the biggest MMA promotion in the world (or for not trying to present MMA as a rigorously regulated professional sport, if we’re talking about Japan),–for not being the UFC, in other words–would not be unbiased, it would be silly.

    Most organizations aren’t going for this, so why fault them for falling short?

  31. 45 Huddle says:

    “MLB takes all the heat for the steroid scandals, etc. Independent leagues don’t.”

    Independent leagues aren’t even talked about on the same websites as MLB is. Nor are their games covered as if they are as important. horrible example.

    And all this talk about aoki being “heel” is a joke. This isn’t Pro Wrestling. Leave the crap out of the conversation.

    Aoki isn’t a heel. He is a prick.

  32. I have one question for 45 Huddle:

    If someone found a legal way to steal your home, drain the college fund you set up for your kids, or took everything left in the family trust (if you had one), it would still be a tragedy to you. Just because laws aren’t broken doesn’t mean good people don’t get hurt. This acceptance of ruthless business practices that make victims out of honest men and women sold lies to make rich men richer is really sickening. Why do we bother to read anything if it’s not to get at the truth? The reality is tough to believe because it’s so cruel, and we’ve been taught these people have been so good for the sport. But, this is not a Tiger Woods moment for the UFC brass. This is the point of no return, the ultimate breakdown. The legal fees alone are going to be staggering. You can sing your UFC song all day long and type your fears away, but the organization’s health is in serious jeopardy. Nothing you can say in its defense justifies this kind of behavior. Because what they did is legal you think it’s right? Doesn’t say much about your character if you feel that way. Wouldn’t want to be on any end of a business deal with anyone with that mentality. I’m sure you wouldn’t either.

Comments

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