« A big month of fan interest in May, but will fatigue for MMA and UFC set in for the long haul? | Home | Josh Koscheck on GSP playing it safe: “That’s kind of bad, he’s going to lose a lot of fans like that” and “he has no punching power” »
Talk Radio: How to make UFC Live, er MMA Live a better show on ESPN
By Zach Arnold | June 2, 2010
A last note from Jordan Breen, touching on something that I’ve been meaning to write on for a while but I haven’t gotten around to it (until now).
As many of you know, MMA Live is now airing before and after UFC PPV events on ESPN2. The network also airs a weekly show at 1 AM EST every Thursday. The crew that produces MMA Live is desperately trying to keep the show going on ESPN2 and they recently got an extension to do so. So, from that standpoint, I completely understand why they are on the UFC bandwagon — it’s all about survival mode for them right now.
However, the audience size is largely made up of about 100,000 semi-hardcore and hardcore fans. The format for the show fits more or less for casual fans than it does for the hardcore fans. I think this is a problem that the producers are going to have to address shortly — do we go full-bore and service the show for the hardcores and get them excited to watch us or do we try to broaden the viewership and make it ‘lighter’ in content?
One of the major problems with the show deals with the politics of UFC and the fighters. Kenny Florian, Randy Couture, and other fighters who appear on the show are actively employed by Zuffa. Therefore, you’re not going to get many critical comments from these guys towards other fighters. They don’t need the headaches. So, you eliminate one of the big hooks that might draw in more viewers to watch the show. On top of that, a lot of fighters are simply basket cases and anything they perceive as a slight, no matter if it is a slight or not, is blown up into a big heated discussion.
As you will read in this paragraph below, Michael Bisping got into it with Randy Couture on the post-fight edition of MMA Live. For the life of me, when I heard that this incident happened, I was dumbfounded because nothing Randy said with Bisping on set was heavy on the critical side.
“I think the thing with MMA Live is [that] reaction is always easier than prognostication. Everyone with hindsight being 20/20 can sort of divine why something happening. I do think the biggest with MMA at this point in time is there aren’t enough retired analysts who are kind of divorced from the game while still being interested in it. And that’s the worst thing about Kenny Florian. We said this a lot in relation to color commentary, Kenny Florian’s brilliant in the booth but his biggest issue is that he never wants to criticize anyone for fear of maybe engendering maybe another Josh Barnett situation where he goes ape and sort of antagonizes Kenny Florian over even a mild criticism. And more than that, you kind of see why perhaps these guys are guarded because it makes for awkward situations. That post-fight show where Randy Couture makes very helpful and honestly not just noy only were they honest and sincere, but frankly the stuff he was saying again was pretty lukewarm for Michael Bisping. He wasn’t judging him as a person but yet Bisping loses it and he can be seen mouthing profanities at Randy Couture. These guys are incredibly thin-skinned. To say that the MMA population in terms of fighters and trainers are a bit hyper-sensitive would be the understatement of the century.”
Go to full-page mode and you can read suggestions on how to improve the format of the show along with deal with some of the primadonna fighters in the business who appear as guests on the program.
Jordan brings up the fact that MMA Live needs to become similar to what the NFL Match-up show is/was on ESPN with Ron Jaworski.
there’s a reason that a lot of these guys are really guarded and measured in comments. My question then is — why don’t you do kind of then you know try to really do things where it’s not so much like editorializing so much as you’re objectivizing this kind of analysis. The one thing that gets me about the MMA analytical side is MMA’s a sport where I think it lends itself very readily to marketing the technical side. It’s kind of like the NFL in that regard. One of the things that the NFL has done so brilliantly over the years has been its ability to market the technical side of football. Whether it’s something like NFL Playbook on The NFL Network or whether it’s the way Ron Jaworski’s used on the Monday Night booth or you know so on and so forth or even going back to John Madden. You know people think John Madden was some kind of simpleton, but when John Madden first came around the idea of using the telestrator and really focusing on offensive and defensive line play and that kind of thing, that was fairly new and unique at a time where football people still almost all just followed the ball with their eyes and the understanding of how football tactics were carried out, that understanding was incredibly facile. So, I think MMA lends itself to richer, more technical explanations so if you’re doing a pre-event kind of thing, yeah these guys are going to be a bit more guarded to just make kind of sweeping remarks about you know this guy’s ground game isn’t good or this guy’s boxing deficiencies. I do think there’s a real value of you know if you’re getting tape and having these guys break it down more exhaustively, not only do I think it kind of empowers them in a way where it takes the opinion side out of it. It doesn’t necessarily look like they’re diagnosing it as much as simply they’re look, look at the objective fact, it’s right there on film. And then on top of that it’s being more gratifying for fans who feel like they’re more in the know and have a better understanding of the sport, so I definitely think that the sort of the pre-fight side of things can expand a bit more. Especially when you look at boxing. Even boxing when it’s not being excellent, it still does a good job breaking down film and doing that kind of thing. Friday Night Fights don’t even put a lot of effort into the fight report with Teddy Atlas beforehand, you know it’s such kind of a throwaway thing and yet it’s still ends up being far more informative than any of the kind of video session that you get in Mixed Martial Arts. So I think that kind of thing would certainly be welcome and I also think again it would kind of objectivize the content in a way where even if they have to be pretty blunt and direct about a guy’s deficiencies I think it helps do it in a way that insulates that guy from feeling like, ‘Oh, Randy Couture and Kenny Florian or Rashad Evans said mean things about me,’ which happens all the time. It’s one of the biggest reasons why these guys are reticent to criticize everyone, especially where they’re still active fighting. It stands for reason they might end crossing paths and training with these guys. Not everyone is War Machine and willing to call everyone you know unsavory things despite the fact that they may have to cross paths with him at some point in time.”
When Jordan brings up the name of Ron Jaworski, he does so in the sense that Jaws is a retired Philly Eagle who works for ESPN and is not afraid to speak his mind because he has the game tape to back up what he says.
Compare that to MMA Live where you not only have ESPN having to deal with the politics of UFC (everyone knows what that involves), but you have MMA fighters as analysts who can’t be critical of anyone because they don’t need the headaches of feuds with other fighters and they don’t want to lose their jobs with the UFC. So, if they say remarks that UFC doesn’t take too kindly to in regards to a fighter that the promotion is building up in the hype machine, look out.
In order for MMA Live to really maximize its potential, the show needs to rely on bringing in retired fighters who have nothing to lose by telling the truth. It would need more tape analysis like Jordan mentioned up above and the show, most importantly, would need a real sense of unpredictability sprinkled in. You have to challenge the guests — politics be damned and feelings be damned. Ask the tough questions and show some spine. Earn respect and maybe a bit of fear from guests. Right now, is any guest afraid to go on that show in fear of being asked a hard-hitting question?
Ironically, ESPN on a larger scale is dealing with the same problem that they have on the MMA Live show but only on the NFL side and that’s with coach Jon “Chucky” Gruden. They have desperately placated to his desires and given him so much air time. However, he’s become a parody of himself because every player is good or great and every coach does a good job. In other words, Chucky wants a job back in the NFL and because of this he won’t criticize professionals in the game. Sure, he’ll criticize college rookies headed in the NFL Draft, but he won’t criticize anyone on or off the field who could hurt his prospects of getting hired again.
At the end of the day, MMA Live needs to make a decision on who their audience is, what content goes with what audience, and do it big and go at it hard. You can’t half-ass a concept and you can’t please everyone. Pick your audience, be aggressive, and give the viewers some hooks as to why they should watch every week. Sometimes, self-contained shows work in terms of content and other times they don’t.
Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 14 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |
What retired fighter right now would be a good pick? Randy is the obvious one once he retires, but it’s not like there’s a whole lot of good choices right now.
The sport is so new that there aren’t a lot of retired fighter options. It’s not like you want Mark Coleman or Don Frye on there doing tape analysis.
I hear Jens Pulver’s available…
The other requirement is being good for TV, which I don’t really think he is. Half the retired fighters are from a generation incapable of really doing good tape analysis, the other half have taken too much damage to be good on air or simply won’t fit what ESPN wants for an on-air personality.
The UFC centric model may miss a lot of MMA, but I prefer it to the All-WAMMA all the time BS that took up a lot of the original MMA Lives.
You know, Tito would be perfect for this.
What is sad is HDNet offers a better weekly MMA program and it really isn’t very good. They are targeting the hardcores and covering everything, but they do so in a kind of ‘duh’ manner. Most of the stuff they talk about the hardcores read on their site of choice a week before and they don’t offer much in the way of analysis.
Never mind nobody gets HDNet.
Let’s talk about whats good about MMA Live
-Jon Anik brings a professionalism to the broadcast
– HD highlights from the UFC the same night of the PPV
-The ESPN brand name
I think the hardcores will watch the show regardless if it goes “light” or in depth. In order for the show to take it to the next level they have to have commentators fully committed to the show. Not current fighters walking on egg shells who moonlight at it
In no other sport (NBA NFL MLB) would it be acceptable to have active participants also serve as TV personalities for the sport’s biggest news show. Objectivity goes out the window and their vanilla answers simply are not that entertaining
I don’t know how much in-depth analysis they can do in the 30 min time slot (there wasn’t even enough time to show Lombard’s fight a couple of weeks ago).
In this current iteration of MMA Live, I like:
Molly Qerim
Sport Science segment
Jon Anik and the other hosts (even Rashad)
Things I don’t like so much:
TUF Recaps
Sometimes a bit bland
Suggestions:
For analysis: A coaches corner segment (Jackson, Miletich, etc.)
To stir things up a little, Josh Barnett could do some analysis.
Somewhere in between being “all inclusive” and being UFC-centric, there is a middle ground where fights of value are covered and analyzed and ones that aren’t are only briefly touched on or mentioned in passing. Sadly, this is considered unacceptable because it denies the concept of the “narrative” in MMA. Shame. For that reason, these shows aren’t gonna get better.
I was midley entertained by the post UFC 114 MMA Live show. It’s nice to see reactions from the fighters. I think it would be better if we got to see the post fight press conference as well…. Or at least if they pieced some of that into their post UFC shows.
For all of the people complaining about MMA Live basically being a UFC show….
1. Baseball Tonight covers MLB 99.9% of the time.
2. The NBA shows cover the NBA 99.9% of the time.
3. The NFL shows cover the NFL 99.9% of the time.
I don’t see the problem with them only covering the bigger organization. It is in line with how sports are handled in America.
I would not expect you to see a problem 45.
But here it is for you. MMA is not JUST the UFC, and the UFC does not encompass the whole of MMA.
Those other sports that you listed do constitute what the sport is.
Right. A fight promoter is nothing like a sports league. It would be like if Baseball Tonight spent 99.9% of its time covering the AL East. Oh, wait…
It makes sense from a ratings perspective to primarily cover the UFC.
Tito isn’t my ideal option. He has so many vendettas that he’d constantly be pulling a Frank Shamrock and taking shots at guys, and he butchers the language badly under pressure.
Matt Hughes would be an interesting choice too if he retires.
I think I’d rather a coach or an educated mind than any of the current “legends” helming the lead spot on the show. Prsonally I enjoy Inside MMA but that’s more for hardcore fans, but regardless it’s a good basis for an all around MMA info show.
BTW I look on ESPN2 and I don’t see MMA Live as ever airing. It’s Thursday @ 1 am(early this morning)? As in Wednesday late night. Between Wed Thurs and Fri all I see is Nascar Live and NFL Live, no MMA Live. I know Time Warner suck but I’d at least like to DVR the program if it’s on because yanno as Dixie Carter tells people “you need to watch the sow within 3 days so Neilsen will count your viewership.
When I said Legends holding the job, I actually ment Legends or soon to be retired guys bein spoken about as a possible future fit for the show. I know any coach worth a damn wouldn’t give up the time from training to host this show, unless his name was Pat Miletich but whens the last time you heard he was actually training his guys afterall?
In the end maybe it is better having journalist host the show, or mma bloggers who can speak on the show with insight and then bring in special weekly guest since that actually has worked out for Inside MMA would well the past few years.