Friend of our site

MMA Headlines


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


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 | »

No more Chris Weidman fight at Staples Center and… no more Anderson Silva?

By Zach Arnold | January 31, 2015

Print Friendly and PDF

Wanderlei Silva said it was “worse than WWE.” Anderson Silva cried after winning the UFC 183 main event fight with Nick Diaz by unanimous decision.

Heading into Saturday night’s fight, there was some murmuring that Nick Diaz was having a challenging training camp. Of course, there were rumors about Anderson Silva’s possibly-challenging training camp as well. Two rusty fighters put right back in the spotlight. The end result was no surprise. It probably will come as no surprise that Anderson Silva doesn’t look ready to fight Chris Weidman any time soon.

Chris Weidman isn’t ready for Chris Weidman to fight any time soon, either. With his fight against Vitor Belfort off the Staples Center card in late February, Ronda Rousey vs. Cat Zingano is the main event. There were high hopes & expectations heading into the Los Angeles event, as it has been rumored that over 10,000 tickets were sold for the event. With a new main event, it will be interesting to see if there are a substantial amount of refunds or if Ronda can cement her status as a true marketing ace for UFC.

Saturday night’s UFC 183 card wrapped up a pretty successful January campaign for Zuffa:

Despite the mostly good news for UFC coming out of January’s events, the respectable Iain Kidd at Bloody Elbow claims there is evidence of long-term concerns with UFC’s PPV model. There remains a great debate as to whether or not the WWE Network business model (now claiming 1 million served) is the way to go and that PPV is on its way out. I remain skeptical on any sky-is-falling claims about PPV as a dying business model. If you have fighters who the general public view as stars, you’re going to sell PPVs whether it’s on cable/satellite or the internet.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 21 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

21 Responses to “No more Chris Weidman fight at Staples Center and… no more Anderson Silva?”

  1. 45 Huddle says:

    I didn’t see the fight, but from what was reported it sounds like Anderson Silva looked older in there. Personally, I think he should retire. He gets to go out on a win with his head up. He would be 40 if he ever entered the octagon again. Now is a good time.

    Nick Diaz is not a 7-7 UFC Fighter. Not sure why there is so much hype behind the guy. He isn’t that good.

    The problem with the PPV model is the shift to online. It is hard to sell a UFC PPV for $60 when the following services cost this much per year:

    Netflix: $120
    Hulu Plus: $96
    Amazon Prime: $100
    WWE Network: $120

    And the UFC wants to sell people Fight Pass for $96 to $120 a year, which doesn’t include $60 PPV’s? And they have 14 PPV’s a year? Doesn’t make sense in the current market place. And while the “sky isn’t falling”, we are seeing the slow decline of the UFC PPV Business model. This year will likely be better then last year, but the overall trend is a negative one.

    The WWE did it the best. I know they had some issues short term, but they cut the band-aide off and made a serious attempt at changing business models. In the long run, the WWE will be rewarded for this gamble. My guess is that within 2 years we will see 2 Million on the WWE Network Worldwide. A lot of that growth will be international, but it will still be a great thing going forward.

    Since the UFC has copied so much about the WWE in the past, they need to copy it again. The WWE kicked off the WWE Network with WrestleMania last year being the big selling point.

    The UFC needs to take a guy like Brock Lesnar, Conor McGregor, GSP (if he returns), or Jon Jones and put a big mega fight on Fight Pass. They will lose money short term on the event compared to what they could have done on PPV. But long term it is the right direction. Oh but wait, they just said another deal with the PPV Providers. Once again, Zuffa just doesn’t get it…..

    • Mark says:

      WWE wrestlers are very unhappy that their PPV bonus money has evaporated due to the Network. The lower level guys are now hurting for money. UFC already have angry fighters, paying them only their on-the-books money would mean a mass exodus to Bellator.

      • 45 Huddle says:

        Not saying the system isn’t perfect. It certainly will have some bumps in the road. The WWE is experiencing that right now. But I do believe it needs to be a quick clean cut from PPV like the WWE did. If the UFC tries to milk PPV for every last dime, they might get caught in a weird middle area and have a harder time switching over to a “WWE Network” type of system. And there is no doubt that is where it is headed.

        Right now they have no competition from local sports teams online. The market is there for them to get a decent subscriber base on Fight Pass. If there is a switch online for the major sports teams, the UFC will be competing with much more competition and be screwed.

        • Mark says:

          UFC and WWE are different situations.

          WWE only has one show a year that really sells. Summerslam and Royal Rumble don’t really draw anymore. UFC, even in a bad year, do better numbers than WWE. So it makes no sense to leave all of the PPV pie for boxing when they’re still making money. And it’s not like people are going to stop subscribing to cable in large numbers anytime soon.

          Sports isn’t going to go online for many years. Sports leagues are not going to turn down huge network contracts “to get ready for the future”. The NFL is never going to let teams stream games and get CBS/NBC/FOX/ESPN pissed at them.

        • @mark:

          >Sports isn’t going to go online for many years.
          Are we in 2001 still?

          I have NBA league pass and can watch it from anywhere on my TV, online, tablet and phone (and I get NBA TV).

          My brother has had the same thing for MLS soccer and the NHL center ice and his stepson watches Arsenal games on the teams website.

          Im pretty sure that MLB also has games available online because I remember reading about it a few years ago and they were using Microsoft’s crappy Silverlight which luckily died off like every MS product not Office or OS.

          And I took 3secs to Google and find you this:

          “With Game Pass you can watch every NFL game online1 live or on demand in high definition. Game Pass features DVR controls, multi-game viewing mode options, and many more enhanced features. Game Pass includes access to live streams of NFL RedZone and NFL Network.2 Plus, fans can watch full NFL game replays online in roughly 30 minutes with the Condensed Game feature. And if you want to watch the game online from Coaches Film camera angles (including the All-22 angle), Game Pass gives you full access to every NFL game online from those exclusive viewpoints.”

          So not only are you wrong, you are epicly wrong about online sports.

          And this is not recent or US based only. I know people who pay to watch tennis online, even world and euro championships in handball and volleyball.

  2. david m says:

    I didn’t think that was anything resembling a 50-45 fight. Silva didn’t hurt Diaz once in 5 rounds, and Diaz landed a bunch of clean punches. The thing about judging is that close rounds go to the fan favorite. I would like to see Diaz vs Hendricks; I think stylistically that is a terrible fight for Johny.

    • 45 Huddle says:

      I think every website I saw had Silva winning 4 to 5 rounds. So the judges agreed with the MMA Media on this one.

  3. David m says:

    Mma media mostly entails people who don’t know your from you’re and are indebted to the UFC. I watched the fight with no sound and I think that is the way to go, so as to not be swayed by Joe Rogan and his narrative (I don’t know what good scoring was in this particular fight, but I have watched mma long enough to know how Rogan operates).

    Either way, Silva didn’t impress me at all. Diaz took much more damage against KJ Noons, for God’s sake. Silva was flummoxed by Diaz’s defense and took more clean shots on the feet than I can ever recall him taking.

    On an unrelated note, I thought Gastellum won.

    • 45 Huddle says:

      They are probably a lot less biased then you. You are a huge Diaz fan.

      Everything backs up the decision.

      The judges scored it 4 to 5 rounds for Silva. The MMA Media scored it 4 to 5 rounds for Silva. Both overall and significant strikes scored per round had Silva winning all 5 rounds.

      Not much wiggle room here. You just seem upset that your favorite fighter not only lossed, but looked bad against an over the hill fighter.

  4. David m says:

    I am not upset Diaz “lossed”, I just don’t think it was a massive blowout. Again, citing the mma media is silly. That is called group think. I just watched the first two rounds again in my hotel, this time with audio, and Goldberg literally didn’t call anything for Diaz. At one point Diaz lands a few punches in a row and Goldberg screams, “and Anderson is right in his face!”; it was disgusting.

    • 45 Huddle says:

      The judges, fight stat guys, and media in the stands could not hear that commentary and still scored it for Silva.

      Not sure why you think Nick Diaz is that good. Since he left the UFC in 2006…. His best win against a natural Welterweight is Paul Daley.

      He is a gate keeper who talks enough trash to make himself a main eventer.

      • David m says:

        Again, I did not say Nick won, I said it was not a 50-45 fight. As I also said (in response to Chuck), judges are human beings and they have biases. You don’t need to hear Goldberg wet himself with glee over every Anderson Silva footstep to know that the UFC markets one of the fighters as the best of all time, and the other as a counter culture idiot clown.

    • Chuck says:

      I know that Huddle said it already, but I will repeat it….the official judges aren’t allowed to listen to commentary. So no way can they be swayed by Rogan and Goldberg. Hell, the judges aren’t even next to each other! They are on opposite sides of the ring from each other. It’s the same for boxing and kickboxing and whatever else. If anything I thought the commentators were too pro-Tate for the Tate/McMann fight. They (along with Cormier) thought she “clearly won”. Naw, not quite. It’s fine she won, but it could have easily been a draw (McMann absolutely dominated the first round) or even could have won. The second round McMann was winning until Miesha took her down and kept her there. I scored it 28-28, but leaning towards Tate if I had to decide a winner (I did give Tate the second).

    • Brenner says:

      Hilarious that David m says others don’t know the difference between “your” and “you’re,” and mocks 45 for “lossed,” but he can’t spell Gastelum.

      • Zheroen says:

        Right, because proper nouns such as last names have a single textbook spelling.

        • Brenner says:

          Right, because you don’t look like a complete jackass when you denigrate others’ intelligence while simultaneously misspelling the name of someone who has been featured prominently for two years.

        • Zheroen says:

          It’s absolutely HILARIOUS!

  5. King Famous says:

    This fight was tailor made for Anderson. Diaz held his own though, and had some great punches. But Anderson doesn’t need to prove anything anymore, and Diaz looks tired and slow in his last few fights. There was no finishing instincts at all. It was a wishy-washy affair with some funny moments.

  6. Chuck says:

    So I think Tyron Woodley should be in the running for MMA humanitarian of the year. Since Gastellum missed the weight he had to forfeit thirty percent of his purse to Woodley. Woodley gave Gastellum back the thirty percent. He said he empathizes because he had issues making welterweight in the past. Good for him! I would have given it to charity if I was in his shoes, but even still.

  7. Tradition Rules says:

    So I was pulling for Woodley and thought Gastelum had won-due to Tyron’s lack of aggression. But I just saw an X-Ray of Tyrone’s foot broken in four places in the first round.

    I guess I can overlook the fact that he didn’t seem that agressive.

    Main Event was “eh”.Silva was off for a year. Diaz’ hands/boxing looked good…but that was it. Silva won but it was basically the winner was the one who looked the least “eh”. Silva had a good reason being off so long. But Diaz has not evolved with the sport and he certainly could…if he wanted to.

    But you see what happens when you have TWO guys that clown and wait for “the other guy” to be the aggressor so they can counter strike. Not exciting.

  8. Chuck says:

    Well, Anderson Silva tested positive for anabolic steroids before the Diaz fight. He tested positive January ninth in out-of-competition testing. Only a matter of time until the fight result gets changed to a no contest.


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