Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board
Elsalvajeloco

2016 Non-Event General MMA Talk Thread

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

No, "ouch" is the pacing on many of these FS1 main cards. I don't know if you've noticed but most of them have six fights with commercials and studio cut-ins interspersed. Also, countless video packages for upcoming cards and interviews. If you've sat through that on the regular, sitting through a PPV where they don't have that shit should be fine. It's so sad that the only frame of reference people have for long PPVs is UFC 33...something that is literally FIFTEEN YEARS OLD come midnight. The other being that Strikeforce Nashville card, which is an entirely different promotion. But guess what? Ain't no Dennis Hallman or Jake Shields on this card. The Janitor ain't in the main event spot, folks. It's fine. There ain't no fucking curse. Keep in mind, the crowd is going to be electric for most of the night. Why can't people contextualize what fights might look like as opposed to "oh shit, THAT'S 2-4 MORE ROUNDS OF FIGHTING! HOW ARE WE GOING TO LIVE?!". Yeah, Joanna Jedrzejczyk and Karolina Kowalkiewicz should be out there fighting 3 3-minute rounds because Jens Pulver had a shitty fight a decade and a half ago. Shit, might as well do standups after 90 seconds on the ground. Are people this stupid?

It has nothing at all to do with UFC 33.  But having three title fights on a PPV that has six fights?  That means you could have three fights all going 25 minutes.  And I say that because UFC's even pacing for some of their shows in recent months has not been the best.  

There's one other frame of reference for this occurrence. Bellator booked a stacked card for Bellator 106.  It featured no less than three title fights.  So the main card was made up by some rather grinding decisions, and the audience got very restless as a result.  So you had a main card that had four decisions in a row, three of which all went full 25 minutes.  It did hurt the pacing of the event.  

I get that the juice is worth the squeeze and all, but I think this type of booking is risky.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

No, "ouch" is the pacing on many of these FS1 main cards. I don't know if you've noticed but most of them have six fights with commercials and studio cut-ins interspersed. Also, countless video packages for upcoming cards and interviews. If you've sat through that on the regular, sitting through a PPV where they don't have that shit should be fine. It's so sad that the only frame of reference people have for long PPVs is UFC 33...something that is literally FIFTEEN YEARS OLD come midnight. The other being that Strikeforce Nashville card, which is an entirely different promotion. But guess what? Ain't no Dennis Hallman or Jake Shields on this card. The Janitor ain't in the main event spot, folks. It's fine. There ain't no fucking curse. Keep in mind, the crowd is going to be electric for most of the night. Why can't people contextualize what fights might look like as opposed to "oh shit, THAT'S 2-4 MORE ROUNDS OF FIGHTING! HOW ARE WE GOING TO LIVE?!". Yeah, Joanna Jedrzejczyk and Karolina Kowalkiewicz should be out there fighting 3 3-minute rounds because Jens Pulver had a shitty fight a decade and a half ago. Shit, might as well do standups after 90 seconds on the ground. Are people this stupid?

It has nothing at all to do with UFC 33.  But having three title fights on a PPV that has six fights?  That means you could have three fights all going 25 minutes.  And I say that because UFC's even pacing for some of their shows in recent months has not been the best.  

There's one other frame of reference for this occurrence. Bellator booked a stacked card for Bellator 106.  It featured no less than three title fights.  So the main card was made up by some rather grinding decisions, and the audience got very restless as a result.  So you had a main card that had four decisions in a row, three of which all went full 25 minutes.  It did hurt the pacing of the event.  

I get that the juice is worth the squeeze and all, but I think this type of booking is risky.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TheVileOne said:

It has nothing at all to do with UFC 33.  But having three title fights on a PPV that has six fights?  That means you could have three fights all going 25 minutes.  And I say that because UFC's even pacing for some of their shows in recent months has not been the best.  

Apparently, UFC 33 does because that's the one people use as it relates to three title fights. I've seen people bring it up here several times, especially back when people first started talking about UFC 200.

Hell, you could potentially have all fights go to decision. But that doesn't mean it's going to happen. However, looking at the quality of the fights, I don't think that's the worst thing. They didn't pick six random fights. This isn't like UFC 190 where they had to slide the two TUF fights on the main card because the Florida card before it was plagued with Visa issues out the wazoo. People like you are going to bitch and complain no matter what. They're going to do the biggest show possible. If you feel you need to take a break, go outside or some shit. Dude, I am not above doing my laundry or getting something to eat during any MMA show. That's all I can tell you because if you ain't excited for six blockbuster fights, this might not be the sport for you.

Quote

There's one other frame of reference for this occurrence. Bellator booked a stacked card for Bellator 106.  It featured no less than three title fights.  So the main card was made up by some rather grinding decisions, and the audience got very restless as a result.  So you had a main card that had four decisions in a row, three of which all went full 25 minutes.  It did hurt the pacing of the event.  

Except that's Bellator, it's on Spike, and that's not even the worst paced Bellator show. If you can find me a card that was paced as bad as that first Dynamite show in San Jose, then I will give you 5 stacks right now. Even looking at both examples, find me a Joe Riggs vs. Mike Bronzoulis fight on this UFC 205 card. If the women's strawweight title fight is as bad as Gil's wife vs. that awful librarian lady, then they might as well shut down women's MMA. We ain't ever coming back from that.

Quote

I get that the juice is worth the squeeze and all, but I think this type of booking is risky.  

But that's MMA and combat sports in general though. You take inherent risks everytime you book a card. UFC 199 is probably the event of the year for 2016, and people tore that card a new one weeks leading up to that show. I saw people calling it the worst UFC PPV card on paper beforehand. It's funny because it was sandwiched in between a massive stadium show and a show that was guaranteed to do big business regardless, and it managed to outshine both really when it came to quality of fights. Maybe it's because it was a great show and the low expectations put it over the top. However, it was a pretty big risk putting a replacement main event on top where it had already happened and the outcome seemed certain. However, having one of the biggest upsets of the year propelled that card from just being very good to an exceptional event. My thing isn't that having six great fights on paper is the be all, end all of MMA greatness. It isn't. My argument is there are a variety of factors that go into a card and the quality of said card. However, overlooking the quality of the fights shouldn't be a part of that. If you're starting off with a Murphy's Law mindset for a card, then you were not looking to be pleased by the card in the first place. In addition, hoping fights fall off a card and wishing bad luck. That's not just MMA fan pessimism you're dealing with. That's just being an overcritical, passive aggressive dick.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only question is what do you gain from being pessimistic about life but more particularly sports? It doesn't seem like a great mindset to consistently have yet you're always finding something to nitpick. This is a way more stacked card than 200 and really is the biggest show of the year with all of the fights intriguing. So what if there's a lull or two throughout? New Yorkers are going to be amped out of their gourds for this show, the atmosphere will be electric. This isn't Bellator, it's a show with some of the best fighters in the world in hugely important fights.

This isn't the same as being a pessimistic and jaded WWE fan being told to wait and see how shitty booking will unfold (shittily). This is the biggest company in MMA putting on the biggest card possible building off a hugely successful last nearly two years. We've been spoiled with great shows on a consistent basis in that time frame. What's to gain by being so negative? My only complaint with the UFC is the disrespectful compensation 99% of their fighters receive. As far as match making? They're doing a great fucking job. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because that's how Jeffrey is and always will be. Plus, someone has to pick up where epwar left off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough. It's not healthy though and this is coming from somebody super critical of WWE booking for the better part of the post WCW era. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say that back when I worked at 8 AM on Sundays, I wasn't thrilled about the stacked cards that went past 1 AM. Course that was only for selfish reasons but I can't be the only east coaster that worked on Sundays that would be annoyed when they were showing their 8th video package.

Course now I am off weekends so bring on the long ass cards, I'm ready.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The longer, the better! Stacked shows are awesome and 205 looks incredible top to bottom. I hate that I have other plans that night.

I loved the Bellator Dynamite shows, especially the 2nd one with like almost 2 hours of prelims, then the six fight main card, then three kickboxing fights airing after. That was just fun to watch all the way through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think I'm pessimistic about MMA, that's a pretty small bubble you're in.

I think two title fights is the max number of fights you should book for a PPV card because it means three title fights all potentially going 25 minutes and that can kill the pacing of an event.  Having two go that long isn't as bad.  I'm not sure what the broadcasting rules are.  My understanding is that on a PPV, the UFC can get a half hour of overtime for the event.  And that's on a card that has six fights on the PPV portion already.  The statistics of a fight going to decision in MMA versus ending in a finish are generally about 50/50.  So that's why I feel that way.  And then if a bunch of fights on the card end up going to decision, then people start complaining even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheVileOne said:

My understanding is that on a PPV, the UFC can get a half hour of overtime for the event.

Your understanding is wrong because for years they have bought more than enough time for PPV to avoid what happened 15 years ago. That's never going to be an issue. The only thing that could interrupt that is like a rain or weather delay, which is why they were never so hot on doing outside stadium shows in the first place. Also, like what hardcore porn comes on afterwards is the UFC competing with where PPV providers are like, "Man, I wish this UFC would go off so Hot Topless Sorority Girls #15 can bring in the real cash"? With Pacquiao fights flopping left and right, Mayweather gone for the foreseeable future, and WWE pretty much cutting off PPV, they are pretty much the only game left in town. If there ain't enough time, they will make time so UFC can get all their shit in.

Quote

If you think I'm pessimistic about MMA, that's a pretty small bubble you're in.

Waitaminute. Wait a fucking a minute. The dude I have had several arguments with about Cain Velasquez, Chris Weidman, and like Dom Cruz being injured and was hoping that 205 fell apart just said he isn't pessimistic. You must be out of your skull.

Quote

And then if a bunch of fights on the card end up going to decision, then people start complaining even more.

No fucking shit. You wanted to purchase a historic PPV with 3 title fights, and you got 3 title fights. Enjoy your purchase or don't buy it in the first goddamn place. There you go.

1 hour ago, DreamBroken said:

I loved the Bellator Dynamite shows, especially the 2nd one with like almost 2 hours of prelims, then the six fight main card, then three kickboxing fights airing after. That was just fun to watch all the way through.

The second one in St. Louis was decent enough IIRC. Probably because I only caught the clips of the kickboxing afterwards. That first one....OH BOY. That was bordering on Dynamite USA 2007 disaster. They had Zack Mwekassa (one of my favorite kickboxers) and Saulo Cavalari out there fighting to deafening silence. Then, they were doing long interviews and video packages between all the fights. The kickboxing on the show (save for the female one, which was bad) didn't suck as much as the pacing and the fact they didn't know people were not jazzed up about it. That San Jose crowd was anything but a crowd from the old Strikeforce days. Also, if you're going to do 8 fights on two different surfaces, you can't linger around. I know you have to hype PBC (probably not anymore but I digress) or upcoming shows and need some corporate synergy, but I do not need to watch boxers or MMA fighters do interviews on Skype. You can skip that. They just wasted so much time on the broadcast and fights were not good enough to justify keeping it on Spike, and the ratings for that first show showed that. No one wanted to see that shit.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not a fan of the idea of three title fights, because inherently one of them gets glossed over. whether it be the first one, or the least exciting match-up, or whatever, it just makes that one division look less important than the others.

but hell. i always watch all of the fights on a PPV card. i tune in to fight pass for the early prelims and i enjoy the show until midnight (central) and have no complaints. we've seen boring 25 minute fights (title or not) and we've seen a hell of a lot more boring 15 minute fights. mma be crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cain Velasquez and Chris Weidman get injured a lot.

I'm not hoping at all that UFC 205 falls apart.  I hope it doesn't. But if you look at the last few years, there's always some sort of nonsense that is constantly causing these events to get gutted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, twiztor said:

i'm not a fan of the idea of three title fights, because inherently one of them gets glossed over. whether it be the first one, or the least exciting match-up, or whatever, it just makes that one division look less important than the others.

I think that highlights the importance of shoulder programming and actually watching it. Because for a lot of people, it seems like they didn't hype up the third fight from the top or in some cases, the co-main event. I'm not saying everything has the promotional muscle of Punk vs. Gall, but people just tend to not care and don't put a ton of effort into seeking something out. Yeah, in a lot of cases you get situations where fighters don't do or saying anything of note. Whenever I do see someone not known for grabbing attention in that way have a poignant moment or two on like a Countdown special or Road to the Octagon show and people bitch about the lack of hype, the first thing I want to do is ask is if they watched the shoulder programming. But I already know the answer because if they did, they wouldn't have said the stupid comment in the first place. 

Also, one of the fights has to be first. Everyone can't headline a PPV. Just because you're first doesn't mean it's not as important in terms of legitimacy. The order is determined based on commercial purposes and marketing. That's fight sports. It was happening before the UFC was ever a thing that existed.

39 minutes ago, TheVileOne said:

Cain Velasquez and Chris Weidman get injured a lot.

I'm not hoping at all that UFC 205 falls apart.  I hope it doesn't. But if you look at the last few years, there's always some sort of nonsense that is constantly causing these events to get gutted.

....except all that is random as fuck to bring up a day after a card comes together. Hell, not even 24 hours. At least wait like maybe...72 hours on being a tremendous buzzkill on everything MMA related. Clearly, that is what makes you a pessimist and you clearly cannot wrap your feeble mind around that much like the McGregor situation. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as McGregor's featherweight title, if he wins the Lightweight title and decides he's not defending at featherweight any more, Aldo's interim title becomes the de facto undisputed FW belt, until McGregor either vacates or gets stripped. Whereas, if Conor loses his title tilt at Lightweight (which is very much possible), What's he got left? Either defending the FW belt, finishing the Diaz trilogy, or... catchweight vs Lesnar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AxB said:

As far as McGregor's featherweight title, if he wins the Lightweight title and decides he's not defending at featherweight any more, Aldo's interim title becomes the de facto undisputed FW belt, until McGregor either vacates or gets stripped. Whereas, if Conor loses his title tilt at Lightweight (which is very much possible), What's he got left? Either defending the FW belt, finishing the Diaz trilogy, or... catchweight vs Lesnar?

No...the whole point of the term undisputed is there is no dispute over who is the champion. If Conor McGregor is featherweight champ, there is very much a dispute over who is champion. Aldo can't become undisputed featherweight champion UNTIL that happens or he beats him in a rematch. Not before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruce Buffer called the Conor Undisputed Featherweight Chanmpion while introducing him before the Diaz rematch. Even though Aldo was already interim Champion (and therefore disputing it) at the time.

Besides which, I said "de facto Undisputed", not "Undisputed". Even if they're still calling it the interim title, if it's the only active Championship and the proper belt isn't being defended, it might as well not exist. Unless they want to make Conor the Champion Emeritus or something ridiculous like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AxB said:

Bruce Buffer called the Conor Undisputed Featherweight Chanmpion while introducing him before the Diaz rematch. Even though Aldo was already interim Champion (and therefore disputing it) at the time.

Besides which, I said "de facto Undisputed", not "Undisputed". Even if they're still calling it the interim title, if it's the only active Championship and the proper belt isn't being defended, it might as well not exist. Unless they want to make Conor the Champion Emeritus or something ridiculous like that.

Except the interim championship doesn't affect the status of the championship whereas the actual champion does. If someone is stripped of a championship, the interim is elevated. If the interim champ is stripped, he is just stripped. If there were two versions of the full belt and Aldo won that, then there would be a dispute. As is, he is just interim champion. McGregor has the legitimate claim to the undisputed crown because he holds the most legitimate victory to obtain that title. Jose Aldo does not hold a victory of greater or equal value to make that claim in the timeframe after that. The only way he would be able to do that without winning the belt from McGregor or McGregor being stripped outright is holding a win over McGregor afterwards in the same weight class w/o the belt on the line to claim a linear title win. That has happened on multiple occasions in boxing. With that being very unlikely, McGregor is still undisputed champion until the promotion says otherwise.

There are like 25 interim WBA titles in boxing. They don't affect the actual titleholders. They call the real title holders the Super champions, but they are undisputed champs nonetheless. Same thing here. McGregor won the real belt. As long as he has that, he is the undisputed champion. There is NO de facto undisputed champion. It doesn't matter when the last time it was defended. You either are or you are not. We don't declare champions. The promotion or sanctioning bodies do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like UFC has signed ex Bellator champion and current M-1 HW champ Alexander Volkov. Also, UFC signed former Bellator fighter Mark Godbeer to fight Justin Ledet for the Belfast card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

Looks like UFC has signed ex Bellator champion and current M-1 HW champ Alexander Volkov. Also, UFC signed former Bellator fighter Mark Godbeer to fight Justin Ledet for the Belfast card.

Update: Volkov is fighting Timothy Johnson on the Belfast card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone got or tried to get 205 tickets? Nightmare trying to get at them through TicketMaster yesterday / today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A_K said:

Has anyone got or tried to get 205 tickets? Nightmare trying to get at them through TicketMaster yesterday / today.

Quite a few of my teammates have tried and it's been an absolute nightmare, I don't know anyone who has been successful. The prices are so ridiculous to begin with let alone how high they are going on the secondary market already. I'll just watch it either at home or with the team somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...