2018 Non-Event General MMA Talk Thread

[ChesterCopperpot]

Punks next UFC fight announced for 225 - versus fellow 0-1 fighter Mike Jackson who also lost to Mickey Gall

[Elsalvajeloco]

 

[TheVileOne]

The last thing the UFC needs is another interim title. It's like they've learned nothing over the past week. 

If it's a matter of pay, then just pay the top contenders like they are champions. 

[Elsalvajeloco]

2 hours ago, TheVileOne said:

If it's a matter of pay, then just pay the top contenders like they are champions. 

Yeah, that's not happening. We can go all the way back to Brandon Vera to see how this usually turns out.

[TheVileOne]

2 minutes ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

Yeah, that's not happening. We can go all the way back to Brandon Vera to see how this usually turns out.

Then enough of the interim titles. Start stripping champions if they aren't defending them. 

[Elsalvajeloco]

58 minutes ago, TheVileOne said:

Then enough of the interim titles. Start stripping champions if they aren't defending them. 

I think the thing here is Woodley is probably able to come back in mid summer/early fall, but they already have fights lined up and that's way too long for RDA to be sitting out when you're trying to sell PPVs (specifically Woodley vs. RDA). The Lawler fight for RDA was in December. Plus, as much as RDA wants the real title, bills gotta be paid. However, it's a conundrum that is rough to deal with because he's gonna wanna protect his spot in getting the Woodley title shot. There is nothing stopping the UFC from putting the winner of Till/Wonderboy or Usman/Ponzi against Woodley when he's able to roll. So when it came to negotiation (and they've been working on this fight for 2-3 weeks at least), I can see RDA's side butting heads with the UFC as how this is going to go down. I am willing to fight but only with these stipulations included and they probably made a counter proposal of guaranteeing him a title shot on the basis of a win, which hasn't really meant anything for awhile. Interim UFC titles are now what the USBA title was to the IBF champ and the NABF champ was to the WBC champ in boxing back in the 80s. You wanna guarantee you get a title shot? Win an interim title. 

I think the only maybe temporary solution to this is letting these contenders know you'll get a title shot when you get a title shot and that you have fights on your contract for a reason. They're not going to strip fighters if they can help it as to not create a merry go round but instead with the real belt as opposed to creating interim champs. At this point, with the inactivity and injury proneness of certain fighters, they'd be better off creating a emeritus champion but that's just adding another domino. What would probably work is telling someone, if the champ is available within the timeframe of 8-10 weeks of you being ready to go (meaning no weddings, vacations, pregnancies, childbirths, etc. on the slate on the contender's side), you will get your title shot. However, if we're talking five or six months, you gotta fight the next guy up. That would also apply to serious injuries incurred by the champ. Something minor that would only pushed it off 4-8 weeks, then the title shot is still yours. Outside of extenuating circumstances, the only thing that would hold something like that up is the UFC does like the hold the right to go with the hot hand. I don't see them every abandoning that in a star driven business. 

[username]

As someone who has been following UFC pretty regularly since the first Ultimate Fighter, and before that saw a bunch of the early UFCs as dad kept renting them from the local video store, I don't think my interest in the sport has ever been as low as it is now and I think a large portion of that is tied to how poorly UFC has handled titles for the past couple years.  A bunch of champs just don't defend the titles, interim titles are at this point being tossed around like candy, in a number of divisions it is just hard to care about the top of the card due to this and while I'm sure it is different for some, it is just poisonous to me.

 

I also like watching the NBA, but if it turned out that this season there wasn't gonna be a champion crowned or that three teams were gonna be champ I probably would tune out for much more of the season.  I am tuning out for much more of what UFC runs because they have made so much of it feel meaningless.  I don't really care if Khabib beats Iaquinta, he's likely never gonna get a chance to fight for the real title.  It was like how middleweight had about a solid top of the division as it has ever had a couple years back and ultimately the champ wouldn't fight any of them and basically took 18 months off.  There are some who will go "hey, a fight is a fight" and I can appreciate that, but it's also fair to say that the point of sports is to see someone climb to the top and with that element removed or reduced it loses a lot.

 

So yeah, I'd say this interim title madness isn't even keeping my interest neutral to me, it actually makes me care less.  I could see UFC continuing down this crappy path they've been heading down for the past few years and me simply no longer watching after a couple more years of it, and I couldn't even consider that at any point up until just about now.  Younger me probably said the same thing about boxing at one point and I can't even name the last boxing fight I watched.

[Elsalvajeloco]

 

[RIPPA]

In the least shocking news ever - Dana and Conor have already talked about Conor eventually fighting for UFC again

That was via Meltzer on the radio show this morning - I am sure there are more detailed stories out there.

[TheVileOne]

UFC needs to start an actual policy of stripping titles and defending titles if they are going to be doing this many interim title fights.

Even in the heyday of TUF and Spike TV, the interim title issue was never this rampant.

Quote

In the least shocking news ever - Dana and Conor have already talked about Conor eventually fighting for UFC again

I mean Dana White pretty much already said this on Saturday night. He said he talked again with Conor and said there's "mutual respect."

[supremebve]

It looks like the new UFC TV deal is going to be split between ESPN and NBC.  They are going to cut back to 6 PPVs per year, and both ESPN and NBC will have certain fighters under exclusive contracts.  They are also going to supposedly add a 165 division and a 105 women's division.  Contender Series is going to replace TUF, and each network will have one season per year.  $320 million per year.

 

[Casey]

Maybe they're upset that the news was broken before they wanted it public, but...

 

[Elsalvajeloco]

3 hours ago, supremebve said:

It looks like the new UFC TV deal is going to be split between ESPN and NBC.  They are going to cut back to 6 PPVs per year, and both ESPN and NBC will have certain fighters under exclusive contracts.  They are also going to supposedly add a 165 division and a 105 women's division.  Contender Series is going to replace TUF, and each network will have one season per year.  $320 million per year.

 

Haven't seen this yet, but it makes sense because their min. number to where PPV revenue wouldn't mean as much was around $330 million and recently Meltzer said it was looking likely to be split between networks. Probably hasn't been finalized yet that sounds like way less risk for the suitors involved. However, fighter exclusivity is going to be very tough with all the various lineup changes. 

[Craig H]

Only 6 PPVs?! Man, that doesn't seem like much at all. Is the idea here to have more PPV quality shows on ESPN or NBC?

[Jiji]

I imagine that would be the idea. This deal sounds awesome.

[twiztor]

IF true:

hopefully with the addition to 165, MiddleWeight gets bumped to 175.  I can't imagine they'd have a 165 and a 170.

not sure how i feel about networks having exclusive fighter contracts. 

curious how the hierarchy of cards will work and how many we'll be looking at. will there still be Fight Pass exclusive cards?

look forward to official announcement and more details. 

[Elsalvajeloco]

 

[Elsalvajeloco]

1 hour ago, twiztor said:

will there still be Fight Pass exclusive cards?

UFC isn't spending nowhere nearly the money WWE spends, but in order to justify having Fight Pass, there will always be a certainty of Fight Pass exclusive cards even if it is 1 or 2 a year. Not every card overseas is going to be broadcast on ESPN or NBC in the middle of the afternoon especially ESPN.

Also, gonna be tough to fight for Saturday night dates with Top Rank in non college football time. Top Rank just only settled a conflict with Golden Boy and that even brought HBO into that little conflict. I certainly wouldn't see that changing between Arum and Dana White who hate each other on an entirely differently level. So Fight Pass exclusive content from the UFC is always going to exist on some level.

[TheVileOne]

They really need less pay-per-views when the main events are constantly falling apart just days before. Having monthly pay-per-views was no longer feasible in the post-Fox, post-Fight Pass era.

[Elsalvajeloco]

I think the money number is around 7 or 8 because when you have so many champions, so many folks want to fight on the biggest cards. Remember when no one wanted to fight on UFC 199? Yet, that ended up being one of the best cards of the year in terms of quality. When you have 600+ people on the roster, you have to put those folks somewhere and six PPVs is only seventy eight fights at 13 fights a PPV. If everyone on the roster fought twice a year, that's around twelve hundred fights. If half the roster fought twice and the other half only fought once in a year, that's nine hundred fights. There is no way in the hell that they can only do a six dozen fights on PPV and do then 700 fights give or take on the ESPN, NBC, and Fight Pass platforms. They can jam stuff on ESPN3 like the second half of Glory shows while Fight Pass carries the first half. However, at that point, you might as well have the whole thing on Fight Pass if you have to compete with other sports on ESPN3. In addition, if you have a big time fight, pushing one fight to the next PPV card isn't going to work if you only on six. So if you have a Stipe/Cormier fight and for whatever reason, you lose that fight, pushing it from early April to mid June isn't going to work especially if the June card is already filled. Someone who is on PPV isn't going to be want to be bumped off PPV because another main event fell out. So if they move a fight to mid August, you moved a fight that could've happened in two months earlier in the first half of the year to August. If you had a contender lined up who actually fought in April or June (go forbid even earlier) and won a title eliminator, they now how to wait until the end of the year to get their title shot at the earliest. A PPV card roughly every 40-50 days gives them flexibility to move around champs you don't have running two months between PPV and when you're going to have to change TV card dates multiple times due to availability.

Even if there is validity to this story, that period of September to late November is going to be brutal because Arum is going to give ESPN execs headaches over which dates belong to him. Keep in mind, you already got college football on every ESPN channel. Imagine if the lead-in is like this mid level Alabama game (vs. Vandy, Ole Miss, or a non conference opponent) that isn't on CBS because Alabama can only be on CBS so many times. You know how hard Arum is going to try to get that slot over UFC so he can get that big lead-in after the 6:30 game? The Lomachenko/Linares dispute went on for like a month because Arum refused to give an inch. Imagine that x50 for three or four months solid. Knowing Arum and Dana, that's a PR disaster waiting to happen on both sides.

 

 

[twiztor]

just ordered my ticket for UFC 225. never been to a live UFC event before, so i'm pretty pumped! 

[Elsalvajeloco]

 

[Elsalvajeloco]

 

[Craig H]

On 4/12/2018 at 3:55 AM, Elsalvajeloco said:

I think the money number is around 7 or 8 because when you have so many champions, so many folks want to fight on the biggest cards. Remember when no one wanted to fight on UFC 199? Yet, that ended up being one of the best cards of the year in terms of quality. When you have 600+ people on the roster, you have to put those folks somewhere and six PPVs is only seventy eight fights at 13 fights a PPV. If everyone on the roster fought twice a year, that's around twelve hundred fights. If half the roster fought twice and the other half only fought once in a year, that's nine hundred fights. There is no way in the hell that they can only do a six dozen fights on PPV and do then 700 fights give or take on the ESPN, NBC, and Fight Pass platforms. They can jam stuff on ESPN3 like the second half of Glory shows while Fight Pass carries the first half. However, at that point, you might as well have the whole thing on Fight Pass if you have to compete with other sports on ESPN3. In addition, if you have a big time fight, pushing one fight to the next PPV card isn't going to work if you only on six. So if you have a Stipe/Cormier fight and for whatever reason, you lose that fight, pushing it from early April to mid June isn't going to work especially if the June card is already filled. Someone who is on PPV isn't going to be want to be bumped off PPV because another main event fell out. So if they move a fight to mid August, you moved a fight that could've happened in two months earlier in the first half of the year to August. If you had a contender lined up who actually fought in April or June (go forbid even earlier) and won a title eliminator, they now how to wait until the end of the year to get their title shot at the earliest. A PPV card roughly every 40-50 days gives them flexibility to move around champs you don't have running two months between PPV and when you're going to have to change TV card dates multiple times due to availability.

Even if there is validity to this story, that period of September to late November is going to be brutal because Arum is going to give ESPN execs headaches over which dates belong to him. Keep in mind, you already got college football on every ESPN channel. Imagine if the lead-in is like this mid level Alabama game (vs. Vandy, Ole Miss, or a non conference opponent) that isn't on CBS because Alabama can only be on CBS so many times. You know how hard Arum is going to try to get that slot over UFC so he can get that big lead-in after the 6:30 game? The Lomachenko/Linares dispute went on for like a month because Arum refused to give an inch. Imagine that x50 for three or four months solid. Knowing Arum and Dana, that's a PR disaster waiting to happen on both sides.

 

 

Regarding tv scheduling, as the resident ND homer, I should also point out that scheduling Saturdays during the CFB season will also be a pain in the ass especially with ND having more and more night games each season. Obviously were talking about 8 to 10 weeks, but that combined with whatever is on ESPN would make scheduling suck.

[Elsalvajeloco]