One promotion is best

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » General MMA Talk » One promotion is best
Caesarrrr
4/18/10 3:35:45PM
I felt this for a while, but I haven't said anything since SF hadn't given me any reason.

I believe that having one huge promotion, like the UFC, is the best way to go. All of the other promotions, such as dream, and KOTC, can be like minor leagues, but I don't feel that there should be two promotions in competition.

Would you want to see the NFL split into two leagues again? would you want to see LeBron and Kobe in different leagues, where they'd never play?

This was a huge issue for boxing, where the best fighters were never in the same promotion. Why would you want the same for MMA?

It's better for us as fans to have one promotion, with the best fighters, and then smaller promotions, almost "minor league" style. You'd get to see all of the most exciting fights, and honestly, I think long term this would be best for the fighters. Think of how much more revenue the sport would have if there was only one major promotion?

Thoughts or opinions?
AchillesHeel
4/18/10 4:27:23PM
While I agree that allowing the top fighters to compete against each other is the ideal, the current norm of signing exclusive, years-long, multi-fight contracts with the UFC means that they run the risk of becoming a monopoly. I believe Major League Baseball has a specific exemption from Federal Trade Commission antitrust laws, and the National Football League has gone to the Supreme Court as recently as January in an effort to get an exemption. In February, the House of Representatives dropped an avalanche of votes (406-to-19) on a repeal of the health-insurance industry's antitrust exemption. The U.S. Department of Justice took Microsoft to court in 1998. And it isn't just an American issue. Google is being pummeled with antitrust suits in Europe. Japan's Fair Trade Commission investigated Intel a few years ago. The list goes on and on, going back (in this country) to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Teddy Roosevelt practically declared war on Standard Oil.

So... no.





p.s. A monopoly would be especially bad for the fighters.
postman
4/18/10 7:18:35PM
yeah if there isn't somewhere for the fighters to go then payscale will never rise.
mrsmiley
4/18/10 7:57:17PM

Posted by Caesarrrr

I felt this for a while, but I haven't said anything since SF hadn't given me any reason.

I believe that having one huge promotion, like the UFC, is the best way to go. All of the other promotions, such as dream, and KOTC, can be like minor leagues, but I don't feel that there should be two promotions in competition.

Would you want to see the NFL split into two leagues again? would you want to see LeBron and Kobe in different leagues, where they'd never play?

This was a huge issue for boxing, where the best fighters were never in the same promotion. Why would you want the same for MMA?

It's better for us as fans to have one promotion, with the best fighters, and then smaller promotions, almost "minor league" style. You'd get to see all of the most exciting fights, and honestly, I think long term this would be best for the fighters. Think of how much more revenue the sport would have if there was only one major promotion?

Thoughts or opinions?



Their's pros and cons to both sides of the argument. I think for this to work the UFC may have to change how they are currently running their business and how they do certain things. Dana White said himself the reason why American football has failed to successfully integrate itself oversea's is because it does not have universal appeal. Fighting however,does. Yet for everywhere we see MMA people add their own cultural flavor to it. Such as how they are still using rings as opposed to cages in Japan and China (though we did see a hybrid at DREAM!). Either the cage because universal for MMA or one major promotion has to integrate both.
And as Dana has also said they have more modeld the UFC after the WWE as opposed to the NFL or MLB. For as long as the formula for pro-wrestling has been around we have seen terrotories and rival organizations buy eachother out and put one another out of business. Likewise the forumula seems to follow with mixed martial arts. Personally,if we use pro-wrestling as a comparison the best comes out when their are opposing orgs adding pressure for one another to put on good bouts. I think one huge promotion is like the old saying "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". What I'm getting at is while we would be hoping to see the best go against the best, more than likely a lot of really great fighters would get black balled and we would more times than not see the most profitable fighters squaring off against eachother to help keep such a super promotion afloat. We already see subtle hints of this within the UFC and it would only amplfy if all fighting was under its banner.
A lot of people think EA owning the whole gaming world would be great for software development but I personally find it a scary thought. Could one MMA promotion work? I'm sure it could. I just personally like a little flavor to go with the sport.
Caesarrrr
4/18/10 9:52:37PM
I'd say its best to stay away from the pro wrestling arguement, because their fights were staged....they were putting on staged shows to see who could create the most drama. In fights, everything is real. Look at SF's card recently, this was supposed to be their best card, and the UFC's only counter programming was the 110 replay. Yet because of upsets and generally lackluster fights, it was an utter failure. In my opinion it actually reduces the pressure on the UFC, so how would you fit that into the WWE model?
mrsmiley
4/19/10 2:53:32PM

Posted by Caesarrrr

I'd say its best to stay away from the pro wrestling arguement, because their fights were staged....they were putting on staged shows to see who could create the most drama. In fights, everything is real. Look at SF's card recently, this was supposed to be their best card, and the UFC's only counter programming was the 110 replay. Yet because of upsets and generally lackluster fights, it was an utter failure. In my opinion it actually reduces the pressure on the UFC, so how would you fit that into the WWE model?



Well the comparison was made by White himself at one point.
It had nothing to do with the fights but how the company is run.
But even at that you could compare the UFC/WWE and Strikeforce with TNA.
TNA's first monday night show was huge because it featured Hulk Hogan, One half of the Hardy Boyz,Ric Flair,etc. Yet the WWE,in order to steal thunder from TNA brought back Bret Hart for a confrontation with Shawn Michaels and Vince McMahon. The action figures,promotional material,playsets,etc are all very simuliar. The same company makes the action figures and replica belts. Not to mention,THQ makes both Undisputed and Raw vs Smackdown. Vince bought out Stampede wrestling,ECW,and WCW to make the WWE the dominant brand in sports entertainment. Much like how Zuffa bought PRIDE,WFA,etc.
But bad cards from rival organizations does not equate to meaning we only need one promotion. What about the bad cards the UFC has put on in the past?

But I would also like to add that the UFC,much like pro-wrestling likes to add drama to fights when possible. It helps add interest. When fighters smack talk,then shake hands after a bout,it's a way of helping to sell the event.
Of course it's not identical to pro-wrestling in every single aspect but their are comparisons.
Caesarrrr
4/19/10 7:21:21PM
I'll give you the comparison's in the business model, but I'm not trying to compare the company's business plans, I'm trying to decide whether one promotion is better than two major promotions. Poor business plans have an effect on whether a promotion survives, but unlike the WWE, it won't keep it alive by itself.

I just lost my train of though, So i'm going to wrap this up with saying I completely understand where you're coming from, and respect your opinion, but I feel like the sport would be more entertaining and eventually better for the fighters if we had one major promotion. If you had a major promotion you could even have a fighters union( I'm only in college, i don't know the details of unions, or if a fighters union would even work, so please don't roast me if its not feasible.)
BustedKnuckle
4/20/10 6:27:37PM
This is a double edged sword here. One part of me says YES put all the best together and we'll get the best fights!. But then my anti-corporation side kicks in thinking of fighters wages/healthcare and such. I think the UFC will be top dog for a long time. But somone else WILL get it right somtime!?
Related Topics