http://nhbnews.podomatic.com/entry/2010-12-04T08_13_46-08_00

I find their conversation on about 1 hour and 4 minutes in starts to get interesting. Now I'm not a big fan of Perretti and I think the reason I don't is because the man has no filter on broad casting.*

A lot of the broadcast digresses on a few tangents on how the current generation doesn't understand. Really guys? It is what it is. It doesn't really have to go there. Despite my complaint I think that most of the posters here should listen up. There are a lot of good points. Really brought me back to the evolution of the sport today.





*I'm a big fan of calling it as it is as long as the person is right there to rebutt.

Really? No comment? You guys are fags.

The site was pretty much offline most of yesterday and Sundays are slow.

Knowing Eddie Goldman, I was amused that you had to specify that he went on tangents.

Knowing Eddie Goldman, I was amused that you had to specify that he went on tangents.

The tangents weren't what I was pointing out. It was what the tangents about.

A lot of the broadcast digresses on a few tangents on how the current generation doesn't understand. Really guys? It is what it is. It doesn't really have to go there.
Kids can get off my lawn >:|

Interesting. "The kids these days" part was kind of silly I think, but I do think that there's a generation gap forming and I don't really like it.

And of course they're all fags...this is Bullshido!

Oh, and if somebody wants to add a pro fighter tag to my thingie, that would be awesome!

I'll check this out tonight when I get home (oh and it BETTER be good *shakes fist* ).

I don't think the point is that there is a generation gap among fans; The point is that there is a generation gap among journalists. In some cases, the sport is being covered by 20 year old kids who missed the early phase of the sport and don't know any better. Conversations like this one can only help in setting the record straight.

I skipped to 1hr 4min where Omega recommended so maybe I missed it but did they complain about the bias of the "unified" rules? Or just complain about coverage and journalists?

My biggest gripe is that the narrower ruleset is what causes the fights to get more alike not some training bias or poor understanding by the media.

They were complaining about the coverage and journalists. The discussion was about the history of the rule set and how the Term MMA was founded.

I skipped to 1hr 4min where Omega recommended so maybe I missed it but did they complain about the bias of the "unified" rules? Or just complain about coverage and journalists?

I was the only one criticizing the new rules. Goldman was an early proponent of efforts to unify the rules, and Perretti helped create them.



My biggest gripe is that the narrower ruleset is what causes the fights to get more alike not some training bias or poor understanding by the media.
I think it is a combination of all three.

Edit: I don't think Omega's preference for the tail end of the discussion was intened as a recommendation that folks would be better off skipping to the end. IMO the later part of the conversation is hard to follow if you do that. Perretti says a lot of important things in the first part.

Inexplicably, they gave me an assignment to interview Gene LeBell about the Ali/Inoki match, which we conducted last night. Pure awesomeness getting to talk at length to such a great man.

Inexplicably, they gave me an assignment to interview Gene LeBell about the Ali/Inoki match, which we conducted last night. Pure awesomeness getting to talk at length to such a great man.
I would like to hear this.
Do they go into the Spinks/Inoki match, too?

I would like to hear this.
Do they go into the Spinks/Inoki match, too?
We did not, but I will be talking to him again this weekend. I'll bring it up and see if he wants to discuss it.

Does he get into the post-match leg injuries suffered by Ali?

Does he get into the post-match leg injuries suffered by Ali?Only in that he was hospitalized.