Feature about MMA on 60 Minutes 12/09/06

[MacWombat]

That was much better than I was expecting. LOL at Fox not taking the UFC when they've had celebrity boxing and temptation island.

[Donkey_Fizzle]

But Renzo's annoying as hell to listen too.....

They are going to have to accept it sooner or later. It's the fastest growing sport in the world. It's an industry that bring in well over 250 million in revenue a year. We have more rules than boxing and, as of yet, not even a fraction of the corruption. As long as the sport keeps producing good ambassadors then the general public view will only improve. Most fighters, when interviewed, are polite, well mannered and articulate. The more the general public sees this the more they'll accept it. Hell boxing was considered barberic less than 100 years ago. A sport for the unwashed masses.

[matrixninja]

Yeah I thought they portrayed the sport very well. It wasn't as biased and opinionated as some of the other articles and segments on MMA, that we se in the media.

[Phrost]

Amazing to see how far we've come just since this site went online. Not that we should take credit for it, but I'd like to think that we're a part of the growth of the sport.

[GoldenJonas]

It was a very good piece. Scott Pelley appeared to be on the attack in the beginning but seemed to get put in his place soundly by Dana White's NFL analogy.

Also, I give Pelley A LOT OF CREDIT; he actually got on the mat and rolled with the Miletich camp (Hughes and Sylvia) and rolled with Renzo. This sport really is something that has to be experienced to fully understand just how friggen technical it is. So props to Pelley.

[Sofa-King What]

Im so glad that I was able to alert people on here to watch this piece. I thought it represented MMA in a positive light. Mainstream media getting this info to the common folk seemed to me to be a positive movement for the sport. With a piece like that shown on such a high profile news show, I bet Dana and all the other bigwigs in the business are frothing at the mouth, anticipating the possible revenues that may be generated from this extra exposure.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sofa
AKA Gafanhoto

[Shawarma]

They are going to have to accept it sooner or later. It's the fastest growing sport in the world. It's an industry that bring in well over 250 million in revenue a year. We have more rules than boxing and, as of yet, not even a fraction of the corruption. As long as the sport keeps producing good ambassadors then the general public view will only improve. Most fighters, when interviewed, are polite, well mannered and articulate. The more the general public sees this the more they'll accept it. Hell boxing was considered barberic less than 100 years ago. A sport for the unwashed masses.

A few points:

1. MMA will NEVER be as big, widespread or popular as boxing. People don't want to see grown men hugging each other for 20 minutes when they could be watching people brawling standing up. MMA takes a significant level of knowledge to appreciate fully, knowledge that the average Joe doesn't have or want to aquire.

2. Boxing is still considered barbaric and brutal by most people, and MMA in America is very much a sport for the unwashed masses, judging by the shots of the hick audience who boos whenever the fight hits the ground.

3. MMA has close philosophical ties to prowrestling in the way it's promoted. ****-talking, invented feuds, Tito Ortiz and his shirts, Bob Sapp calling out Mike Tyson, Quinton Jackson and his ghettolicious gold chains and attitude and so on. It is therefore often associated with prowrestling. It needs much more of an air of professionalism if it wants to distance itself from fake fighting. Then again, it attracts more of the aforementioned hicks who boo with their WWF-style promotion.

4. MMA has fewer rules. In boxing you can't kick or grab your opponent. This isn't even a debateable issue.

5. MMA has less corruption because it's far less lucrative. Not because of any kind of moral superiority.

6. I ain't buying the "Fastest Growing Sport" thing. You're telling me more people start playing MMA than judo, taekwondo or even soccer, basketball or tennis? Sounds very unlikely to me.

7. **** 60 Minutes and their bullshit McDonalds-type reporting. And **** them for making it impossible for me to watch this segment on their website but rather showing me a bunch of commercials.

[RoninPimp]

I disagree. MMA will be bigger than boxing in 5 years imo.

[Phrost]

Yeah, I agree too. But I see the chance of some more bullshit rules coming in to keep the action focused on striking.

[GoldenJonas]

1. MMA will NEVER be as big, widespread or popular as boxing. People don't want to see grown men hugging each other for 20 minutes when they could be watching people brawling standing up. MMA takes a significant level of knowledge to appreciate fully, knowledge that the average Joe doesn't have or want to aquire.

I agree with the knowledge part. However, I would be curious to see the pay-per view draw for the last UFC as compared the pay per view draw for the last Klitchko (sp?) fight.

2. Boxing is still considered barbaric and brutal by most people, and MMA in America is very much a sport for the unwashed masses, judging by the shots of the hick audience who boos whenever the fight hits the ground.

agreed; both sports are typically played as barbaric and it is probably just as difficult to find a viewer who understands the difference between a straight and a jab as it is find a viewer who understands the difference between half-guard and full guard.

3. MMA has close philosophical ties to prowrestling in the way it's promoted. ****-talking, invented feuds, Tito Ortiz and his shirts, Bob Sapp calling out Mike Tyson, Quinton Jackson and his ghettolicious gold chains and attitude and so on. It is therefore often associated with prowrestling. It needs much more of an air of professionalism if it wants to distance itself from fake fighting. Then again, it attracts more of the aforementioned hicks who boo with their WWF-style promotion.

unfortunatley true. That Tito/Shamrock **** kind of pissed me off.

5. MMA has less corruption because it's far less lucrative. Not because of any kind of moral superiority.

Like I said above, I do not know that MMA is "far LESS" lucrative. The IFL just went public with an offering of greater than $100 mill, and UFC pulls in probably $20-30mil per show with pay-per view, box office, betting lines, concession, and sponsors. That's not chump change. (I don't know for certain I'm sort of going on numbers I have heard through interviews and using simple math)

Give it time though. The bad eggs have a way of polluting the bowl and I'm sure there are a few in the MMA bowl.

6. I ain't buying the "Fastest Growing Sport" thing. You're telling me more people start playing MMA than judo, taekwondo or even soccer, basketball or tennis? Sounds very unlikely to me.

how much more does soccer, football, baseball, etc, all of the mainstream sports, have to grow. You can't compare MMA to soccer or even rugby for worldwide popularity; I don't even think you can compare boxing to soccer or rugby for worldwide popularity.

The bottom line is that boxing is apparently loosing to MMA as far as gross worldwide revenue and growth of fan base worldwide.

The revenue thing interests me. I'm gonna look into it a bit to get better numbers. Any ideas on how to narrow it down, i.e., compare payper view ratings, sanctioned pro fights in a particular geographic area, etc...

any ideas?