12/07/2009 3:00am, #11
- The article begins with a conclusion which the rest of the article is meant to support.
- The article ends with an extremely poorly constructed sentence which is itself contradicted by the article (e.g. MMA supporters' voices are being heard, since this article spends a great deal of time referring to the opinions of MMA fans).
- The author clearly has no idea how to use paragraphs.
- Poor sentence structure pervades the article (e.g. the second paragraph: the effect of "[...] also has fans frustrated" is completely lost because the sentence began with "With a;" for the sentence's structure to have any real purpose, it should begin "Though the" and change "receiving" to "received").
- Some sentences are incoherent (e.g. the sixth paragraph: the announcement made perfect sense; if anything, it was the decision which "appeared to make little sense").
- Subject-verb disagreement is present (e.g. the seventh paragraph: the assertion was troubling; the assertions were troubling).
- The author's assertions aren't supported with evidence (e.g. the eighth paragraph: when has Dana White made exaggerated claims? More importantly, when has Dana White made false claims?).
- The author shows a fundamental misunderstanding of karma (i.e. Dana White isn't dead, therefore he can't be affected by his karma).
- The author doesn't actually discuss any of the subjects in the article, rather, (s)he has simply stated a series of (presumed) facts (e.g. the progression from the twenty-second to the twenty-third paragraph).
- Poorly written sentences lead the reader to misunderstand the author's intended meaning (e.g. the twenty-fourth paragraph seems to state that fans should complain to athletic commissions about Dana White not being allowed to appoint referees and judges).
- The author is so caught up in using colloquial language that (s)he destroys the meaning of certain clauses (e.g. the twenty-fifth paragraph: exactly how plain is day on a screen?).
- A mistake of articulation is made which is unforgivable, unless English isn't the author's first language (in the twenty-seventh paragraph, "did make" should be "made").
- The author uses childish sentence structure in places (e.g. the twenty-eighth paragraph: "In the end, part of the reason why progress is often stifled is because...").
- The article ends with a final illustration of the author's pathetic writing (i.e. a period of time can't accomplish anything. Something can be accomplished within a period of time, however).
12/07/2009 8:08am, #12
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
Altough this isn't Pulitzer material, I agree with some of the thoughts being expressed in it. TUF 10 sucked, the TUF 11 coaches are washed up and they will probably suck and most of the cards from UFC 100 onward have sucked also...but the doomsday scenario that the writer wants to play to us isn't that "doomsdayzy" or anything of the sort. Less cards, more quality
12/07/2009 8:42am, #13
I agree with the article on some levels. One there are too many UFCs without guys from my gym. Two Dana is a braggart. TUF 10 sucked. I should be a coach on TUF 11.
All joking aside they need to slim up the model and make some changes. Dana does need to reel it in a little. The quality of the next season of TUF needs to be picked up. I dont think that rehashing old fan favorite fighters is the way to go but it is worth a shot if they have talented fighters on the show.Judo is only gentle for the guy on top.
12/07/2009 9:00am, #14
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
12/07/2009 9:08am, #15
This would be slightly less idiotic if re-phrased as a proper editorial rather than pretending to be a news piece about the opinion of 'fans' and 'critics' (i.e. the UG).
Wouldn't fix the horrendous quality of the writing, mind you.
12/07/2009 12:04pm, #16
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Seattle, WA
I'm sorry, but this "article" is so borderline idiotic in some places I don't even know where to begin.
12/07/2009 4:36pm, #17
12/07/2009 4:57pm, #18
Irie Evergreen, I don't think you know the concept of karma as well as you think you do. But I agree with pretty much everything else you wrote, as well as your avatar. Any chance of a sample?
12/07/2009 5:05pm, #19
12/07/2009 5:10pm, #20
I do agree that it seems that there has been a flood of events lately but I think that the author's disdain is predicated by the (false) belief that you need big name headliners to make a good fight. A good example is any fight with John Fitch in it. He is a name but he isn't one of the big ones. This does not prevent him from putting on exciting fights every time he steps into the cage.