12/08/2009 2:37am, #31
12/08/2009 3:27am, #32
Upa is still the only voice of reason or thought in this sub-forum.
The rest of you are idiots.
This article is ****.
12/08/2009 3:53am, #33
12/08/2009 4:13am, #34
I'm not. So please don't try to have sex with me.
12/08/2009 10:22am, #35
Wait... that's "Pizdoff" isn't it?
12/08/2009 11:05am, #36
There's no downward slide not even close the UFC is bigger than ever.
As a result of which it will receive more and more critisizm. This is always the case when one company dominates an industry.
I would love to see more money invested in Dream in an attempt to really take on the UFC. I dont think Strikeforce are up to it.
12/08/2009 12:58pm, #37
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Seattle, WA
12/08/2009 4:31pm, #38
I am not trying to argue that the UFC is going to ****.I said I thought it was on a downward slide, but I also said that the sport is growing and getting bigger every day.Contradictory? No, because what I meant by downward slide was the quality of marquee matchups as of late. There have been some bore snores and there are just too many fights.It would be more of an event to have one great card every month or two than a mediocre card every weekend.
The fight fixing thing I mentioned only in passing because it seems to come up a lot more now than it did before. why is the suspicion there now ?
Basically, my major beef is this: the over-the-top fueding and silly trash talk and behavior on TUF has made the UFC come to resemble Professional Wrestling far too much. I don't think its neccessary.The sport is great on its own. I have always hated the phony drama that accompanied pro wrestling and now it has crept into a sport that I love.Not only has it crept in, but it is starting to become an integral component - all because of TUF - an element that the sport itself doesn't even need.I know its good for ratings - but is it good for the sport maintaining its legitimacy?
So, I guess overall its TUF that I really have the problem with not the UFC per se." If one wants to have a friend one must also want to wage war for him: and to wage war one must be capable of being an enemy." - Fr. Nietzsche 'On The Friend' Thus Spake Zarathustra
12/08/2009 6:46pm, #39
This necessarily prevents certain matchups being made. Let's go with your proposal of a UFC ppv every other month (for your information there will have been ~14 ppvs in 2009, less than one every six weeks). Six ppv's a year, sure every single one would be good but we also would see very few fighters and champs would fight very infrequently. The UFC would also have to drop more than half its active roster; or are you proposing that guys like Alves and Marquadt should forever be on the undercards?
Regardless, I wouldn't agree that the quality of matchups has actually gone down. Consider this weekend's card:
Penn vs Sanchez
Mir vs Kongo
Fitch vs Pierce (was supposed to be... I forget who)
Florian vs Guida
Buentello vs Struve (okay, this one sucks)
Belcher vs Gouveia
Wiman vs Nelson (also kind of sucks but the loser will be out of the UFC so we all win)
Hendricks vs Funch (very solid undercard fight due to Hendricks potential)
Palhares vs Linhares (fabulous matchup but will likely end up being boring)
Johnson vs Garcia
Burns vs Grant
This is a very solid card with several fights that have strong title implications. Now consider that there was supposed to be a comain event: Rashad vs Rampage. That got axed because of Rampage thespian desires. Clearly the quality of cards is going down.
It is funny that people are calling the quality of UFC shows into question based on cards that are being aired on Spike TV. I wonder how many of you have seen the quality of many of the Strikeforce challenger cards.
12/08/2009 6:54pm, #40