Debunking The Myth of UFC Dominance

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Jul 24, 2005
12,836
2,137
0
45
#1
by Paul Magno - Two weeks a month boxing fans have to withstand a barrage of attacks from fans and representatives of the UFC. The week before a UFC PPV and the week after, we'll hear: "Boxing is dead...Boxing is dying...Boxing is losing its ground to MMA...MMA is the combat sport of the future...etc, etc..."

Most of the so-called legit media take the story and run with it, not really knowing or caring whether the story is true or not. It just makes for a good headlines and it justifies their own ignorance when it comes to the sport of boxing..

Also, helping spread boxing's obituary is the ever-accessible, ever-outspoken Dana White, head honcho of the UFC and de facto voice of MMA. White is a soundbite machine and he spends a good portion of each interview ripping apart all things boxing while declaring MMA, and the UFC specifically, as the antidote to all that's ailing combat sports.

White will talk about the lack of star power in boxing, the corruption and the general degradation of interest in the sport. He'll talk until his segment is up and then post it all over the internet for even more to hear.

He'll never mention the fact that his company probably only has one or two fighters, to be generous, remotely recognizable to the average person on the street. One wonders who would draw more attention on a busy street corner in downtown Chicago, the threesome of Floyd Mayweather, Manny Pacquiao and Bernard Hopkins or the MMA trio of Georges St.Pierre, BJ Penn and Lyoto Machida...The answer to that is obvious.

White's claims of corruption in boxing are, unfortunately, not too far off. But what he fails to mention is that, while his own iron fisted control over his company prevents a lot of controversy in areas of scoring, it opens up just as many questions when it comes to proper fighter rankings and issues regarding fair wages and benefits.

The biggest fallacy in the "Boxing's Dead/MMA Rules" line of thought has to do with the very essence of the way both sports do business. And it's in this discrepancy that we truly discover that boxing is not dying at all and that MMA is not really ruling.

First, it should be made clear that MMA, as a sport, is most definitely not taking over the world. As a matter of fact, the UFC is the only Mixed Martial Arts company that is able to make a real profit and the attempts to branch off into Europe and Latin America have yielded mixed results, at best.

Boxing, on the other hand, has enjoyed great expansion in the international market.

Recently, over 60,000 fans packed into a soccer stadium to see Wladimir Klitschko defend against Ruslan Chagaev and a packed arena in the United Kingdom saw Amir Khan win his first world title. All across Europe and Asia stadiums and arenas are being packed for boxing shows; TV ratings are also through the roof. Even previously dead markets like Russia, Turkey and China have hosted boxing events with great success and are exploring future boxing-related events.

In the United States, boxing is not as prominent as it once was and stars do seem like they're harder to come by, but this is only because the rest of the world is catching up to the talent and skill level of US fighters. Now, it's just as likely to see a meaningful title defense in Europe as it is in Las Vegas.

However, it should be pointed out that attendance has generally been good at boxing events in the US. For instance, a weak card in Newark, New Jersey with the questionable Tomasz Adamek-Bobby Gunn main event, drew over 8,000 fans and the Vic Darchinyan-Joseph Agbeko card in Florida drew over 9,000 while, on the same night, the mega-promoted UFC 100 drew over 10,000 in Las Vegas.

A dominant UFC should've crushed two marginal boxing cards in secondary markets, but it didn't, at least not at the live gate.

But let's get back on track and look at the way the UFC does business compared to the way boxing does business. The myth of UFC dominance gets blown to pieces when we focus on just how small the UFC actually is in terms of ability and/or desire to create new, fresh programming.

The UFC has very little live action on TV. Most of their exposure is through their reality show or through various highlight and countdown shows. It's easy to give the impression of a high quality product when only highlight packages of the best fights are aired.

When you look at it, the entire TV presence of the UFC is aimed at promoting their upcoming PPV. Essentially, most UFC programming is along the lines of an infomercial, whipping their fans into a frenzy for the next show.

Now, as a way of comparison, let's take boxing and fit it into the UFC model.

Before doing enything else. we'd have to eliminate most of the live boxing programs from HBO, Showtime, ESPN, Versus and the Latino stations. Substitute the live shows with Boxing's Greatest Hits and endless Countdown shows.

Now, take all that live action that would've been on cable TV and put it on one mega PPV per month, making it so that if you want to see live boxing, you have to order the show.

Take the month of August as an example. The boxing PPV for August (We could call it Boxing #1: Heat Stroke, or something equally catchy) would feature the following televised bouts:

Roy Jones vs. Jeff Lacy
Timothy Bradley vs, Nate Campbell
Juan Diaz vs. Paulie Malignaggi
Nonito Donaire vs. Rafael Concepcion
Juan Urango vs. Randall Bailey
Robert Guerrero vs. Malcolm Klassen

How many PPVs would that card sell if there were almost literally no way to see boxing aside from ordering the event? Would a card like this sell more than the average UFC PPV of 450-600,000? The answer would be a resounding "yes" and August is not even a particularly strong month this year in terms of competition.

The UFC churns out more PPV shows and they are very good at marketing their shows to the max, but only a media manipulator like Dana White could turn less product and a smaller demographic base into signs of the UFC's domination.

As the next UFC PPV approaches we will be forced to hear more cries of "Boxing is dead" and we will for sure see and hear Dana White on ESPN and on various sports talk shows across the nation. White will blather on about how boxing is dying and the UFC is taking over and the misinformed host will go along with the attack, not knowing enough about boxing to offer any sort of intelligent rebuttal.

But, just one time, it would be refreshing to see a host fire back at White and touch on the points that this article has touched upon. It's time boxing started standing up for itself because a lie told often enough, one day, may become reality.

Boxing is not dying and the UFC is not killing it.
 
Jul 29, 2008
3,400
1
0
74
#2
these arguements are dumb to me. Too many people argue of this subject.

These are 2 different sports. MMA is dope.. but it can be boring (to the casual fan) bekuz the dont understand the ground game 100.
 

B-Buzz

lenbiasyayo
Oct 21, 2002
9,673
4,429
0
40
bhibago
last.fm
#3
I honestly never hear anyone argue about this, it's just the writers on both sides of each sport writing this shit to fuel the argument.

And I lol'd at the GSP/BJ/Machida comparison since BJ and GSP hate each other. If it was Brock, Randy & Clay Guida in Chicago people would be going apeshit.
 
Feb 12, 2004
7,488
886
0
38
#4
blah blah blah boxing is boxing and mma is mma. they are 2 different sports. i don't see articles comparing football, basketball and baseball. article writer is stupid. funny they make dana white to be a boxing hater when he absolutely loves boxing and thats where he got his start in the fight business.
 
Jan 2, 2004
3,168
2
0
39
#5
Yeah. I love how he picked good fighters but not popular fighters for the ufc.

If I was on a computer. I'd pick apart a lot of the article. But it's not worth the time.
 
Aug 31, 2003
5,551
3,189
113
www.ebay.com
#6
I hate these silly MMA vs boxing articles. I, personally, like boxing more than I do MMA, but that's my own personal opinion. I like both sports and even if I didn't like MMA there would be no reason for me to even speak on it.

I don't watch golf. I don't can't name too many golf players. I've had it on TV before and found it extremely uninteresting. That being said .. I don't ever speak on the shit. I don't go around telling people that golf is dead and it's a one dimensional sport.
 
May 6, 2002
7,218
2,906
113
#8
I think boxing is dying and UFC is killing it.
Yet, boxing is so large that it will take a long time before the UFC surpasses it...if it all.
It takes a long time for a small group of termites to eat an entire house.
 
Jul 29, 2008
3,400
1
0
74
#9
I honestly never hear anyone argue about this, it's just the writers on both sides of each sport writing this shit to fuel the argument.

And I lol'd at the GSP/BJ/Machida comparison since BJ and GSP hate each other. If it was Brock, Randy & Clay Guida in Chicago people would be going apeshit.
shit, get on boxing forums and mma forums. Most of the internet shit talkers have talked bad about boxing for years.. and then they always lay out a game plan for fighting a boxer like, "I'd go for a takedown and work side control". My thing is that MMA is universal in all aspects. But each aspect is different and more indepth than people think. I think a boxer could out box an mma fighter in boxing. I think a wrestler can out wrestle an mma fighter in wrestling (if he's only trained in basic wrestling)... I say this bekuz MMA doesnt get into the fine aspects of each sport it borrows from. In MMA, you dont worry about pins like wrestling. You dont worry about a time limit to submit you opponent like in Sambo. Feel me? Of course alot of MMA fighters have a background in something before MMA. Hughes has a strong wrestling background, Couture in Greco Roman, BJ Penn in BJJ...etc. I'm just saying that I think Tim Silvia would get fucked up in a pure boxing match.

I think boxing is dying and UFC is killing it.
Yet, boxing is so large that it will take a long time before the UFC surpasses it...if it all.
It takes a long time for a small group of termites to eat an entire house.
Boxing is not gonna die. Fans are gonna jump to what they think is cool and what not..but you'll always have die hard fans. Again, 2 different sports. With that said, MMA can not replace boxing as a sport. Like Judo cant replace wrestling.
People might bandwagon to what they like, but 2 different sports dont cancel each other out if they are well established and people love it. Baseball might be more boring to you than football.. that dont mean baseball is gonna go away.
 
Dec 9, 2005
11,231
31
0
41
#10
Yeah, the only people arguing this dumb argument are people on internet forums, and the idiot 'writers' who egg them on.

But the fact of the matter is that those same people arguing on the internet, are a very small percentage of the paying customers that really carry these sports.


I love both sports.

I'm a fight fan, and it trips me out how there are so many people who feel like they have to choose a side.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#11
^^^not only the internet forums the dumbasses on ESPN seem to always have to mention MMA when boxing in general is being discussed, which is annoying because these same guys don't talk about why tiger woods and golf is better than NASCAR, etc. So ESPN and other media dipshits add a lot of fuel to the fire. (remember leading up to the Oscar vs Floyd fight, all the media would ever talk about is why UFC is better, blah blah blah, they basically started a lot of the debate).

I'm not a fan of MMA, but I respect it as a sport. Any time two people risk their lives and fight it deserves respect, whether thats boxing, wrestling, mma, kick boxing, etc. etc. etc.

People need to understand and realize that MMA is a sport and boxing is a sport, they shouldn't be compared.