MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[Caine2878]

I definately feel MMA needs some kind of amateur system in place in order to become a legit sport. Maybe something like Gold Gloves in boxing and have MMA National championships etc.,

[Pasha K]

1.- Unsportmanship attitudes, MMA is still a very fresh sport and many people dont accept it. And when you see fighters talking a lot of shit to eachother and then continue to hitting the opponent after he is KOd the obviosuly you will think that this "sport" is no more than a brutal fight inside a cage between thugs.

2.- LnP: The casual fan will watch a fight and when he will see LnP it will become extremely boring to him so he wont be watching MMA anymore. (Note: LnP is not the same as ground game)

3.- 10 point system, it makes many desicions very controversial. bring the Pride scoring system.

4.- As RH said, TUF is in part hurting the sport. Its an idea that could easily help MMA, but they are using it in a way that its only hurting the sport. They like to show polemical scenes, unsportmanships attitudes...in resume, they introduce the whole thing as "a reality show where thugs are involved" instead of a reality show where Martial Artists are involved. It is supossed that martial Arts is all about respect, honor. In UFC its all the opposite.

[claycollett3]

Great points. The ranking sys, judges, and co-promotions are someting that definately need to be adressed in an aggressive manner. THe UFC does need to loosen up a bit, too many by-the-way fans think its UFC fighting, not MMA, something needs to be done to change the masses assumptions of what true mixed martial arts is.

[apardo]

You guys might of hated me for this but a few years ago I was actually an Executive Producer and Production Manager for a show we were going to make.

The show in summary was going to be about up and coming fighters, veterans, or "Fighter in Training" (basically someone who is training to fight but hasnt made the jump to pro yet)

It was going to be a 3 - 6 Month Show actually (it still wasnt decided) It was basically going to go Discipline by Discipline and at the end of ea. Discipline there was going to be matches (Example: BJJ, at the end of the training period we would have BJJ only matches with BJJ rules (gi or no gi)) The Disciplines decided were BJJ, Judo, Wrestling, Muay Thai, and Boxing. Now for the last two months, the fighters could choose which discipline they wanted to keep on training because there would be an MMA Tournament to conclude the season.

The Idea was to invite the people from various MMA Promotions (We had like 5 Promotions I believe who were loving this idea and were on board)to scout these guys during the tournament and decide whether they want any of these guys in their promotion.



(copyright 2006 - 2012 yellow paint productions, llc. all rights reserved.

[sikk]

I think the Organizations names kinda hurt the sport. I mean trying to sell your Organizations sport of MMA to people who have no clue what it is and stating that you represent a company called the Ultimate Fighting Championships, Strikeforce, Pride, Sengoku, or any of the other Organizations out there, just plain sounds rediculous. Where is my National Mixed Martial Arts League at???? I mean sure the name UFC has been around since the beginning but, if I had no clue what it was and you were trying to get me to put it in the Olympics or something I would laugh in your face. Until some promotion takes themselves seriously, they shouldn't expect the rest of the world to, and a name is how you introduce yourself, if you fail there it's hard to come back from.

[joeodd2]

Originally Posted by stpierrecanada

I like this thread and am not bashing at all, just some input with 1 and 2.

1. Yes it is a shame sometimes when guy's hit opponents late, but we have seen some guy's get up and win the fight after taking some ridiculous shots. We have seen it over and over again, you can watch a bunch if Nog's fights, or Saku's and they were 90% out of it and ended up coming back in the fight. We see it all the time, and when you hurt a guy you want to finish him and leave no doubt that he is done. When you're fighting the best in the world you wanna make sure you win the fight and make damn sure of it. I admit sometimes they can see they are completely out but watch some Saku fights and you'll be amazed.

2. Rankings cannot accurately be done. They would have to make an exact system of how people are ranked(ie:finishes, good performance, bad stoppage win/loss, etc). It would never be accurate anyways because first of all everyone has different opinions and a big org like UFC's rankings couldn't be accurate because if Maia wins a couple more lets say and he is the #1 contender clearly, the UFC won't put him there on that list as #1 because that would mean he is getting the title shot for sure, and if anderson was still champion, Maia is never getting another shot at him for the belt..

Most guys are not freaks of nature, the two fighters that you mention are the exceptions to the rule. When a fighter goes stiff and his toes curl....he's out. We've seen lots of examples of guys taking 3,4, hell even more shots on a knocked out opponent. If a politician really wanted to keep MMA out of his or her state they would just loop those late hits together. This is a problem that fighters have to address if they want to be taken seriously as athletes and not modern day bloodsport gladiators.

Another thing, the UFC should change that ridiculous promo before every event. It's an over the top exaggeration of what MMA is all about. Having a gladiator go out with a sword and shield implies more violence than what the sport is about. Personally I think the UFC's over the top production sometimes hurts the sport.

Originally Posted by apardo

You guys might of hated me for this but a few years ago I was actually an Executive Producer and Production Manager for a show we were going to make.

The show in summary was going to be about up and coming fighters, veterans, or "Fighter in Training" (basically someone who is training to fight but hasnt made the jump to pro yet)

It was going to be a 3 - 6 Month Show actually (it still wasnt decided) It was basically going to go Discipline by Discipline and at the end of ea. Discipline there was going to be matches (Example: BJJ, at the end of the training period we would have BJJ only matches with BJJ rules (gi or no gi)) The Disciplines decided were BJJ, Judo, Wrestling, Muay Thai, and Boxing. Now for the last two months, the fighters could choose which discipline they wanted to keep on training because there would be an MMA Tournament to conclude the season.

The Idea was to invite the people from various MMA Promotions (We had like 5 Promotions I believe who were loving this idea and were on board)to scout these guys during the tournament and decide whether they want any of these guys in their promotion.



(copyright 2006 - 2012 yellow paint productions, llc. all rights reserved.

Sounds like a great Idea, but....now I do hate you though.....eh can't win for losing huh guy?

[apardo]

Originally Posted by joeodd2

Sounds like a great Idea, but....now I do hate you though.....eh can't win for losing huh guy?

Touchè

[Goremire]

Regarding the four points raised by the author, I have to disagree that they are 'hurting' MMA as a legitimate sport.

1. Shots on the ground after a guy is knocked out.

- Sorry, but 'knocked out' is not always a clear cut definition, never mind how much the author would like to frame it as such. It is asinine to compare dropping bombs on a downed opponent while the referee is in the process of stopping the fight to 'ruffing' (roughing?) the passer or late hits in the NFL - the situations are not comparable.

The two UFC rules that sum up this situation being described are as follows:

26. Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee.
27. Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded the end of the period of unarmed combat.

Can anyone off the top of their heads remember any examples of the above ? The only ones I can think of are Babalu vs. Heath or Daley vs. Koscheck, but both fighters got their walking papers after pulling that shit, and rightly so. Also, 'attacking' the opponent implies (to me at least) the commencing of an attack, not continuing one that started prior to the opposing fighter 'being in the care of the referee.'

Even an example like Hendo vs. Bisping (Which was pretty controversial when it happened) doesn't prove the point - if you re-watch the fight (or even a gif of the finish) the referee is nowhere near Hendo when he lands the last shot. It is not the fighter's job to decide when the fight is over - it's the referee's. Plain and simple.

Given the context of the sport and the rules that surround beating an opponent with your fists to the point where the referee intervenes I think ths situation is adequately policed. In fact, we can all think of a number of recent examples where fighter safety has perhaps been too heavily considered (in the form of early stoppages.) So I dispute the point the author is trying to make in this instance.

2. Arbitrary ranking systems within organizations. Instead of going off of some kind of mathematical system, most orgs just choose who they think deserves a title shot

- I'm curious as to what evidence the author offers to support his assertation that a 'mathmatical system' would be more effective in all situations than the current one based on the subjective assessment of matchmakers. Because in a 'mathmatical system' there is no way that Brock Lesnar would be the heavyweight champion of the UFC. Because 'mathematically' there is no way that Brock Lesnar (with a 2-1 record) beats beats Randy Couture in a World Heavyweight Title match - except in real life.

I get what this guy is saying, but damn, show some evidence that the current system would be worse in all facets than a hypothetical (and as yet undefined) system instead of just stating it as a fact.

3. Lack of Co-promotion

- Here the author seems to want to partially acknowledge the benefits of not co-promoting ("Yes I know the money argument concerning the UFC and co-promoting") while bemoaning drawbacks that may-or-not be related to it ("many uneducated media people and politicians, refer to MMA as "Ultimate Fighting" - which the author asserts is due to the UFC's disinterest in co-promotion without offering evidence) while at the same time praising the joys of co-promotion while ignoring its pitfalls. (For example, who here would seriously want to try and negotiate with M1? This is not a Fedor dig by the way, I genuinely interested, who here would really, really want to negotiate with these guys? And would you do so based on the experience of those who had gone before?)

Yes, I can see the benefits of co-promotion - who wouldn't want a genuine tourny featuring all the major promotion's champions to crown a genuine 'World MMA Champ' in any given weightclass each year? While that is an admirable goal, to achieve this would require some serious navigation of some seriously rocky relationships between aforementioned promotions to achieve, and I just don't think it's feasible - as sad as that may be.

4. More MMA on network and primetime. Strikeforce has done a good job in that regard. But we need more. Bellator is doing good too, if we had a MMA equalivant to Friday Night Fights, then I think MMA would grow leaps and bounds into the mainstream.

- Awesome idea - who is going to pay for this? Seriously, who is going to invest the money (which presumably would be earned from PPV sales?) to get this up and running for long enough to build an audience base large enough where it will be financially self-sustaining? Any ideas?

Yeesh, I'm not too impressed with the above article. Truth be told, if you take the basic premise of the article ("Things that hurt MMA as a legit sport") Both SWIFTboy and Rivethead do better jobs at outlining genuine issues in this area.

Skip the opening post and go straight to their contributions if you want some decent discussion on this particular topic.

[Chute_Boxe44]

Originally Posted by joeodd2

Most guys are not freaks of nature, the two fighters that you mention are the exceptions to the rule. When a fighter goes stiff and his toes curl....he's out. We've seen lots of examples of guys taking 3,4, hell even more shots on a knocked out opponent. If a politician really wanted to keep MMA out of his or her state they would just loop those late hits together. This is a problem that fighters have to address if they want to be taken seriously as athletes and not modern day bloodsport gladiators.

Another thing, the UFC should change that ridiculous promo before every event. It's an over the top exaggeration of what MMA is all about. Having a gladiator go out with a sword and shield implies more violence than what the sport is about. Personally I think the UFC's over the top production sometimes hurts the sport.




Sounds like a great Idea, but....now I do hate you though.....eh can't win for losing huh guy?

Your right man, it just looks bad to anyone who doesn't truly understand the sport and how it works. Like when Carwin bashed Mir with those extra shots, or Yvel hit Rizzo a few to many times. In the end the ref should have stepped in and did his job when it was obvious. It's even hard to justify it sometimes, but in the end the refs need to be more aware of set rules in the sport and it shouldn't change no matter the commission. For example Oliveria got a ball shot the other night and he's suppose to get 5 minutes regardless of whats happening in the fight. But the paricular ref was egging him on the whole time to start fighting again. These little differneces should not be looked past and are simple enough that they should be universal.

These little things just show us how the sport is still very much in its growth stage. We see them all the time, still they happen regardless.

[joeodd2]

Originally Posted by apardo

You guys might of hated me for this but a few years ago I was actually an Executive Producer and Production Manager for a show we were going to make.

The show in summary was going to be about up and coming fighters, veterans, or "Fighter in Training" (basically someone who is training to fight but hasnt made the jump to pro yet)

It was going to be a 3 - 6 Month Show actually (it still wasnt decided) It was basically going to go Discipline by Discipline and at the end of ea. Discipline there was going to be matches (Example: BJJ, at the end of the training period we would have BJJ only matches with BJJ rules (gi or no gi)) The Disciplines decided were BJJ, Judo, Wrestling, Muay Thai, and Boxing. Now for the last two months, the fighters could choose which discipline they wanted to keep on training because there would be an MMA Tournament to conclude the season.

The Idea was to invite the people from various MMA Promotions (We had like 5 Promotions I believe who were loving this idea and were on board)to scout these guys during the tournament and decide whether they want any of these guys in their promotion.



(copyright 2006 - 2012 yellow paint productions, llc. all rights reserved.

Originally Posted by joeodd2

Most guys are not freaks of nature, the two fighters that you mention are the exceptions to the rule. When a fighter goes stiff and his toes curl....he's out. We've seen lots of examples of guys taking 3,4, hell even more shots on a knocked out opponent. If a politician really wanted to keep MMA out of his or her state they would just loop those late hits together. This is a problem that fighters have to address if they want to be taken seriously as athletes and not modern day bloodsport gladiators.

Another thing, the UFC should change that ridiculous promo before every event. It's an over the top exaggeration of what MMA is all about. Having a gladiator go out with a sword and shield implies more violence than what the sport is about. Personally I think the UFC's over the top production sometimes hurts the sport.




Sounds like a great Idea, but....now I do hate you though.....eh can't win for losing huh guy?

Originally Posted by Goremire

Regarding the four points raised by the author, I have to disagree that they are 'hurting' MMA as a legitimate sport.

- Sorry, but 'knocked out' is not always a clear cut definition, never mind how much the author would like to frame it as such. It is asinine to compare dropping bombs on a downed opponent while the referee is in the process of stopping the fight to 'ruffing' (roughing?) the passer or late hits in the NFL - the situations are not comparable.

The two UFC rules that sum up this situation being described are as follows:

26. Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee.
27. Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded the end of the period of unarmed combat.

Can anyone off the top of their heads remember any examples of the above ? The only ones I can think of are Babalu vs. Heath or Daley vs. Koscheck, but both fighters got their walking papers after pulling that shit, and rightly so. Also, 'attacking' the opponent implies (to me at least) the commencing of an attack, not continuing one that started prior to the opposing fighter 'being in the care of the referee.'

Even an example like Hendo vs. Bisping (Which was pretty controversial when it happened) doesn't prove the point - if you re-watch the fight (or even a gif of the finish) the referee is nowhere near Hendo when he lands the last shot. It is not the fighter's job to decide when the fight is over - it's the referee's. Plain and simple.

Given the context of the sport and the rules that surround beating an opponent with your fists to the point where the referee intervenes I think ths situation is adequately policed. In fact, we can all think of a number of recent examples where fighter safety has perhaps been too heavily considered (in the form of early stoppages.) So I dispute the point the author is trying to make in this instance.

- I'm curious as to what evidence the author offers to support his assertation that a 'mathmatical system' would be more effective in all situations than the current one based on the subjective assessment of matchmakers. Because in a 'mathmatical system' there is no way that Brock Lesnar would be the heavyweight champion of the UFC. Because 'mathematically' there is no way that Brock Lesnar (with a 2-1 record) beats beats Randy Couture in a World Heavyweight Title match - except in real life.

I get what this guy is saying, but damn, show some evidence that the current system would be worse in all facets than a hypothetical (and as yet undefined) system instead of just stating it as a fact.

- Here the author seems to want to partially acknowledge the benefits of not co-promoting ("Yes I know the money argument concerning the UFC and co-promoting") while bemoaning drawbacks that may-or-not be related to it ("many uneducated media people and politicians, refer to MMA as "Ultimate Fighting" - which the author asserts is due to the UFC's disinterest in co-promotion without offering evidence) while at the same time praising the joys of co-promotion while ignoring its pitfalls. (For example, who here would seriously want to try and negotiate with M1? This is not a Fedor dig by the way, I genuinely interested, who here would really, really want to negotiate with these guys? And would you do so based on the experience of those who had gone before?)

Yes, I can see the benefits of co-promotion - who wouldn't want a genuine tourny featuring all the major promotion's champions to crown a genuine 'World MMA Champ' in any given weightclass each year? While that is an admirable goal, to achieve this would require some serious navigation of some seriously rocky relationships between aforementioned promotions to achieve, and I just don't think it's feasible - as sad as that may be.

- Awesome idea - who is going to pay for this? Seriously, who is going to invest the money (which presumably would be earned from PPV sales?) to get this up and running for long enough to build an audience base large enough where it will be financially self-sustaining? Any ideas?

Yeesh, I'm not too impressed with the above article. Truth be told, if you take the basic premise of the article ("Things that hurt MMA as a legit sport") Both SWIFTboy and Rivethead do better jobs at outlining genuine issues in this area.

Skip the opening post and go straight to their contributions if you want some decent discussion on this particular topic.

Well.............somebody's not getting a Christmas Card from me this year........