Media mainstream sportscenter starts show with mma vs boxing debate

They showed cotto and judah as a top play. Thats all the coverage they gave it meanwhile they gave the U.S. open more coverage than a fucking superbowl. They need to get their stuff together.

I thought you were done talking about it ;D

If the HBO network would lease out more then 20 seconds of highlight footage then guaranteed it would have gotten loads more attention.

Quote:

---

This is why boxers have to wear pillows on there hand as some jackass newbe said.

---

As I said southakron314, and maybe you didn't read it, but I was using constructive criticism to show you guys how you sound when bashing MMA. There's no need for personal attacks man and I don't know why you'd do that. Give me a -1 but don't start name calling.

Oh, and I didn't say they didn't need 'pillows' sir. I was giving you a retrospective look on how MMA being called watered down is insulting to boxing as well, since boxing is the most DOCTORED and CONTAINED combat sport. I believe 'watered down' means less pure am I correct?

As for more punching power, there was a 'better chins' thread somewhere out there and most of us agreed that you can't compare people's personal strength and attribute it to their sport. Comparing Mike Tyson's power doesn't prove anything either, since its his personal strength that dictates his power, not the fact that he's a boxer. NO ONE hits like Mike, period.

All said, its just a debate. Everyone here seems like nice intelligent guys so lets be constructive.

Excellent posts here Nate, completely got you on the showing how ridiculous MMA bashers sound. Again, one thing to not like it but don't discredit it. Clicked you for that.

Thank you sir! You can see I'm not here to make enemies or insult anyone, I'm just trying to get some haters to at least respect a sport and its practitioners. I'm glad I joined the forum though, there are a lot of good threads and good people, not to mention fun debate. O0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punisher136

They showed cotto and judah as a top play. Thats all the coverage they gave it meanwhile they gave the U.S. open more coverage than a F****** superbowl. They need to get their stuff together.

---

On ESPN the day after the fight, when they showed the highlights of the fight, the idiot ESPN announcer kept pronouncing Miguel's name wrong. He pronounced the "Cot" part of Cotto like it rhymed with the word "hot." Cot-to.
I wanted to throw the TV out the window. Learn the guy's friggin' name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VanChilds

I thought you were done talking about it ;D

---

I'm talking about boxing and thats all i'm talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punisher136

They showed cotto and judah as a top play. Thats all the coverage they gave it meanwhile they gave the U.S. open more coverage than a F****** superbowl. They need to get their stuff together.

---

On ESPN the day after the fight, when they showed the highlights of the fight, the idiot ESPN announcer kept pronouncing Miguel's name wrong. He pronounced the "Cot" part of Cotto like it rhymed with the word "hot." Cot-to.
I wanted to throw the TV out the window. Learn the guy's friggin' name.

---

Thats completely unexcusable if you see some of the baseball names they crank out like theres nothing to it. They say Saltalamacchia without any problems but they can't say cotto? Oh well atleast Brian Kenney is there. He brings some boxing to the network and hes about the only one that knows anything about it.

UFC is for people with IQ's the same as their shoe size!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

UFC is for people with IQ's the same as their shoe size!

---

ahhh...another well thoughtout, mature and intelligent response...thanks for your input douche

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VanChilds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

UFC is for people with IQ's the same as their shoe size!

---

ahhh...another well thoughtout, mature and intelligent response...thanks for your input douche

---

Your Welcome! Just my opinion proven once again!
I'd rather watch two idiots fight in a pub!

There was a time when HBO had the luxury to charge networks, businesses, and people for showing clips or fights to the public.

Now we need the public.



But I think that it's good that boxing is underground. I usually meet only hardcore fans.
Would we want all these guys with IQ's as high as their shoe size to be talking about boxing as if they know everything? Trust me, it's annoying. I see it all the time when I go to sports bars showcasing UFC fights. Most of them think they know everything about fighting, when they just barely follow fights, or are new fans, or are just plain not real fight fans.

And now that boxing is falling in it's popularity, it may be a good thing for the fans.
It's starting to become common that two Millionaires stink out the joint on a hyped matchup.
Millionaire Wealth doesn't make a good foundation for good fighters. They start to care more about business than fighting. It leads to boring matchups and less hardcore fights. This has lowered the standards of the sport, set and pioneered by the blood and sweat of many great boxers of past eras.

Maybe boxers had this coming long ago. Their egos are their undoing.

Again where is your basis that boxing is in a state of dispairity? You do know how popular it is over seas right? So what if sports bars don't play boxing matches, it's their loss. This thing survived the great depression and two world wars but some upstart bs organisation (who isnt a monopoly and will soon be in huge business trouble) is gonna take it down? Next thing your gonna tell me is that we can actually effect the planets climate.... ::**

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

UFC is for people with IQ's the same as their shoe size!

---

Coming from you, I find that funny :fyou: by the way ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JT Rock

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

UFC is for people with IQ's the same as their shoe size!

---

Coming from you, I find that funny :fyou: by the way ;)

---

Have a :coolclick: JT. As a recent convert to MMA (proving I am NOT a bigot and can see my past my own prejudices ;)) I will join you in giving a collective :fyou: to this upstart.

Now swing over to the Let's Get it On room and help me with my bottom troubles :-*

I don't think boxing is in disparity yet either. I do think that their big draws have been retiring, and not a lot of new fighters are taking their place. Its a bit premature to say its in disrepair. The numbers do prove its not as popular as before, at least in the US, but with a bit of marketing and maybe combining some titles it could take off again with a few new stars. I like boxing as well as MMA and I hope it will become a thriving and entertaining sport again.

Quote:

---

UFC is for people with IQ's the same as their shoe size!

---

UFC is for people with penis' the same as their shoe size. Get it right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punisher136

Again where is your basis that boxing is in a state of dispairity? You do know how popular it is over seas right? So what if sports bars don't play boxing matches, it's their loss. This thing survived the great depression and two world wars but some upstart bs organisation (who isnt a monopoly and will soon be in huge business trouble) is gonna take it down? Next thing your gonna tell me is that we can actually effect the planets climate.... ::**

---

I think disparity is the wrong word. I'm 29 and have been a boxing fan since I was 12. I can say that there has been a definate drop in popularity in the US in the past 17 years, but i wouldn't call it disparity. The thing is boxing could fix its self easily. Have a federal commision, get rid of the ABC's, have singular champs in each weight division and a single raintg system, force champs to defend against the #1 contender at least once a year, put together better fight cards, put more fights on free TV. All of these things would do wonders. I love both boxing and MMA, I just feel more satisfied with the MMA product right now and that I get more bang for my buck. Why do you think UFC will be in financial trouble by the way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VanChilds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punisher136

Again where is your basis that boxing is in a state of dispairity? You do know how popular it is over seas right? So what if sports bars don't play boxing matches, it's their loss. This thing survived the great depression and two world wars but some upstart bs organisation (who isnt a monopoly and will soon be in huge business trouble) is gonna take it down? Next thing your gonna tell me is that we can actually effect the planets climate.... ::**

---

I think disparity is the wrong word. I'm 29 and have been a boxing fan since I was 12. I can say that there has been a definate drop in popularity in the US in the past 17 years, but i wouldn't call it disparity. The thing is boxing could fix its self easily. Have a federal commision, get rid of the ABC's, have singular champs in each weight division and a single raintg system, force champs to defend against the #1 contender at least once a year, put together better fight cards, put more fights on free TV. All of these things would do wonders. I love both boxing and MMA, I just feel more satisfied with the MMA product right now and that I get more bang for my buck. Why do you think UFC will be in financial trouble by the way?

---

People are still making money so their view is "If WE'RE not broke, why fix it?".

The UFC right now is doing its best job to be a monopoly in the mma market. After pride merged with them, there really isn't another mma branch that threatens them as far as ticket sales, ppv numbers, or fan base. However, there are many branches of mma promotional orgs being formed because they all want a piece of the money. Now if this thing stays as popular as it is down the road, it's inevitable that there will be another company that will rise in popularity that rivals the UFC (don't believe me just look at how many different brands are on tv now and this thing is in its birth stage of being mainstream).

Now if this brand pulls a pride and just joins up with the UFC this won't be a problem, however, if that group is just in it for the money they would want to try and overrun the UFC so they could be known as the dominant brand of mma. Remember the UFC isn't the sport itself, its a sanctioning body/promoter of the sport (like the ibf/wba but because of its monopoly like hold, atleast for now, you could probably compare it to the nfl/nba). The reason the nfl and other major sports outlets have stayed in business so long is because they only way you would be able to rival them is to come up with several hundred skilled athletes that have similar skills and can put on just as entertaining a show. You don't need nearly as many people to start an mma promotional organization and if one of these branches got a hold of a fighter who wins a few matches between orgs and then backs out and says "this brand isn't worthy of me" or some shit like that, you'd have a problem.

The UFC has done a great job of monopolizing the mma front so far, they've even coined mma as Ultimate fighting. I'm only suggesting this as a possibility because of how early mma is in developement and how money hungry america is as compared to the days when the nfl was formed (nobody wanted to watch the nfl back in the day so alot of investors didn't see a purpose to it).

I think the thing that will keep the UFC on the top of the hill is at the moment there just isn't enough top fighters to fill more than two orgs, and for the forseeable future the money is in the UFC. Hopefully with the integration of the bulk of the Pride fighters we will see more stacked PPV cards, and more of the up and comers on free TV. IFL/Bodog/k1 Heroes all have some fighters that could compete at the UFC/Pride level but not many and most of them were at one time in UFC/Pride. Until the sport grows to the point that there just isn't room for the UFC to contract and showcase all of the top fighters in the world I don't think we will see a true rival org. Even when Pride had arguably a deeper stable of fighters, was putting on great cards and selling out stadiums in Japan they never did a very good job of marketing to the US audience. A rival org will need to come from the states or do an awesome job of marketing its fighters and cards to the, at times, somewhat less MMA educated American.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nate17

I don't think boxing is in disparity yet either. I do think that their big draws have been retiring, and not a lot of new fighters are taking their place. Its a bit premature to say its in disrepair. The numbers do prove its not as popular as before, at least in the US, but with a bit of marketing and maybe combining some titles it could take off again with a few new stars. I like boxing as well as MMA and I hope it will become a thriving and entertaining sport again.

Quote:

---

UFC is for people with IQ's the same as their shoe size!

---

UFC is for people with penis' the same as their shoe size. Get it right.

---

Yah probablly centemeters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VanChilds

I think the thing that will keep the UFC on the top of the hill is at the moment there just isn't enough top fighters to fill more than two orgs, and for the forseeable future the money is in the UFC.   Hopefully with the integration of the bulk of the Pride fighters we will see more stacked PPV cards, and more of the up and comers on free TV.  IFL/Bodog/k1 Heroes all have some fighters that could compete at the UFC/Pride level but not many and most of them were at one time in UFC/Pride.  Until the sport grows  to the point that there just isn't room for the UFC to contract and showcase all of the top fighters in the world I don't think we will see a true rival org.  Even when Pride had arguably a deeper stable of fighters, was putting on great cards and selling out stadiums in Japan they never did a very good job of marketing to the US audience.  A rival org will need to come from the states or do an awesome job of marketing its fighters and cards to the, at times, somewhat less MMA educated American.

---

Thats what i'm saying, from a business stand point, they are doing an excellent job at monopolizing but because of the sudden popularity in such a short time, a rival org isn't completely out of the question. It's not as concrete a monopoly as the nfl was by the time a league was ready to challenge it (pro football was underground for atleast 30 years before anyone even paid attention to it. Hell the first two superbowls weren't popular even tho the greatest dynasty of all time won them). It'd be easier to form a rival org for this than it would any other pro league simply because its an individual event which requires a lot less people as opposed to a team event. People would probably watch an mma bout regardless of whose brand it is due to its shear popularity so funding will basically take care of itself. It'd probably take a few years to develope it well but it's definitely doable.

edit: Also, you have to be honest and admit that the IFL looks a lot like amateur hour compared to most outlets and that org has very mainstream coverage. Where i live its on foxsports and a local basic cable channel.

The only real MMA events that can even compare or hope to compare with UFC are Pride, WEC, and IFL. KoTC is all amatuer with no coverage, and EliteXC was a disaster.

UFC owns WEC and Pride now, and while IFL is growing and on mainstream TV I don't think it will ever grow as big. IFL is a team based MMA event, and while its pretty cool I think people want to see man vs. man and belt holders, not championship MMA teams.

Quote:

---

Yah probablly centemeters.

---

"Yah probablly" ha hahaah aha haha ha haha ha haha ha hahahahaaha. What a riot. You should write that one down and save it for later my man. Zing! Burn!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punisher136

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VanChilds

I think the thing that will keep the UFC on the top of the hill is at the moment there just isn't enough top fighters to fill more than two orgs, and for the forseeable future the money is in the UFC. Hopefully with the integration of the bulk of the Pride fighters we will see more stacked PPV cards, and more of the up and comers on free TV. IFL/Bodog/k1 Heroes all have some fighters that could compete at the UFC/Pride level but not many and most of them were at one time in UFC/Pride. Until the sport grows to the point that there just isn't room for the UFC to contract and showcase all of the top fighters in the world I don't think we will see a true rival org. Even when Pride had arguably a deeper stable of fighters, was putting on great cards and selling out stadiums in Japan they never did a very good job of marketing to the US audience. A rival org will need to come from the states or do an awesome job of marketing its fighters and cards to the, at times, somewhat less MMA educated American.

---

edit: Also, you have to be honest and admit that the IFL looks a lot like amateur hour compared to most outlets and that org has very mainstream coverage. Where i live its on foxsports and a local basic cable channel.

---

I watch the IFL, but yes its pretty bush league at times...there are a handful of guys I'd like to see move over, but for the most part their fighters couldn't compete at even a contender status in other orgs. It will be interesting to see how Horodecki evolves and grows as he gets more experience. Really the coaches are the biggest draw in IFL and their super fights