Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

UFC on Versus 6: Cruz v Johnson? Really?

Options
  • 25-07-2011 6:22pm
    #1
    MrStuffins
    Registered Users Posts: 19,166 ✭✭✭✭


    I'm not sure if this has been discussed already but:

    Am I the only one who is surprised that UFC have chosen to place a title fight on free tv? I know they;ve done it before but this was because the show was on in the UK (Silva v Hendo).

    They chose to hold a show in the UK and make it a numbered show, UFC 138, and have it "co-headlined" by 2 fights with very little significance. Leben v Munoz (a popular also-ran v a popular rising star) and Pickett v Barao (a UFC debutant v a fast rising contender). But they stick a title fight on free live tv?

    I can see the pros (great exposure for the best guys in the lighter divisions etc) but at the same time..... is it kind of belittling the FW Championship? I mean, would they put a HW title fight on live tv?

    Also, is this all part of UFC's tit for tat battle with Spike TV?

    What are your thoughts?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    scudzilla
    Registered Users Posts: 11,920 ✭✭✭✭scudzilla


    Seems odd alright, maybe it's a sweetener for Spike and helps any future contract talks, if they promised them a title fight why not make it the most newest and less well known division.

    Wasn't that Dampage v Hendo in the UK.


  • Options
    #3
    Richy06
    Registered Users Posts: 963 ✭✭✭Richy06


    I think it may be in a bid to get a ratings spike. The last two Live On Versus specials have been a case of diminishing returns as far as ratings go. Probably plays into the whole negotiations with Spike also.


  • Options
    #4
    MrStuffins
    Registered Users Posts: 19,166 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    scudzilla wrote: »
    Seems odd alright, maybe it's a sweetener for Spike and helps any future contract talks, if they promised them a title fight why not make it the most newest and less well known division.

    Wasn't that Dampage v Hendo in the UK.

    Was indeed. My bad! I thought Rampage v Hendo but my fingers said Silva v Hendo.


  • Options
    #5
    SDTimeout
    Registered Users Posts: 2,660 ✭✭✭SDTimeout


    I said in the other thread it's two things. One Richy pointed on above.

    The last free card UFC did on spike I believe it was beaten in ratings by a repeat the UFC showed that weekend.

    Secondly, we saw the contract Cruz was on for his last fight, 20,000$. UFC when re-negotiating deals go by PPV buys and merchandise etc. This will introduce Cruz to the free audience. UFC 132 was the best PPV in a long long time yet did poor buys. Why ? Because Cruz and Faber were the headliners.


  • Options
    #6
    weemcd
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭weemcd


    Very lame that a full numbered event in the UK has a low profile main fight, while a free to air versus card has a full title fight on it. Doesn't bode well for any future cards we might see in uk & ireland, probably the kind of standard we are going to have to get used to, if we are lucky enough to even get events over here.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement