...OH, ONE MORE THING - PLEASE BOOKMARK US & VISIT DAILY!
By: Yanni Kyriacos, MMATorch Contributor
The UFC's recent introduction of fighter rankings, releasing of a slew of fighters such as Jon Fitch and Jacob Volkmann, and – no less important - their matchmaking decisions the likes of Nick Diaz vs. GSP and Chael Sonnen vs. Jon Jones, have all provoked overwhelmingly emotive responses from MMA fans. Once properly understood, the sheer level of emotional outpouring, in combination with its type (anger, dismay) and direction (towards the UFC and its figureheads), reveal truths about what the fans want from MMA and the UFC, and the way fans believe the UFC should run. Should being an operative word in this situation. What quickly becomes clear is that fans have unrealistic expectations, and it may be up to us to change them, as MMA cannot change for us.
Just as importantly, the discretionary approach the UFC takes to said processes and how such decisions are communicated is another factor at the core of the expressive reactions we have witnessed from its fan base. In truth, we don't understand how or why the UFC works the way it does, and therefore leaves us guessing: what happens next?
"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not." – Albert Einstein
One of the intrinsic issues serving as a catalyst for the past fortnight's craziness has been the inherent contrast of MMA as a show and as a sport. However, it is a concept which has been both examined and taken for granted. As fans, how often do we really consider how this manifests into the sport we hold so dear? The more aware we are of its bi-polar personality, the less likely we are to witness the emotive response from the fans when this contradiction boils over.
The fighter releases, newly introduced rankings, and matchmaking dilemmas provide for powerful examples as to how this unavoidable contradiction exists between the running of the UFC as a promotion and sport, a business and a martial art. Appreciating that it is impossible to have only one of these options is key to understanding said emotive response. While it is okay for fans to want their fruit cake and eat it too, they have to understand that it comes with ingredients which will never make it simply fruit or cake. This may seem simple and easy to understand, but if it is, why all the fuss? Well, it is in its ingredients, how it is different to other foods, and why it is important for it to be included in a balanced lifestyle that we start to understand why we keep coming back, seemingly without learning anything new. Yes, I am liking this analogy. Emotional outcry is a causal result of expectations not being met, and if the UFC will not manage, or make clear our expectations as fans, then we have to do it for ourselves.
Context is important. As MMA is largely a new sport, it is fair to assume that many of its fans have been supporters of different codes in the past – football, basketball, soccer etc. Whilst many analysts like to compare MMA to other sports (here's looking at you Mike Chiappetta), there are some innately distinct differences in their function and premise.
Irrespective of this, fans bring over expectations deriving from such sports which cannot be replicated. For example, two teams playing off against each other from a pre-determined roster, three teams being relegated or promoted from differing divisions based on their cumulative points at the end of a season, measuring wins with said points or percentages, having well defined seasons and matches in a given time period, often, culminating in a finals or playoff type system, etc. In many sports, a cumulative total of not just the wins/draws/loses is considered, but also the number of points or goals scored or achieved in each respective match.
There is an intrinsic, consistent, and fair involvement of math and logic, where results and outcomes are causal. A well-defined process is laid out and properly understood. This is all impossible in MMA, and it drives us crazy – resulting in the above emotional outcry. Rather, it is a constant grind between art and science, with naive desperation from its fans attempting to find equilibrium.
At the heart of our troubles is the innate want of people to measure things in a sport and organisation where opinion and money are the most powerful forces in judging worth. We measure in an attempt to understand a concept better for the purpose of managing its progress. For example, at the end of the season, if a team is in the bottom three they are relegated, if a player wins a quarter final, they move to the semi-final, if that same player gains more cumulative points than the player above them, they will overtake them in the rankings. It is to compare, contrast, and understand meaning when data is brought together. However this largely cannot be achieved in MMA: wins, losses, submissions, knockouts, takedowns, speed, creativity, entertainment, and popularity cannot be converted into such information on an objective level.
Moreover, in stark contrast to other sports, we tend to reward performance and behaviour as much as results: Fight of the Night, Knockout of the Night, Submission of the Night – how many sports organisations have an incentive scheme around "goal of the week" or "rally of the week"? No matter how desperately we want otherwise, results and outcomes will always be determined and judged subjectively. While other sports may have referees the way MMA does, they do not also have judges. How, then, in amongst all this chaos, can we legitimately be shocked when the UFC powerbrokers wave their hand?
We are bound by the subjective nature of the sport. It makes us salivate, and then leaves a bad taste in our mouth. I believe most of us can agree that an Anthony Pettis liver kick against a previously unfinished (minus one submission) Donald Cerrone is worth more than a Nik Lentz grinding win over Diego Nunes. But what is this "worth"? That Jon Fitch's consistency and superfluous results should keep him in the UFC? That surely Chael Sonnen does not deserve a title shot? That Melvin Guillard did not deserve a 30-27 over Jamie Varner, or that Josh Rosenthal should have stopped Chris Weidman from landing an extra 10 punches to Mark Munoz's unconscious face? While this feels so incorrect, it is impossible to find what is correct in an objective way. What's true for you will not be true for others, and it is important to remember how much more prevalent this is in MMA. Welcome to grey space people: try and enjoy it, as you are here for the long haul!
"A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a moulder of consensus." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Where does that leave the UFC as an organisation, in their decision making, and as a leader in the sport? Well, there is something they can do. Before we were all emotional, we were confused. We didn't understand these decisions that they made. I believe it is in part the job of the UFC to ensure that such a confused and emotional reaction does not happen – they can mitigate its degree. It is not enough to argue that as fans "we don't get it." As part of the UFC's leadership, it is accountable to engage its followers by educating them on what the end or goal is, and build confidence through communicating a transparent, mindful path.
We need to know how they came to the decisions they came to, and why. This manages our expectation. We invest in the fighters, but how are we to know they will not be cut the following week? We invest in their futures, but it is clear that matchmaking is highly discretionary. An educated customer is a good one, and the UFC should know this.
Consider this whenever you explore the unknown unknowns, known unknowns and unknown knowns of the UFC. As an example, Dana White claimed that Matt Grice would not be cut despite losing to Dennis Bermudez.
To wit: "That's one of those fights where there's no loser. There is no loser in that fight. As a fight fan, those are the kind of fights you want to watch. And those are the kind of fights where guys won't get cut. It's pretty easy – pretty simple.
No Dana, it isn't. How is there no loser? How was Jon Fitch more of a loser than Matt Grice? How does Dana determine what fights want to be watched? What are the kinds of fights? Dana claimed that on a base payout of $66,000 per fight, Jon Fitch was "super f***ing expensive." In a sport without a salary cap, how is that determined?
We deserve to know how and why they came to the decisions they did, and how this fits in with what we should expect in the long term.
However, it appears that the ambiguity around their decision making is something which they try to foster. When the devil is in the detail, sometimes it is better to view things from a distance. The UFC brings their decision-making to light when they believe it could generate good publicity, but when it potentially won't, the cards stay close to their chest (releasing rankings but not telling us how and how much fighters get paid). They accept the role of leader and trailblazer when it suits them, but deflect or reject accountability when it doesn't. Do not expect the UFC to change, as it does not have to, this is simply a recommendation.
While it may not matter to the UFC, I believe it should. It is a question or genuineness, engagement, ideals, and customer centricity. All of which the UFC is rejecting. In a world where perception is reality, and emotion is high, it is difficult to read between the lines – the UFC should know this and act accordingly.
It will always come back to the fans. For us, it is a fine balance between accepting the limitations of a subjective sport, while demanding transparency from those who wield that subjectivity. Unfortunately, the fight game has a short term memory; how quickly do you eat the unhealthy cake, feel bad about it, and simply go back for another slice not long after? It makes me wonder whether we will we ever be able to come to terms with the contradiction that is MMA? And whether we will ask why the UFC should treat us mean, yet keep us keen?
Wanna fight about it? Follow me on twitter @yannikyriacos
(Attention MMATorch app users: Make sure to upgrade to the latest edition of the MMATorch app on your iPhone, iPad, or Android device!)
Jamie Penick, editor-in-chief
(mmatorcheditor@gmail.com)
STAFF COLUMNISTS: Shawn Ennis - Jason Amadi
Frank Hyden - Rich Hansen
Chris Park - Matt Pelkey
Interested in joining MMATorch's writing team? Send idea for a theme to your column (for Specialist section) or area of interest (i.e. TV Reporter) along with a sample of writing to mmatorch@gmail.com.
