UFC sponsoring own fighters

such as ??? I don't recall hearing anyone saying this apart from the topic of the payscale ( wich is not revelant to inside the octogon performance or undeserved opportunity ) and Brock Lesnar treatment ( wich was clearly biased)

 

By the UFC sponsoring him. Can they "sell space" in Jones' shorts? ::

 

Uhhh, their cash cow loses its marketability?

 

LOL.. Didn't you read the other thread about Dana not being able to do in-house random drug test?

That's 2 in one week..

 

Ummmm... Yep, GSP hasn't been able to sell a single ticket since getting knocked out by Serra.

And Lesnar fought Overeem in an empty arena after being crushed by Cain.


Seriously?????

 

now this is just ridiculous. Of course a fighter loses marketability when he loses, it's outrageous to claim otherwise

 

Yes, seriously. Lets see how many tickets Brock sells now.

 

Brock will sell the shit out of some WWE tickets.

 

If Brock announced he was returning to the UFC, he could headline a card immediately.

It sucks but it's true.

 

I disagree. He is a joke in MMA now.

 

Then almost every fighter in MMA has lost their marketability.

The point is that a loss doesn't kill a cash cow in MMA. Sure a lose might diminish the attraction but a fighter like Jones won't 'lose his marketability' with a single loss.

Again, I named some guys that lost and were still the biggest draws in the game. So now you name some guys that lost a single fight and 'lost their marketability'..

Hell, I'll add another.. Couture got knocked silly by Rampage in a bout that sold 675K PPVS. And then Chuck pulled down almost 500K PPVS in a headline bout with freaking Keith Jardine... Keith Jardine!!!!!!

How stupid of the UFC for matching their cash cow with Rampage. He 'lost his marketability'.

Ok... Now your turn. I'll wait.

 

Please... They'd spin the marketing that he rushed back from stomach surgery against Overeem. But now he's training harder than ever. And probably mix in some quotes from trainers and sparring partners about how Brock is crushing everyone in the gym.

MMA fans wouldn't buy it but the same Brock fans that sucked this shit up before would be right back on his sack.

 

Pacquiao lost to Morales then went on to have bigger PPV numbers than he had before. DLH and Tyson still pulled outsanding ppv numbers no matter how many time they lost. LL rematch with Rahman did better business than the 1st fight. I guess a loss don't hurt a boxer makertabillity either

 

Keep dreaming..

 

Yep... I'm really not sure why you brought boxing into this. It wasn't a comparison.

But if that's all you got then I guess it will have to do.

 

nah, it points out that if you cherry pick some example, you can make practically any point look true, no matter how ridiculous it is

 

Facts are facts.


And again, I gave you the opportunity to name an MMA fighter that "lost his marketability' because of one loss.

And you responded with boxing examples...

Now THAT'S ridiculous.

 

whoever claimed that mma fighter lose all their makertability because of 1 loss ??? Certainly not me, I just said that that a loss has a negative impact on a fighter maketability wich it obviously is. Claiming otherwise is retarded but if you want to believe so, more power to you I guess

 

Im done trying to explain this to you.

 

He hasn't made a dent in the Raw ratings thus far. :: I think McMahon will be regretting the $5 million he gave Lesnar pretty soon.

 

:shit:

 

Of Course they Are...In a Few Years, it'll CLEARLY B "Advantageous" to Wait for &/or Accept ANY Sponsorhip Offer UFC Issues...



REED:dancingBaby:

 

Smart Man...

"Who, What, Where, When, Why" OR "I Don't Understand" is All Anthony is Good for, when UFC Salaries & Pay Scales are Brought Up...He's a Loyal Little SHILL Though...



REED:hammert:

 

Suck and Blow doing their UFC shill routine at full force in this thread.

 

See, this is where you show just how absolutely stupid you are. I've said absolutely nothing in support of the UFC in this thread.

You just don't have near the capacity to grasp that. At the end of the day, in all honesty, you probably have the lowest IQ of anyone that has ever posted on Fightbeat.

 

You, Suck, have joined Blow, in arguing that there is no apparent conflict of interest because fighters don't lose marketability if they lose. This is supporting the UFC, in this thread, by implying that UFC sponsorship of an individual fighter presents no incentive for the UFC to want that fighter to win.

This disingenuous spin, wahhhhh name a fighter who lost marketability because of one loss, is just being a transparent, strawman-making UFC shill. Suck, suck, suck.