Question by overgrow00: How many “MMA” fans will not watch Matt Linlands documentary “Fighting Politics”?
Why is it that EVERY UFC superstar has had good marketable traits?
Tito…
Liddel…
Couture…
Arvloski…
Silvia…
and the guy talked about in this film and the reason Matt Lindland was cut from the UFC (to keep him from destroying him)
Rich Franklin…
I think we can all agree Marketable traits DO NOT make you a better fighter… Is it a coincidence?
Or are the UFC fighter just the most skilled “marketable fighters” not actually the most skilled fighters???
Liddel may not be great looking but i think we can agree, standing next to Lindland, he is.
I didn’t mean Silvia I meant A. Silva…
All those guys i named are all somewhat “good looking” to a majority of woman, coming from a hetero male so i don’t know…
Just seems too coincidental…
Everybody should just pay download the mp4 and watch the movie…
I’m sure it will open the eyes of the majority of its viewers.
Lets face it most UFC fans just don’t know the darkside, behind the cage.
Ok maybe not Couture… But he had the whole captain america thing going for him… very very marketable… especially back in the day.
Best answer:
Answer by The king of barnie town
It might be that Dana gets good fighters, and than he teaches them about marketing. At the same time, Loyoto Machida is boring to watch (at least my coworkers didn’t like how he fights), and he isn’t really that charismatic, but he is still in the UFC.
This is were I’m getting at, its easy to make conspiracy theories. Its hard to check if they are facts (in some cases). Is there a conspiracy, I dont think so, but its possible (I can’t fully say yes or no). Why, there are a lot of variables, but you got me interested in “Fighting Politics.”
Add your own answer in the comments!
Related posts:
Loading ...
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I don’t think Liddel was all that marketable. He is not good looking, he doesn’t have a good physique, and he comes across as very boring in his interviews. He was a superstar because he was a great fighter in his day and because he was friends with Dana White.
Arlovski barely spoke English – not the most marketable, but I agree the UFC put a huge publicity campaign behind him.
Sylvia was just a tall freak show. I guess that is marketable.
Tito I think was the most marketable based on his charisma and personality, but he was the least successful of the fighters you listed!
If Lindland is bitter about being dropped by the UFC, he should have taken steps to make himself more marketable. Chael Sonnen figured that out, and now he has a title shot due to his relentless trash-talking. Lindland and Sonnen come from the same camp – I guess Sonnen learned from Lindland’s mistakes.
BTW, I do think Lindland in his prime could have beaten Franklin at 185, but Franklin was tough – I doubt Lindland would have “destroyed” him.
Dana is making money. There is no fan interest in a college wrestling match.
In the Frank Gotch days, when pro catch-wrestling was for real, guys would roll around for a long time, sometimes hours, to get a hold or a fall. The first Gotch win over Hackenschmidt
lated more than two hours.
Interest in the reality of it started to die off when matches lasted so long. Brazil vale tudo fights lasting hours would not go over well in the USA.
Fans demand action, and that is why Dana outlawed the gi and put in stalling rules.
BTW didn’t Lindland lose to UFC and Pride guys? He was not undefeated was he?
Dana is about money. His product is better than pro bxing as it is now, but it’s still about money.