MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
Earlier today Kid Nate posted an interesting juxtaposition of ideas on the current need (or lack thereof) for an MMA sanctioning body. Fightlinker responded to Dave Meltzer calling for said sanctioning body by pointing out the mess that boxing has found itself in.
Frequent contributer to the site Robnashville pointed out what a lot of people do when he said:
There is a very big difference between the MMA promotions and the boxing alphabet "sanctioning bodies" and it is very simple. It all comes down to placement of power.
As Bob Verdi put it "Boxing is a rather amorphous body, though recognizable because it is headless."
In boxing the money is controlled by promoters, then the alphabets. Organizations line the WBA/WBC/IBF all exist to gather money off of fees by "sanctioning fights." What happens is an endless circle of corruption and basically a fancy money laundering scheme. It is pretty much just considered common practice that a promoter get his guys ranked highly by the commissions by underhanded business tactics. So a promoter uses influence to get his fighter ranked highly by an organization. That organization can then declare him a "mandatory challenger" for the championship. This means that the champion now must defend his title against that mandatory challenger in the next fight (or sometimes within a set amount of time) or risk being stripped of the title. This is how we often end up not seeing the true top boxers face off but instead taking on manditory challengers with no track record justifying their position in the rankings.
Now the champion and his promoter have to make a deal to fight the mandatory because, hey...let's face it, championship fights draw more interest and money than non-title bouts. The commission now gets to take a fee from each fighter just so that the fight can be "for the title."
Commissions have little to no interest in putting together the best matchups but rather just satisfying the crazy whims of the Don Kings and Bob Arums of the world.
Where things get even weirder is that these commissions pull corrupt moves that go against their own initial corrupt plans.
See Carlos Manuel Baldomir upsetting Zab Judah for the IBF, WBA and WBC world titles in 2006. Baldomir chose not to pay the sanctioning fees of the WBA and IBF. So what did the IBF do? Decided that Zab Judah should remain IBF champion...even after losing. What about the WBA? They decided to put their title on Luiz Collazo, not even making him fight. The WBC had declared Baldomir the mandatory challenger, which was likely the reason why he chose to pay their sanctioning fees. The sheer amount of sanctioning fees that have to be paid in situations like this serve as a punishment to actually try to clean up the convoluted title picture. Judah came in as champion of three different bodies, Baldomir defeated him and we were left with three different men holding titles.
Now in MMA you have power (and money) controlled by independent organizations. The focus of a promotion like the UFC is to make the most money possible. And while this does at times mean that fighter purses seem disproportionately small, it also means that fans are generally treated to the fights they most want to see. Sure cross-promotional dream matches remain in the minds of fans rather than in the cage/ring/YAMMA thingy but when a promotion can do a fight that is both good for the fans, and good for their wallets it is likely going to happen.
A lot of people clamor for an "Ali Act" in MMA. But the point of the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act was to provide guidelines for boxing as it had no league or central rule-making body. MMA has several leagues, each providing their own rules (within the guidelines of state athletic commissions). An "Ali Act," at least the exact point of the act, doesn't work for MMA. I don't disagree with the need for slightly more oversight into the contracts fighters sign, but generally I think the current landscape of MMA is a lot better than people credit it as being. This is especially true when compared to boxing. When a fighter is a free agent he is able to seek out the best deal from a large group of organizations. He is not forced to pay fees to compete in these organizations should his ultimate goal be to be champion. A fighter in MMA has options galore in a sport where promotions want to put on the best and most compelling matches possible.
While in boxing...well I'll leave you with another Bob Verdi quote that is all too often true:
"The bell that tolls for all in boxing belongs to a cash register."
0 recs |
12
comments
Comments
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
by nitro on Apr 8, 2008 1:19 AM EDT 0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
And you pretty much answered your own question. The size of an organization has a lot to do with who is considered a contender as well as fan interest. Fan interest in Baroni/Hose was very high and it helped ICON to put that fight on their card. Baroni was a guy with experience in just about all the biggest companies in MMA history and putting him against Hose for a smaller promotion's title made fine sense. Baroni was inches from finishing the fight on more than one occasion in the first round.
What I'm really saying is that in MMA you're getting fights based more on fan interest than on the interests of the promoters and sanctioning bodies like you get with boxing. I've got to think that is a better and less corrupt way of doing things. And this is from a boxing fan.
by brentbrookhouse on
Apr 8, 2008 1:29 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
by nitro on
Apr 8, 2008 1:50 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
There is a reason why NFL, MLB, NBA...etc players have to sign contracts stating that they can't ride motorcycles (in most cases), play in recreational sports leagues...etc.
But I couldn't agree more on the production values of the UFC. I just don't fault the UFC for Rogan saying something incredibly dumb. Then again, I like Rogan as a broadcaster and think that the "rape choke" thing was just a one off stupid remark. Were Dana a serious "man in charge" he'd probably have grabbed Rogan after the show and smacked him on the nose with a rolled up newspaper and given him a "bad doggie" chat. Situations like saying rape choke on national TV or Manny's stupid fake touching gloves are the times and places for the angry Dana White to come out (behind the scenes).
by brentbrookhouse on
Apr 8, 2008 10:09 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
by mattwatt on Apr 8, 2008 2:40 AM EDT 0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
by brentbrookhouse on
Apr 8, 2008 9:38 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
by Luke Thomas on Apr 8, 2008 11:09 AM EDT 0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
by AJB on Apr 8, 2008 11:49 AM EDT 0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
My main intent with this line was to put forth the idea that while many folks seem to see the mma model as somehow superior to the boxing model... in the end you have basically the same thing: disparate bodies handing out belts willy nilly with a true notion of who the best fighters in each weight class being lost as a consequence. In boxing you have more cross promotional (Arum/King/golden Boy) match-ups but, for many of the reasons you mentioned above about the sanctioning bodies, the belts still end up all over the place. While in MMA, you have strict promotional ties, with little co-mingling of top talent and rarely concrete results to validate one's claim to be the best in a given weight division.
While i agree with your blasting of boxing's nefarious sanction bodies (WBC's Jose Suliman may be the most corrupt man in sports), I don't see the current structure of MMA as a panacea or better mousetrap. In mma, the seeming improvement over the boxing structure is that when pointing fingers at who screwed you over... there's one less finger to point since your promoter is also your de facto sanctioning body. If you got promised a title shot, bro, and you didn't end up getting it, you won't be asking "Don't you know who i am?," you just suck it up and take the next fight offered because the sanctioning body that gave and revoked your title shot is also the guy signing your paychecks.... good luck fighting city hall....
I'm not sure what the happy medium is but neither MMA as we know it now or boxing as it has de-evolved is it.
by robnashville on Apr 8, 2008 5:09 PM EDT 0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
by brentbrookhouse on
Apr 8, 2008 5:55 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
believe me, i'm no proponent of sanctioning for MMA, i don't want to see the folks over at WAMMA get their grubby hands on the sport...
by robnashville on
Apr 8, 2008 6:10 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Re: MMA in Need of A Sanctioning Body? Nah
by Luke Thomas on
Apr 8, 2008 9:35 PM EDT
up
0 recs



