In Defense of Golden Boy/Affliction Boxing/MMA Cards

by Luke Thomas on Sep 15, 2008 1:17 PM EDT in News Comment 39 comments

BloodyElbow.com's own Michael Rome pushed the idea that if this new Golden Boy/Affliction effort can focus their energy on promotiong main events rather than full cards with less marketable and sometimes expensive fighters, then profitability and success are possible.

The idea is compelling even if there are questions about the frequency of putting on cards with enough main event heft to carry the day. But let's propose a card that would accomplish the mutual goal of the two companies. Let's say the aired main card on PPV would look something like this:

-- Tito Ortiz vs. Fedor Emelianenko
-- Manny Pacquiao vs. Oscar De La Hoya
-- Bernard Hopkins vs. Kelly Pavlik
-- Andrei Arlovski vs. Josh Barnett

This may be overextending the abilities of the company to line up this many stars on one card either from a financial or logistical perspective. That being said, if we accept the possibility of something like this, wouldn't this card be purchased by every human in the known universe?

This card would be more than sum of it's parts, wouldn't it? It's not as simple as boxing fans plus MMA fans equal lots of PPV purchases. It's that this co-promoted event could be star studded enough to force recognition that this many key players creates an event.

Again, I could be proposing a card this is simply too hard to produce, but if are correct that only main eventers will be featured on these cards we are looking at star power to overcome any weird marriages or deep divisions.

1 recs | Comment 39 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

This one couldn’t happen, because the pricing of the show would just be too expensive for everyone involved. For boxing I meant something more along the lines of the kind of fight that usually draws in 200,000 buys rather than 600 to a million. One of the bigger challenges is finding a boxing fight that can draw without costing the big bucks.

by Michael Rome on Sep 15, 2008 11:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think with a card like this, if 2 or more fights ended quickly you’d have some people who would feel short changed and wouldn’t be happy with the purchase. Obviously, MMA fights have a greater chance of ending quickly so this might not be as risky as the idea of a 4 fight mega card that was purely MMA.

Part of the success of the undercard fights is that you feel like you are getting your fifty-bucks worth. I think with the level of FULL and SPECTACULAR fights cards the UFC has put on, we’ve been spoiled to the level that a fight card with just 4 fights would have to be pretty DAMN impressive to carry it.

by Fight Genius on Sep 15, 2008 12:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I don’t see the boxers ever agreeing to do something like this.

Even if you just tried 1 MMA match and 1 boxing match from your proposed card and a junk undercard, I don’t know why the boxers would agree to share any of the revenue with the mma guys.

There’s a reason that boxing cards only have 1 main event, the boxers don’t want to share the money, so I can’t really see how this will work out.

by Phildo on Sep 15, 2008 1:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

If the market was such that you could run a “stacked” boxing card and it would make money, it would happen more often than once every few years (last ones I remember were the Castillo/Corrales II and Juarez/Barrera II ppvs). It seems to happen more often in MMA because people have such low expectations for “major fights”. Look at UFC 83: Kalib Starnes/Nate Quarry and Mark Bocek/Mac Danzig added probably zero buys to that card, and frankly none of those guys are any good. They’re barely B-level fighters with no prospect of making the top 10 in their respective divisions. McCarthy/Bisping is only slightly better and Franklin/Lutter was the last fight in UFC’s 185lb weight class for either. Did you hear a lot of complaints about how lame that undercard was?

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even if these mythic cards never happen, I still think putting a mixing MMA fights with boxing matches is a great way to expose it to more mainstream audiences. Putting dynamic fighters (Arlovski/Barnett/Fedor) before a crowd to whom a ground game (or kicking game, or that matter) is the easiest gateway drug for them. I’ve never enjoyed boxing because I’ve never understood why they can only punch – it wasn’t diverse enough. Give boxing fans something fast-paced and fun to watch, nothing too technical (or to them, boring) at first.

Of course, this assumes everyone plays nicely…

Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by themachiavellian on Sep 15, 2008 1:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

In Reality though ...

What do you as one has already suggested and how are the boxing aficionados going to like this, if Fedor demolishes Andre in 36 seconds – a distinct possibility? Or, how are the MMA folks going to like sitting around for 10 or so rounds watching two dudes push each other around the ring as can commonly occur in boxing (and MMA I suppose hey)? The way I see it though, these events are totally different dynamics – there is a reason I haven’t watched boxing in a long time, while I have watched for than my share of MMA. The stacked cards of a variety of fighters and styles is a SIGNIFICANT (or only?) reason why – I might try this out, but I can’t see it working. And the price tag for the fight night proposed seems way out of anyone’s league.

by HankAtVancouver on Sep 15, 2008 1:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

You can say this about anything. MMA fans can’t handle a 12 round fight, but they can handle a 5 round MMA title bout? What is it about the extra 10 minutes that is a killer for them? I find it impossible to imagine that fans who sat and watched Sherk/Franca would find themselves incapable of watching an Israel Vasquez bout, especially since casual MMA fans clearly prefer the standup game.

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If it’s so simple for the crossover, then why don’t we see more of it? It’s not as if this crossover event is the first time MMA fans will be exposed to boxing. It’s around and available now, but MMA fans by and large don’t watch it. It’s not the length of the rounds per se, although that’s part of the problem. MMA fans may not be enthralled with a Franca-Sherk type of fight, but they’d rather watch that than even one round of boxing in many, many cases.

by Luke Thomas on Sep 15, 2008 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We don’t see more of it because MMA as a mainstream entity is a whopping 27 months old (going back to UFC 60, the first “block buster”). MMA fans may very well watch boxing; who the hell knows? Fights of significant value haven’t been on free network/cable TV in 2 decades. MMA thus far has been built on a strong base of technically awful striking exhibitions, not off elite grappling, after all. Fans didn’t gravitate to Chuck Liddell or Forrest Griffin because of their incredible rubber guard, its because they love to see dudes bang out and those guys do just that. Its no wonder why Chris Leben is headlining UFC 89 and Travis Lutter and Matt Lindland don’t have contracts.

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I believe you are badly underestimating the appeal of MMA striking to MMA fans, while badly overestimating the appeal of “technical” boxing striking.

While drunk guys may want fighters to stand up and punch each other, they also want to see fighters throw each other around and kick each other and knee each other in the face. Even before I got into MMA, boxing striking irritated the hell out of me with the constant clinching and hiding behind the big gloves. Thats been a common complain against boxing, and I suspect one of the reasons MMA has taken off. For all the complaints about how mediocre MMA striking is, it tends to be more entertaining to watch for those not educated about the technicality of boxing striking.

So while its possible that there could be significant crossover appeal, I have difficulty believing that will be the case, without significant effort to educate both populations. Effort Affliction cannot afford to spare and GBP probably will not bother to.

by Michaelthebox on Sep 15, 2008 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fans want to see whatever brings them “action”, and “action” is effectively a code word that means “people getting hurt and stumbling around”. Boxing on free TV often doesn’t attract an audience because not many big action fights have been made there. When they do happen (even on pay TV), there’s certainly an awareness out there. You can’t tell me you don’t know who Arturo Gatti and Mickey Ward are and I’d bet there’s a good number of fans in MMA who are qute cognizant.

The “mediocrity” of MMA striking is a perfectly legit complain though. Hey, lots of people like watching a pair of wrestlers pretend to be kickboxers and wing overhand rights at one another. That’s great for them, and for the UFC thus far, its been a big help. I’m not nearly as interested.

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, you’re not nearly as interested. But you’re pretty clearly a serious boxing fan, and educated about technical boxing. I think when it comes to opinions, mine is probably more reflective of the mainstream attitudes about striking than yours are.

Regardless, I’d say awareness of big-name boxers has more to do with boxing’s place in our culture than with any preference one way or another regarding striking. There is a very clear and strong movement by young people towards MMA, which suggests that lacking commitment one way or another, people are overwhelmingly choosing MMA and MMA-style striking over boxing.

by Michaelthebox on Sep 15, 2008 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’m a serious fight fan of anything. I’d watch kids scrap at Lumpinee on Thai 7 if I had the time. Fight fans like people throwing down, even if its bad. Doesn’t necessarily mean bad things for boxing.

As for “awareness of big-name boxers”, Arturo Gatti was a glorified club fighter. He was legit not that good. He was popular because he was a “blood and guts warrior” as Jim Lampley endlessly stated. When he faced guys who weren’t journeymen, he was always severely outclassed, and yet that didn’t do major damage to his reputation among fans.

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So now you’re admitting you’re a fan of everything, and using that as an argument that fight fans like everything as well. Can you admit that maybe you’re not the best example to determine how fans will react to a mixed boxing/MMA card? All your arguments seem to boil down to how you act, but its becoming increasingly clear that you are an outlier.

by Michaelthebox on Sep 15, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So, what? Only people who watch MMA exclusively can come up with honest analysis?

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, but you’re using yourself as an example to support your opinions about the behaviour of a large percentage of fans. I only do that with myself in very specific instances, such as the fact that my understanding of boxing technique is pretty rudimentary. In that case, I’m a much better example as to the attitudes of casual MMA fans than you are. However, I wouldn’t pretend to extend myself as an example of what hardcore boxing fans are like.

by Michaelthebox on Sep 15, 2008 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’m not using myself as an example of anything. Am I a boxing fan? Sure. I’m an MMA fan too. The exclusivity of those things is not readily apparent. Do I know MMA fans who don’t watch regularly boxing? Quite a few. Most of them just haven’t had the opportunity nor the interest to seek the sport out on PPV/HBO/spanish TV/etc.

As far as MMA striking not technically being very good but still appealing, its true. Its also true that Arturo Gatti was more popular than Bernard Hopkins. Its not as if hardcore boxing fans go to great lengths to love fights the casual watcher doesn’t, otherwise you wouldn’t hear Gatti/Ward as being the blueprint for every action fight since.

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Take a look at your arguments in this thread. You kind of are, even if you aren’t aware of it.

Anyway, we’ve wandered way off topic, which is simply how well the differences in combat dynamics will play to casual fans. I don’t think they’ll play very well, but I’ve kinda lost interest in going into the specifics. I will say I think the announcing team will play a large part in how it goes over.

by Michaelthebox on Sep 15, 2008 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even beforeI got into MMA, boxing striking irritated the hell out of me with the constant clinching and hiding behind the big gloves. Thats been a common complain against boxing, and I suspect one of the reasons MMA has taken off.

I haven’t claimed to be a firm example of casual MMA fans, and instead actually went through the process of distancing myself from them in my description thereof. You, on the other hand….

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have very little interest in watching any boxing match. Not that much interest in watching Sherk/Franca either, but the key difference is that Sherk Franca was not completely predictable; Franca could have finished him with that knee in the second and it would have been a completely different fight. A boxing match is different because I know going in that it probably isn’t going to be something I want to watch.

by Michaelthebox on Sep 15, 2008 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That’s fine. There’s a lot of people who like what MMA brings at its best. I love watching BJ Penn work. Its like a great artist painting. But I’ve been to a lot of MMA events including UFCs, and what I hear more often than not are drunk people yelling for guys to stand up and punch each other.

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Arlovski-Barnett definitely isn’t the main event anymore:

When the card was called off, Golden Boy attempted to have Arlovski-Barnett rescheduled as part of the Oct. 18 Pavlik-Hopkins HBO PPV card. However, co-promoter Top Rank and HBO rejected the overture.

"They presented us with the option and we respectfully declined," HBO PPV chief Mark Taffet told ESPN.com.

by Nick Thomas on Sep 15, 2008 1:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

No Way

I’ve purchased every MMA ppv since 2003, but I will in no way support boxing and this whole deal with Affliction/Golden Boy is nothing for the development of MMA and only trying to build a younger fanbase for boxing. Tom Atencio sucks.

by ProCannonFodder on Sep 15, 2008 2:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Boxing & MMA cards structured completely different

Boxing cards either have 2 mid-level co-main events or a big main event & undercards designed to build up future prospects SLOWLY. MMA puts a card together where (depending on your tastes) you’ll want to see at least 3-4 of the fights & hope to see every single one (at least I do). I love boxing but I’ve only seen 1-2 cards where I genuinely cared about multiple fights. And that was never on a PPV. Boxing PPV’s are designed to push 1 high profile fight. If this union between Golden Boy & Affliction meant that only 3-4 fights were shown, my interest would drop significantly. Plus, the casuals that I know, wouldn’t get to see those awesome, undercard FOTY candidates that come out of nowhere. Plus, it doesn’t hurt that those fights last only 15 fighting minutes at most. Much easier to swallow than watching Juarez / Barrios for 10? rounds just to see it end on a horrid cut. Then the main event, that most people tuned in for, was a lop-sided boring fight that went to a decision.

by frickshun on Sep 15, 2008 2:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Juarez-Barrios

While it did end on a gruesome cut, Juarez was putting Barrios away no matter what. Barrios was on jell-o legs and being battered.

"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum

Camden Chat
Bad Left Hook

by SC on Sep 15, 2008 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by Zocalo on Sep 15, 2008 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dana White thinks this card sucks. You should save your money and get the “Silva/Cote” PPV instead.

" Tell me something Steve, How does a guy from Puerto Rico loose a ball in the Sun? "

by aaronb on Sep 15, 2008 2:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Don’t forget Leben/Bisping, LIVE ON PPV CONACT YOUR PROVIDER. Now that’s a main event between top level athletes!

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That fight is on Spike TV.

"My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions." --George W. Bush, The Decider, Lancaster, Pa., Oct. 3, 2007

by lovingmma25 on Sep 15, 2008 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thank fucking god.

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They plan on giving the other fights for free on hdnet and selling these big ones on ppv packaged with boxing. It’s a decent idea, let’s see how it works.

by Tommy7 on Sep 15, 2008 2:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

With the above fight card example – I could see that card doing some decent buys.

"My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions." --George W. Bush, The Decider, Lancaster, Pa., Oct. 3, 2007

by lovingmma25 on Sep 15, 2008 2:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well, it should. Pacquiao/De La Hoya is basically destined to break a million buys on its own.

by D.Capitated on Sep 15, 2008 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Forrest Griffin vs Rashad Evans will be a bigger event. Especially if they put Rob Emerson vs Matt Arroyo on the undercard. Dana White and Joe Rogan think its going to be ABSOLUTELY CRAZY. THESE GUYS ARE SO DANGEROUS, YOU BETTER NOT BLINK. Death to everything non zuffa!!!!!

" Tell me something Steve, How does a guy from Puerto Rico loose a ball in the Sun? "

by aaronb on Sep 15, 2008 2:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

If you aren’t going to add anything productive, head over to Sherdog.

by Michaelthebox on Sep 15, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

how is this gonna work again boxers make a shit load more money than MMA fighters and that is only gonna cause grief inside the locker room plus boxing fans and mma fans are night and day boxing fans don’t get mma and think its barbaric MMA fans don’t like boxing because it seems slow and boring there are far fewer people who enjoy both than those who do i think all in all this is a last ditch effort to try and make something happen but in the end it will end in a Blaze of Stupidity

"If I wanted to spend a half hour between two hairy legs I'd go to your mother's house." -Don Frye

by Pitbull on Sep 15, 2008 3:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

and the card suggested would set a record a record in Money Paid out to the Fighters…the Card would cost more than it would make even if it sold like crazy

"If I wanted to spend a half hour between two hairy legs I'd go to your mother's house." -Don Frye

by Pitbull on Sep 15, 2008 3:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

So wait a second…

Affliction couldnt get enough buys from MMA fans with a stacked card…

Now that they are adding boxing they will start to really penetrate the MMA market??

No, they will lose more than half the hardcores… believe me if it’s one fight or they have to sit through boxing to see MMA it will be a youtube event. But lets assume they at least keep everyone one of the hardcores.

That means the only way it will work is if they convert boxing fans into MMA fans.

At this point none of Golden Boys major boxing partners want anything to do with that.

Here’s the reality:

Affliction gets to save some money on production but they are betting that they will not lose any hardcore fans by adding boxing… if they lose half its a wash for them and they havent saved anything.

Golden boy gets a venue to place some of their fighters in, save some money of putting on the venues and test the waters of another venture… don’t expect any ppv caliber fighters.