What Would UFC Weekly Events Look Like?

by Michael Rome on May 1, 2009 5:34 PM EDT in News Comment 45 comments

Ufc75_spike_medium_medium

When the UFC renewed its deal with Spike, they mentioned the possibility of live, weekly programming starting in 2010 or 2011. Nobody at the UFC really knows what will replace TUF, but a weekly show with live fights is the most likely answer. There are a lot of obstacles to it, but Robert Joyner says there have been discussions about it lately between the UFC and Spike TV.

The first obstacle is capability. The UFC staff is run ragged as it is, and I don't see any way to run live events all over the country without more than doubling the staff. Unlike pro wrestling, the big names won't ever be on free TV, so it's also hard to sell out arenas and make the money back. To do this, they'd have to bring ticket costs down by a huge amount, and they'd probably have to run out of small Las Vegas venues most of the time.

The second issue is overexposure. Despite worries in some circles, overexposure has not hurt the UFC yet. They still have 12-13 PPV shows a year with big names, and even with added shows on Spike they aren't giving away big fights for free, so they can still sell them. Would a weekly live fights show dissuade people from buying monthly PPV events? In the case of pro wrestling this is certainly the case because the stars perform on free TV too, the UFC could avoid this problem by keeping their stars on PPV. The potential problem is if ratings start to fall and they feel the need to put big fights on TV.

The third issue is where do the fights come from? Do you take amateurs and put them on TV? The best idea I've heard is to end the concept of "preliminary fights" at live shows, end Fight Nights, and with all those fights you could easily fill a weekly TV fight show throughout the year. Prelim fights are a nice bonus for live fans, but getting rid of them won't hurt attendance at all and putting these fights on TV would actually make the fighters some money by way of sponsorships.

I think an effective show could be a 2 hour show from the Pearl in Las Vegas weekly. Do four or five fights depending on their length, and also do interviews and promotion for the fights coming up on Pay Per View. They could announce signings, do MMA news updates on the show, and even do public contract signings if they wanted to get really into the promotion business. They could even do a legendary fights segment or training segments. I'm just spitballing, but there's plenty of content you could fill a weekly 2 hour UFC show with.

Eventually TUF will come to an end. The resistance point of the 1.0 rating has been stronger than I imagined, but it will eventually give way within a couple of years, and they need to have a new idea for when that day comes.

0 recs | Comment 45 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I would have imagined it will be a ShoXC type thing. But I like the idea of it being more of a varied show containing interviews, previews and what not. But with the inevitable demise of TUF, any successor needs to first and foremost be geared towards building stars for the future.

by -Sam on May 1, 2009 5:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Maybe a live torney show kinda like Bellator. Tons of filler with hype for the fights, but no house and no crap about teams and drama

by szucconi on May 1, 2009 5:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think that could work. The thing is, it cant just be TUF level guys fighting without house stuff. Nobody cares about those guys fighting, we’ve seen a million times that the house draws the ratings, all the drama does it. They have to put meaningful fights on the air to get people to watch. I think the fights from prelims and UFN’s are definitely good enough.

by Michael Rome on May 1, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe you use the TUF level guys but make the drama be something different. Maybe have the tourney and have the winner get a two fight deal or with the UFC or something. Maybe have a GP for each weight class, but leave out the top 5 guys in each weight division. Then the winner of each weight class has the GP title until the next go around, give the guy $50,000, and a shot at one of the top 5 (not the champ). If he gets by all these challenges then he’s a star and ready to go against the champ.

by dedstrk316 on May 1, 2009 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed, they would need to have at least one bout with “name” fighters every week to draw eyes to the show. I would love a “UFC Wednesday Night Fights” show (or whatever they would call it). The only caution would be if it would water down their big events. As a result of so much exposure, would they have to run slightly fewer big fights? The NFL works so well because we want more; but would we want even more if they gave us more?

by Fooshnickens on May 1, 2009 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What about a camp vs. camp structure. Hype the camp, teach the sport, build big fighters at a camp while featuring unknowns.

by szucconi on May 1, 2009 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t see any reason to think this would draw ratings better than TUF, which can barely do 1.0. I like the idea though and would watch it. I think it would quickly settle to like a .6 though.

by Michael Rome on May 1, 2009 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Production would be key, but you can’t say anything will pull big numbers. Everything is projects to settle low in the ratings.

by szucconi on May 1, 2009 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You mean like the IFL?

by madiq on May 2, 2009 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, not teams. But profile real camps and who trains there with the unknown guys that are fighting. Like AKA, talk to Kos and fitch about a prospect.

by szucconi on May 2, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That wouldn’t work for very long unless you start digging into much smaller camps, and people (in general) won’t really care about random North Carolina fight camp.

It’s really about the fighters anyway.

by bigweeze on May 2, 2009 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am not saying feature camp A, I am saying feature a fighter on the next PPV from Camp A. Camps like ATT could supply all sorts of pairs. But bring the camp structure of MMA to the public at large is generally a good idea. You just can’t use artificial teams like the IFL. But going into a fighters natural environment would be entertaining, informative, and useful in marketing the fighters that this up and comer trains with.

by szucconi on May 2, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Waiting for my phone to ring, logic. So I can pitch this whole idea to people who need to hear it.

by szucconi on May 3, 2009 4:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like this idea (but to be fair, I was also a fan of the IFL), but there’s one problem.

Once UFC brings camps to the forefont, they begin to unwittingly educate its fans about other important brands within the sport, and other talented fighters, while at the same time weakening their control over how fans see the product. While we hardcore fans love the idea of Black House vs. Xtreme Couture, the UFC would rather filter it through the lens of Anderson Silva training partners facing off against Forrest Griffin training partners, which, when you really break it down, is eerily similar to what they do with TUF.

And let’s recall the Jon Fitch fiasco. Zuffa cuts Fitch, and makes it known that AKA is on the Shit List, Fitch capitulates, and it’s a non-story. Problem is, if more fans know about AKA, then they have more leverage, because Dana blacklisting an entire camp IS a story, ESPECIALLY one that has been featured prominently on their television program.

Case in point #2 (and #3, and #4): Randy Couture and Xtreme Couture, Pat Militech and MFS, and Tito Ortiz and Team Punishment. All of those guys, while on the outs with UFC, have had fighters from their camps fight, but they were near-santized from the onscreen product. It would be hard to profile a group of fighters from MFS, and pretend that Pat Militech, Showtime/Strikeforce broadcast team member and WAMMA spokesperson, doesn’t exist. But that is and likely always will be, the UFC’s M.O.

by madiq on May 3, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There is money to be made all around. Camps will play nice to get featured. It means more visability. Sure there are some issues with “ignoring non-Zuffa fighters”. But it can be handled.

And its important to note that the AKA thing with Fitch and Dana was really a problem with a group of guys and not the camp. Just so happend that the group of guys were all at the camp and had the same agent. Swick didn’t have an issue.

by szucconi on May 3, 2009 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're forgetting the reason for the prelims

they’re there to fill gaps in the PPV in case there is a flurry of 10 second fights.

"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"

by Kid Nate on May 1, 2009 5:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Even just eliminating half...

of the prelims would help considerably. I mean we’re to the point now where we’re seeing 12 fight shows with 5 guaranteed fights making the broadcast. That’s 7 fights with no promise of being shown. I know there have been SOME shows that have fit in a full 10, but hell. Even if you eliminate 3 from each show that is 36-45 fights a year…plus the fight night fights.

Friday Night Fights on ESPN pulls in steady ratings that prove that you can get by on just the hardcore base turning in. Weekly fights would probably have very little impact on expanding the base but they would help in building new stars. Plus the other big thing with FNF is the studio segments which would be great for the UFC.

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on May 1, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Plus the other big thing with FNF is the studio segments which would be great for the UFC.

I think that is what is most lacking out of MMA coverage on Spike. I am very surprised that UFC has not looked into it. I know it isn’t anything big but it is cool to have like a good 15 mins in a 2 hour show to show happenings and interviews within the sport or in UFC case… itself.

"Boxing is dirty," said Casamayor. " The day I’m not ready to be a dirty fighter is the day I don’t fight anymore because it will mean that I have no heart for it anymore."

by Zocalo on May 2, 2009 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Studio for the UFC, yeah. But I think they would have to open it up and cover all promotions. Treat them like minor leuages, but cover them. Its plenty of compelling content. Just covering the UFC would get boring. They put on great shows, the greatest, but they would need more for a weekly program.

by szucconi on May 2, 2009 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would so much prefer to watch a "Friday Night Fights" thing over TUF ...

… I don’t think words can really do it justice.

Although detractors decry (MMA) as a brutal, bloody form of human cockfighting, aficionados know it is a brutal, bloody, totally fucking awesome form of human cockfighting. -The Onion

by The Kittitas Kid on May 1, 2009 6:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Elminating prelims?

I probably wouldn’t bother attending a live event if it was only the main card. That’s just me though

by nastyem on May 1, 2009 6:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I dunno… it might mean that I’m not completely hammered by the time the main event starts for once.

by -Sam on May 1, 2009 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most people go for the main cards, they’re empty in the first few fights. These 12 fight cards are too long anyway, people pay for the main fights, the couple of hardcore fans making your decision would make no difference, and prelim fighters would be better off long run.

by Michael Rome on May 1, 2009 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know some will be upset at the notion...

but eliminating the WEC and combining rosters would really open things up too…or at least allowing WEC fights to happen on the weekly show.

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on May 1, 2009 6:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Actually...

I’m in love with my idea of allowing WEC guys to fight on the weekly show. don’t get rid of the WEC…just accept that you’re related and have the lighter fighters able to fight on the show als

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on May 1, 2009 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Do they use the same size cage?

by subo on May 1, 2009 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nah

I think the WEC cage is a little smaller.

http://www.mmaforreal.com

by Kelvin Hunt on May 1, 2009 8:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A weekly show would suck. A bi-weekly show would probably be better. Or, basically, just schedule one event free on Spike two weeks before (and after) any Pay Per View. Just leave it as one Pay Per View per month and one free event on Spike per month. Simple as that. Title fights should be on Pay Per Views so that’s out but a lot of the lower level guys could fight it out on live television rather than be drowned down on the undercard. Guys like Jon Fitch, who seems to be undercard fodder again, would headline some of those free Spike shows. Same with Koscheck.

Just something to think about it.

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." - Sir Winston Churchill

by FlyByKnight on May 1, 2009 8:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Nifty article, Rome.

I’ve long thought that weekly shows are an eventuality with the UFC and I’d love to see this actually occur. Hell, even cut it down to only two or three fights and just make it an hour long. Not only is it less of a drain on the UFC’s roster and finances, but you could make them a more manageable chunk of time for the viewer.

The real problem with this concept; however, is the venue. The UFC needs to keep costs down, and I wonder if they would need to essentially do all these shows at one location. And there are a ton of problems with that too.

"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR

by Rundownloser on May 1, 2009 8:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Tossing up trial balloon

Would the weekly shows have to be live, or could you still do the prelims at the live shows and then broadcast them a few days later?

by Beau Dure on May 1, 2009 8:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think unlike wrestling, tape delay just doesn’t fly for sports. The appeal here is who wins. You can do same day and get away with it, but I think tape delay doesn’t work in MMA. Too big of a percentage of fans read the sports news and would find out results.

by Michael Rome on May 1, 2009 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I’m not a fan of tape delay.

http://www.mmaforreal.com

by Kelvin Hunt on May 1, 2009 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I love of the idea of a live fight/news magazine type show.

Sort of a combination of MMA Live/Inside MMA and Fight Night.

by Sergio Hernandez on May 1, 2009 9:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Live fights every week sounds like a lot free product that’s quite similar to the pay product. I’m not qualified to speculate as too how many live events you can put on before you burn people out, but that would be my concern in this instance. Unless the UFC does a really good job of integrating the non-live fight portions of the show, I think you might get either fights that don’t really go over well or some erosion of PPVs.

Of course, Brent pointed out that boxing (Friday Night Fights) does well with the main contingent being hardcore boxing fans. Is that what the UFC wants out of a weekly show, or are they looking to convert people into fans? If the goal is to capture ratings similar to what TUF currently is doing, then this would probably do the trick.

I guess we’d just have to see what kind of format the UFC would decide on. There are a lot of ways to go. It’s an intriguing idea, but one that’s probably going to take a good amount of work to implement successfully. Personally though, the mere idea is a huge improvement over what TUF currently is, and I’d welcome the change.

by Cannon Jacques on May 1, 2009 9:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

First of all, if they merged with WEC they would have a lot more depth on their roster. They’d have 8 weight classes to draw upon (assuming they don’t also try women’s MMA). Sure, it’s not going to happen anytime soon, but by 2011, I think it’s a possibility.

I think a two hour show seems about right, with a total card of about 8-9 fights, four of which would definitely be televised. As for the day of the week, Tuesday and Wednesday really seem like the best options.

The show seems like it would have three main purposes:

1) Direct revenue from Spike TV and the live gate.

2) Advertising their PPV product.

3) Developing and giving exposure to up-and-coming stars (or people who they feel are otherwise underexposed).

Always having a quality main event, and occasionally having a big name fight, would help draw interest from casual fans, which would draw more interest from casual fans and help their ratings, serving the first and second purposes. Using the televised undercard to develop people and interspersing video packages and interviews to help us better know both their top stars and whoever is fighting on that night will help serve the second and third purpose.

I really do think a 1.0 rating or higher is easily attainable.

by Chromium on May 1, 2009 10:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

UFC Fight Nights

Conceptually, you take the guys who would be on TUF, you eliminate the “living together” social drama stuff, you go ahead and let them fight (and thus enter the UFC “pool” of fighters) along with the guys you have fighting on Fight Nites, you add the guys fighting in the prelims. The are on a weekly, one-hour live show. Two to three fights depending on time, live. Maybe once a month (say, two weeks after the last PPV, which is still occurring basically once a month) you do a “special” 2-hour show. You keep the name Fight Nights. Now, Fight Nights IS the weekly, live face of the UFC… and as the first poster mentioned, you do interviews, you promo the upcoming PPV, you use this as a proving ground for all the young talent (and there is a lot, MMA is a GLOBAL sport)… And in the meantime, UFC makes MMA a mainstream sport, on the level of the NBA, NFL, and MLB. The talent is there in the sport. As a fan, I would LOVE this. I can’t get enough MMA to watch. My only question is… would there be “seasons” like the other major sports do (and allow their athletes to recover physically), or is that simply a matter of scheduling fights… I could watch MMA every day and be happy… but what is the line for overexposure? Is overexposure even an issue if the sport is popular enough? Fans of the NFL would watch it every week if they could… or do they kind of enjoy the down period, the draft… I don’t know. I’m not a fan of the NFL… I’m a fan of MMA and I could watch UFC every night. UFC Fight Nights. Now weekly on (day?) at (time?). Make it happen Dana.

by senorpuma on May 2, 2009 12:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

You’re crazy if you don’t think the UFC has connections with every major professional and amateur promotion in the US. They could easily use that resource to sponsor the top 2 or 3 fights on a card and show them live on Spike. I’m sure it would take some effort to get the shows up to Dana standards but at least they wouldn’t have to “double” their staff. You would also get the added bonus that shows would be held all over the US. Who wouldn’t be excited about attending a local promotion that had its main or co-main events sponsored by the UFC?

by ScotyB on May 2, 2009 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

MMA/UFC will never be mainstream until it has a transcendent superstar.

"Boxing is dirty," said Casamayor. " The day I’m not ready to be a dirty fighter is the day I don’t fight anymore because it will mean that I have no heart for it anymore."

by Zocalo on May 2, 2009 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

GSP is the top choice.
Rashad Evans and Quinton Jackson are good candidates as well.
Brock Lesnar is already a superstar, but has the pro wrestling thing working against him.

by madiq on May 2, 2009 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If [b]Quinton Jackson[/b] were to become as dominant as say, Anderson Silva, he would easily be the face of the UFC. I don’t know if he would be a transcendent superstar, but he has just a ton of charisma, and less importantly but also critical, he has the “look” of a superstar. The guy is witty, funny, and very likable, yet never comes off as less than badass, and knows how to hype a fight. If he had the division dominance to go with it, I think he would be the best candidate on the UFC roster to be a huge mainstream star.

I’m not sure I see it happening though.

by Chromium on May 3, 2009 6:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They’ve been cutting the roster left and right in the past years. For a weekly show, they’d need a lot more fighters to avoid burning anyone out. Remember, the fighters would still need a training camp before the fights. For that and a myriad of other reasons, one won’t be able to fight more than 4-5 times each year. A weekly show, even with a small number of fights, is going to need a huge roster.

by lhasafi on May 2, 2009 2:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I always thought that an old school WWF Superstars-type show was exactly what was missing from the UFC.

What WWF superstars turned into after Monday Night Raw started, just lower level fighters fighting, maybe on tape delay, maybe live, and a bunch of hype for the big stuff.

If they are unable to sell tickets for a tiny show featuring 3 or 4 undercard fights, just have the fights in the TUF Gym, who cares, the sponsorship opportunities for the fighters in this situation would come from the TV exposure, not exposure to the fans at the show.

If the show is an hour, it could have 3 “live” fights and 15 minutes of hype/showing an old fight from an undercard or a PPV that can be used to hype the next show.

by Phildo on May 2, 2009 9:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

To trial things they could replace a TUF season each year with a 13 week ‘season’ of live fights.

by rabrown on May 2, 2009 9:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

If you’re going to do “seasons,” then you may as well have a tournament. That provides structure, as well as helps to build stars.

I do think that an IFL-type camp vs. camp structure, combined with a season long tournament, would provide a 12-week arc of continuity, where successful fighters could “graduate” to PPV cards. Add in a week of season recap, and you can run four seasons a year (with 155, 170, 185, and 205 tourneys) of the “Fight Night Circuit,” which would have a different payscale than the “PPV Circuit.” Eventually, the WEC will be absorbed into the UFC, and then all 8 weight classes could have tournaments.

As for locales, I think that if they signed deals with four casinos/venues, and rotated between them, they could cut down on staging costs.

Obviously, this would probably mean the end of 3 hour Fight Night cards, but 4 2-hour shows a month isn’t that ambitious, when you consider that they’ve done that many, between UFN events, WEC cards, and PPVs.

by madiq on May 2, 2009 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t think the UFC should put on shows to an empty house, or put on shows with greatly reduced production values. It could make it too easy for people to say “pass”.

Also, the UFC needs to do what it can to avoid looking “minor-league”.

by bigweeze on May 2, 2009 2:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs