Our own Michael Rome has already said his piece and I couldn't agree more. But I thought I'd add two more nuggets from some of my other favorite members of the MMA blogosphere.

First Steve Cofield takes the L.A. Times' T.J. Simers to the woodshed (read the whole piece for the blow by blow deconstruction):

...It's easier to write a column on deadline when you've already decided what you're going to write. T.J. Simers from L.A. Times generally knows his take on event before he arrives. UFC 100 was no different. The always grumpy and contrarian columnist came to Las Vegas with a "UFC is for morons" column and it played out nicely.

...

Hell, Simers didn't even like his seat at the event. While not watching two of the fights, Simers came into the press room and bitched about his front row seat. He couldn't see because of the photographers. That's the same seat people paid a reported $4000-$20,000 to grab. Everyone's entitled to their opinion about MMA but when it's already set in stone before you sit in your "lousy" seat why bother?

These guys are writing for an audience that's 50-plus, that also doesn't like this internet stuff or cell phones or Twitter. They're dooming the print business to a slow and ugly death. Or just trying to find a quicker way to get their buyout.

Then Fightlinker has more about why we don't need to kow tow to the MSM:

Everyone is so hypersensitive because this was UFC 100 and everyone was watching. But how can you argue that what went on at this event was so bad when so many other horrible things have gone on over the past year? We’re fucking LUCKY that the mainstream isn’t paying attention, because they’re dicks and they’d probably slit the sport’s throat the same way they did with cycling.

Lemme tell you what, it was almost cute to see pregger-punching Todd Beard step down from Affliction once his sins were revealed. The UFC understands that you can just keep your head down and things will eventually blow over. But in a world where the mainstream sporting world actually paid attention, how do you think our greasing, cop punching, interview humping, steroid taking, drunk driving, late punching, standgating, arm breaking sport is going to fare? Not fucking well.

So how about instead of sucking every ounce of drama and controversy out of the sport in an attempt to appeal to the groups that don’t give a shit, we instead accept the reality that MMA might never get the attention it deserves from that nebulous ‘mainstream’ so long as the ‘mainstream’ is controlled by twats. That way we can take care of any specific real issues in a sane and rational manner rather than just bitch and moan about how far this fighter or that show set the sport back.

UPDATE: It's clear from the comments that I didn't entirely make myself clear. Obviously more (quality) coverage is great for the sport and I want all we can get.

There's also an increasing blurring of the lines between the "mainstream media" and new media. Outlets like Sherdog, MMA Mania, MMA Weekly and MMA Junkie are reaching numbers most newspaper sites would kill for and outfits like USA TODAY, AOL Fanhouse, Sports Illustrated and Yahoo! have been doing great coverage of MMA -- obviously Josh Gross, Sergio Non et al are the solution, not the problem.

Its really more of a generational shift and the old dogs like T.J. Simers are never going to get on board.

What I liked about Fightlinker's piece wasn't the headline, but the point that we don't need to twist ourselves into pretzels worrying about what some imaginary "mainstream" might think, but should instead just do our best to police the sport and cry foul when someone goes over the line.

UFC 100 coverage