Where would our sport be without you? It's hard to say. I love to read about the fights that happened, the fights to come, and analysis of technique. I can't find the words to describe my joy each time I spot Jack Slack's articles or Dallas Winston's dissections. The announcement of new pairings, the debate over the greats, the evolution & growth of our athletes, the fighters. All these fascinate me. I am a fan and a consumer of the product and the media relating to the product.
But, I've noticed a trend among the journalists/bloggers of our sport that bothers the heck outta me.
The fallout from GSPs fight with Condit becomes public as all parties involved are asked their opinion. Firas says this, Ceaser says that, Hendricks says such & such, and Diaz pipes up too. We track each and every statement by all the parties involved until we get to Dana stating that Diaz is the next opponent. Here's what's bothering me though. In each piece quoting one party or another, there is, without fail, an editorial at the end stating how irregular, how unprecedented Diaz returning to receive a title shot would be. Even before Gsp fought Condit I was reading again and again how unlikely such a scenario would be. Go right now and open the first post/article you see on the subject, and you will see what I say is true.
Having followed these events closely, knowing Diaz didn't pop for weed, but metabolites, knowing Diaz and Condit's fight was razor close, why then is Diaz as a contender so irregular? Are we to believe that Diaz was cheating and gaining advantage with pot? Did Diaz actually get whooped by Conduit and we just don't know what a whooping looks like these days?
I for one, am fed up with being told that Diaz doesn't deserve a shot right away. I love you mma journalists & bloggers, but I've had it with your proselytizing from on high. I posted recently that the culinary union are not the moral arbiters of our society and neither are you, mma journalists. And now that Dana made his choice, its all the rage to bemoan the fact that this is the fight "business". Implying that if the UFC wasn't a business , but some bizarre non profit entity we would see Hendricks fighting Gsp instead.
Finally, I can't stop wondering how many journalists out there smoke pot, without legal permission. I wonder how many cagewriters are drug tested. I wonder if they shouldn't be drug tested before every article is posted/published. I wonder if they consume alcohol while writing, therefor writing impaired. I wonder if journalists who fail drug tests should be kept from publishing their work. Should they be suspended? And if they only tested for metabolites, but not thc, should the writers commission distinguish between the two, or treat the writer as impaired, thereby punishable? Fighting and writing are not the same, much in the way roiding and smoking a joint are not the same.
Tell me mma journalists, do you lobby against Diaz because he doesn't like to talk to you? Or, is it because you know whats right and wrong better than us(and the UFC brass), and you can't help but tell us about it?