1. The biggest problem I have is that "Ground and Pound" refers to a strategy, but it is mostly used to refer to a situation (throwing strikes on the ground). When one thinks back to the origin of this term in MMA, it goes back to proto-MMA wrestlers like Mark Coleman, whose fight strategy was a simple matter of using their wrestling to quickly bring their opponent to the ground and then wail on him with brutal yet mostly rudimentary strikes (headbutts, elbows, etc.). This strategy was refined by Tito Ortiz, who diversified the striking (no longer needing to be pressed against his opponent body-to-body in order to throw strikes) but retained the brutality, and then perfected by Randy Couture, who eschewed some of the brutality in favor of positional dominance and a relentless body-head/body-head striking variation seemingly transposed from boxing. Now, however, this term is used whenever a fighter throws any strikes on the ground, whether it is related to a smothering wrestling attack or not. Simply put, Chael Sonnen employs a "ground and pound" strategy as his primary path to victory, while a guy like Cheick Kongo (and perhaps Fedor Emelianenko to a different extent), though an effective ground striker, does not.
On this site recently, and obviously in every UFC if not MMA event in general you will hear commentators refer to a fighter as having "good ground and pound" or that a fighter who takes his opponent down should "start using his ground and pound." I don't know about the rest of the MMA-loving world, but this term is to me a misnomer at best and a cringe-worthy statement at worst. Here are a few reasons, and an easy replacement solution:
2. The term "ground and pound" usually sounds dumb coming out of somebody's mouth, and I personally feel stupid just thinking about saying it. Any term that rhymes is, to me, a gigantic verbal red flag right away. Add this to the slangy, Sesame-Street-for-adults nature of the term and I'm out. To say that a fighter has "good ground and pound" or that he should "start using his ground and pound" would be akin to a football announcer suggesting that a no-huddle quarterback should start using more "throw and blow." It just sounds stupid, and that is without even acknowledging the homoerotic connotations of using "ground and pound" to describe something that involves the one position in MMA that is most commonly labeled as such by casual and non-fans.
3. Verbal errors and/or promotion of cliches leads to a dumbing down and mystification of the sport. To go back to football for a moment, any minutely intelligent fan will probably be very quick to complain about the "retarded" announcers on NFL broadcasts and the "dumb shit" they are seemingly in a race to shout. Every defense is either "cover two" or "eight men in the box." One team wants to "punch 'em in the mouth" while the other team wants to "send a message." The key to one team winning the game is for their best players to play well. All black players are "athletic freaks" while white players are "high motor guys." It never ends, and certainly and thankfully, MMA is nowhere near this point of verbal shingles, but terms like "ground and pound" are the gateway drug.
So what's the solution? Simple, refer to strikes on the ground as what they are-- "ground striking." If you want to get specific, break them down into stuff like "elbows" and "punch combinations." And if you like, refer to guys like Chael Sonnen as "employing an old school ground and pound STRATEGY" but do not use this crap every time somebody decides to throw some weak ass arm punch from top position. "Look Joe! Matt Hammil's using his ground and pound!"