MMA-UFC UFC 203: Miocic vs Overeem

[phantom13]

We need to all take a minute to admire BradWCE 's avatar... That is liquid gold my friend.

 

[BradWCE]

Tim Tebow just got a minor league contract in the MLB (for those that don't know he was a failed NFL QB), not to mention the raft of stars who get no disciplinary action for assaulting spouses, drugs, etc.

Granted the UFC might not have done anything this outlandish in a while they still do what will sell (think Conor v Nate etc). I said before PvZ shouldn't have been granted a release for DWTS as well.

My point is if it sells the UFC (and most sports) will do it. Punk was right on the most extreme edge of this statement but theyre all part of the same family.

If Punk coming in bumps up PPV sales and that flows on to better fighter pay then so be it. Im aware that's not how it works but if the UFC keeps making big money fighters will rightly demand more.

I don't know much about baseball. Had a quick look at this Tebow stuff. From what I can tell he'll be playing in the MiLB and if he does well he could play in the MLB. That's not like Punk at all. Maybe I'm completely off on this.

Better players and more famous people get away with doing worse things. Everyone knows that, but I'm not going to shrug my shoulders at that. Will Chope got released by the UFC because of a domestic violence charge. Others in the UFC have done similar and nothing happens to them. This is to be expected. This is yet another thing where the UFC, or more accurately Dana White, have opened their big mouth and said complete bullshit. White said something along the lines of "you don't bounce back from hitting a woman in the UFC". Well you do, if you're needed enough. Everyone knows this, but White can say some bullshit and it never comes back to him because the fans and more importantly the media treat him like a god. I get it with the media. They need/want their credentials and are too worried about asking certain things. I get it with the fans too, because a whole bunch of MMA fans are s**t awful people.

McGregor/Diaz 2 happening is something that makes their comparisons to sports dumb. I don't really care though because it's like 0.000001% as bad as this Punk thing.

Why shouldn't VanZant have been allowed to be on Dancing with the Stars? Did she even need the UFC's permission? Really she shouldn't have needed it. Who knows though, maybe UFC contracts are that restrictive. I don't really know why you'd be against VanZant going on dancing with the stars. She needed time off after getting beat up and got to make more money than she'd make fighting. Should fighters not be allowed to be in movies either?

No other sport is gifting Punk such a position. Punk's not getting a contract with any professional sports team in America. He says I'd like to play in the NFL and they'd laugh for 30 minutes straight before saying no. Lesnar tried to play in the NFL and he wasn't good enough.

Punk seemingly did bump up PPV sales. It made the UFC a lot of money. It made Punk quite a lot of money. It might make another 1 or 2 fighters on the card more money. Maybe Overeem and Miocic get PPV points, maybe not. So really not very much is going to anyone else besides the UFC and Punk. The only way this is going to significantly help fighters is if the UFC have a celebrity fighting on every card. That won't happen, so this Punk thing has done very little for other fighters. Fighters will continue to be paid as little as they are because the UFC is run by very good business people who don't care much about the people putting their health on the line to make them money. That is until the fighters do something that makes the UFC pay them better and treat them better in general.

 

[BradWCE]

I'm less concerned by whether fan boys and keyboard experts think it delegitimizes UFC, and I'm more concerned about the UFC continuing to win new fans so it can pay it's fighters better.

It only delegitimises the UFC because it goes against what they say they are. If they were like Pride this wouldn't be discussed. The UFC want to pretend they're running a pure sport when it suits them.

It can pay its fighters better. It chooses not to. The estimates out there are that fighters make something like 15% of UFC revenue.

The UFC winning new fans will make them more money. They'll keep basically all of it until they're forced to pay the fighters better. Sure, it'll help the fighters a little bit, but it's mainly just helping the company that profits off of them. And I really don't see people Punk brought in sticking around and buying more PPVs without him on it.

There were fighters on the undercard at 203 who were earning $10-12k for a fight.

That in and of itself is not enough to risk brain damage and your physical health. But when you consider they have insurance to pay, trainers and seconds to pay, gyms to pay, costs for you and your crew when you get to Cleveland... there are people who have fought on last weekends card and have probably lost money to do it.

Someone like Joanna Calderwood, who fought on the main portion of the card ffs, was paid $25k for her loss. When you factor in that (I'm pretty sure) she's still based out of Scotland, and she's flying a team over from Scotland to train her, she would've gone damn close to working for free on the weekend.

If the occasional gimmick like CM Punk (or Kimbo back in the day) increase PPV buys and result in someone like Calderwood being properly remunerated for giving her body to this sport I don't think anyone can or should complain.

I'm in complete agreeeance with you here. I don't think anyone in the UFC gets paid enough for what they're doing. Fighters in other promotions get paid even less, which is even worse obviously. The difference is that the UFC is making heaps of money and the other promotions aren't. The UFC is probably making 90% or more of all the money generated in MMA.

As I previously said, the UFC can pay them better but they don't want to. Calderwood's not benefitting from Punk's presence. None of the people earning very little are being helped by Punk being on the card imo. The only fighters benefitting are those who get PPV points. That's likely at best two people, Overeem and Miocic.

Myles Jury went into detail about the expenses fighters have. He says if you win a fight and make $10,000 to show and $10,000 to win, then you'll only really end up with $5,500 to show for it. Your point about Calderwood is spot on. She probably made very little in the end.

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2015/10/...eight-myles-jury-reebok-expenses-fighter-pay-

 

[nobbyiscool]

Punk seemingly did bump up PPV sales. It made the UFC a lot of money. It made Punk quite a lot of money. It might make another 1 or 2 fighters on the card more money. Maybe Overeem and Miocic get PPV points, maybe not. So really not very much is going to anyone else besides the UFC and Punk. The only way this is going to significantly help fighters is if the UFC have a celebrity fighting on every card. That won't happen, so this Punk thing has done very little for other fighters. Fighters will continue to be paid as little as they are because the UFC is run by very good business people who don't care much about the people putting their health on the line to make them money. That is until the fighters do something that makes the UFC pay them better and treat them better in general.

IMHO this is taking a short term view of things.

We know there's a correlation between wrestling fans and MMA (or at least UFC) fans. There's probably an even bigger correlation between former wrestling fans who hate WWE's "PG era" and MMA (UFC) fans, because those people were looking for something more realistic from their combat sport. (I don't know a hell of a lot of MMA fans myself, but of the ones I do know I reckon over half fall into the category of former wrestling fan.)

So in bringing in Punk, I think they're probably trying to sweep up the wrestling fans that didn't already show an interest in Lesnar. From a WWE perspective, Punk's fan base in 2016 is a pretty different set of fans to Lesnar's fans in 2005.

It can pay its fighters better. It chooses not to. The estimates out there are that fighters make something like 15% of UFC revenue.

That's probably a better discussion for the fighters union thread, cos fighters have lost all these sponsors as a result of the Reebok deal, and the money paid for fights has stayed fairly stagnant across the board. But if hypothetically they're stuck to a 15% figure (which I know they're not, but hypothetically), the hope is that the pool from which that figure comes from is/becomes larger as a result of Punk fighting. 15% of $10m is more than 15% of $9m (I've just plucked those figures.)

Don't get me wrong - I'm not arguing that Punk deserved to be in the UFC, or that he deserved to walk onto the 3 slot on a PPV. Contrary to what I've written here and in my previous post I don't really have a strong opinion on that cos I can see both sides of the argument.

My argument was just that people shouldn't begrudge what he was paid. If he's added say 150k buys, he's worth every cent of that $500k even if he gets PPV points as well, cos if 25k of those fans become UFC fans who become Fight Pass subscribers, or go to a show, or order 3 or 4 PPVs a year, or watch the Fox shows and increase the value of tv rights and sponsorship - he's made a pretty meaningful contribution for other fighters who, in the long term, will benefit from all these things.

 

[BradWCE]

Yeah that's fair enough. I can understand your arguments.

The reason why I don't think Punk will have the sort of impact that Lesnar had is because everyone's aware of the UFC now. If people wanted to become huge MMA fans by now, they would have already imo. The UFC's on Fox in the US and is advertised on NFL broadcasts. They weren't when Lesnar showed up. Lesnar came in and the UFC had a boom based on his and other fighters' drawing power. Then he left and most of those fans left with him anyway, or if they stayed they mainly only bought huge PPVs. The majority didn't become hardcore fans.

The UFC's financial success is volatile. They need draws and Lesnar was that. 2014 was a terrible year for them because there were basically no big draws competing. They still made heaps of money, but it was a real down year. 2015 was their best year because McGregor and Rousey became huge draws. Punk's presence won't turn anyone into a huge draw. I see people say that Miocic might become a draw because he was on this PPV with Punk. I don't think that sort of thing ever happens. People either become huge draws because everyone is drawn to them or because they fought someone who was a draw.

I was a huge pro wrestling fan back when Lesnar was in the WWE. He might have been some part of the reason why I started watching. I remember hearing about the UFC on WCW and WWF television in the late 90s with Ken Shamrock and Tank Abbott on the programs. I never cared about the UFC then. My Dad's cousin had an MMA fight in the early 2000s. I still didn't care about MMA. I heard that Lesnar was fighting in the UFC and still didn't really care. I bought one of the UFC video games, UFC Undisputed 2009 (by the way the fighters get paid nothing for being in the video games and have to sign away their likeness in perpetuity). Pretty sure I bought it a long time after it was released. Played that quite a lot and still didn't have much interest in watching actual fights. Then UFC 110 was on Free TV over here and I thought I may as well watch it. First PPV I bought was UFC 112 which turned out to be pretty terrible. For a while after I wasn't buying PPVs, I was just watching the free shows on One. Then at some stage I started watching basically everything and buying almost all the PPVs.

 

[phantom13]

I take your point BradWCE and I don't think anyone is arguing Punk was a complete and abject failure in the cage but this is about sales and the point with Tebow, Rousey in WWE, Jordan in MLB and every other piece of marketing like that is it puts more eyes on the sport. One could even argue that it actually shows how impressive these athletes are (think of a WWE or casual sports fan tuning in ONLY because of Punk who sees Gall absolutely embarrass Punk, they might actually realise there are some legit athletes and technique in the sport).

Say Punk has 100,000 people tune in for him and 10,000 of them go "hey this is alright, I might buy the next one" replicate that 10 times, theres 100,000 new fans.

Diversity of marketing is a key. Maybe you have the magnetic people (Rousey, Conor, Lesnar) maybe you build stars through promotion (Van Zant, Sage) maybe you have guys who feed off of others stars (Tate, Diaz) then maybe you can bring people in with other avenues (Punk etc).

For the record Tebow is exactly like Punk. From all accounts his open workout was awful and hes been gifted a contract to get bums on seats (there was even talk of him being brought to the ABL if he didn't get picked up). Difference is, that's a team sport. If he plays and is terrible and the team loses fans lose their minds, Punk fights in the UFC and loses and nobody really cares. Punk is a no lose situation, cause its an individual sport in its infancy. Baseball is "Americas pastime" with die hard fans.

All sport now is business, if it sells its gonna happen.

Also on Van Zant of course she needed the UFC's approval, even as an independent contractor she has responsibilities to them as well as her sponsors. As I mentioned when it happened theres been at least one serious (think ACL) injury in EVERY season of the show (a major difference to films). Now ill admit I didn't and still don't like it as shes doing the whole "I wanna be a fighter. its my dream" thing and this takes 6 months of her training and development away but even I have to admit it made her a star and brought in new fans.

 

[phantom13]

Not an exact science but a BR article today estimating that punk likely brought in between 125k and 225k additional PPV buys which would net the UFC an additional $3.75-$6.75m.

Reading it I think they are grossly underestimating how much having an American heavyweight champ brings in additional PPV buys but either way, no doubt Punk brought in some cash money.

 

[BradWCE]

http://www.mmafighting.com/2016/9/1...mbers-bring-up-tough-questions-about-cm-punks

Pretty sure this is the article phantom13's talking about.

I think it's pretty spot on about the buys if Punk wasn't on it. 250,000 seems a little too low, but high 200,000s or just over 300,000 seems about right without Punk.

I don't think Miocic being an American HW champ would do much for the buys. Velasquez/JDS 2 did quite well, but it was mostly due to the combination of their first fight being the first UFC on FOX and that Velasquez beat Lesnar imo. After that Velasquez's PPV buys dropped and continued to do so each time he headlined a PPV. UFC 188 with Velasquez/Werdum did about 300,000 apparently. I think Mioic/Overeem would do about the same.

I don't think Miocic at this stage would be a bigger draw than Velasquez was at UFC 188. Although I'm sure there are going to be some American fans that are more willing to embrace Miocic as an American HW champ than they were with Velasquez.

Can someone explain why Meltzer's estimates are meant to be accurate? Everyone uses them, including me. I've just never really known why they're supposed to be accurate. If they're not, then there's no point using them.

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

http://www.mmafighting.com/2016/9/1...mbers-bring-up-tough-questions-about-cm-punks

Pretty sure this is the article phantom13's talking about.

I think it's pretty spot on about the buys if Punk wasn't on it. 250,000 seems a little too low, but high 200,000s or just over 300,000 seems about right without Punk.

I don't think Miocic being an American HW champ would do much for the buys. Velasquez/JDS 2 did quite well, but it was mostly due to the combination of their first fight being the first UFC on FOX and that Velasquez beat Lesnar imo. After that Velasquez's PPV buys dropped and continued to do so each time he headlined a PPV. UFC 188 with Velasquez/Werdum did about 300,000 apparently. I think Mioic/Overeem would do about the same.

I don't think Miocic at this stage would be a bigger draw than Velasquez was at UFC 188. Although I'm sure there are going to be some American fans that are more willing to embrace Miocic as an American HW champ than they were with Velasquez.

Can someone explain why Meltzer's estimates are meant to be accurate? Everyone uses them, including me. I've just never really known why they're supposed to be accurate. If they're not, then there's no point using them.

Its just his reputation, and his been the goto guy for a long time.

I heard a interview he did (could have been a recent submission radio one) where he said he basically use's a whole heap of different metrics, none are from the source, like how many times the event has been googled per hour and things like that.

His been way off before, and he predicted the punk event would draw around 350 to 450k with punk having a direct correlation to 150k of those.

Ive heard it was a hell of alot more than that.