UFC 70 Free on Spike?

Off Topic
1

I just saw the commercial today (sorry if this is old news to you guys already, I didn’t see any other posts).

So many questions:

Is this UFC trying to make up for the Tito v Dana fiasco?

I thought CroCup wasn’t fighting in UFC 70 (originally)?

Is anybody in the U.S. (the only country its free for) actually going to pay 50 bucks just to see it live, when they can wait a few hours and watch in later in the evening?

Is it just me or is UFC turning all WWE gimicky since the purchase of Pride?

I got questions, whose got answers?

2

[quote]hoosierdaddy wrote:
I just saw the commercial today (sorry if this is old news to you guys already, I didn’t see any other posts).

So many questions:

Is this UFC trying to make up for the Tito v Dana fiasco?

I thought CroCup wasn’t fighting in UFC 70 (originally)?

Is anybody in the U.S. (the only country its free for) actually going to pay 50 bucks just to see it live, when they can wait a few hours and watch in later in the evening?

Is it just me or is UFC turning all WWE gimicky since the purchase of Pride?

I got questions, whose got answers?

[/quote]

  1. No, it was already scheduled free previous to that.
  2. I think he has been on the card for quite some time, at least a month + from my memory.
  3. Fuck no. I might just TiVo it.
  4. Fuck yes. It sucks. I knew it would happen eventually. (Sigh)
3

[quote]hoosierdaddy wrote:
I just saw the commercial today (sorry if this is old news to you guys already, I didn’t see any other posts).

So many questions:

Is this UFC trying to make up for the Tito v Dana fiasco?

I thought CroCup wasn’t fighting in UFC 70 (originally)?

Is anybody in the U.S. (the only country its free for) actually going to pay 50 bucks just to see it live, when they can wait a few hours and watch in later in the evening?

Is it just me or is UFC turning all WWE gimicky since the purchase of Pride?

I got questions, whose got answers?

[/quote]

UFC 70 has been scheduled to be on Spike in the US fort a while. It is being held in London, so for it to be live in the US it would be in the middle of the afternoon. I don’t think that’s even an option, so now one will pay for it.

I think it’s just a business move. With all of the events that they are holding now, they know they can’t expect fans to shell out $40 every month. So they put some on Spike, Spike TV pays the UFC and fans feel like they’re getting something for free. The rumor is that UFC 72 in June will also be on Spike, but that is not confirmed. That event will be in Ireland.

Crocop has been scheduled for this card from the start.

a lot of people are complaining of the gimmicks that you speak of. Personally, I don’t see. They are marketing their product, simple as that. The Tito vs. Dana thing should not have aired since there was no fight. Other than that, I don’t see anything that makes them look like the WWE.

Also, I’m tired of hearing people complain about the Pride purchase and the potential lack of competition hurting the sport. That is complete BS. All major sports have one major league, and no competition at the top level. That puts all of the best talent in the same league, and therefore, the best product possible. Having all of the best fighters in one organization would be the best thing for the sport.

The only reason that Pride will be kept separate from the UFC is geography. It is simply to great a distance to successfully integrate both into one cohesive unit with multiple events per month. I think they are going the best possible route keeping the two separate and having superfights a couple times per year.

4

It was originally supposed to air on Showtime, but the deal fell through. They missed the deadline for it to be a PPV in the US because of that, so they’re airing on Spike.

5

[quote]Rah-Knee wrote:
It was originally supposed to air on Showtime, but the deal fell through. They missed the deadline for it to be a PPV in the US because of that, so they’re airing on Spike.[/quote]

Where did you hear that? UFC was talking to Showtime a while ago, but when that fell through Showtime struck a deal with Elite FC. I wouldn’t think they would both put events on showtime.

6

Beleive it or not I am all about the purchase of Pride, Im excited about the potential fights and the expansion of the sport, my fear is more based on Dana the media whore, who sees all the money the WWE as made (and McMahons rise to relative B-List Fame) with the fake drama.

Do I beleive that the fights will one day be fake and coreographed? Of course not, but I love the sport in it’s natural beauty, not some trumped up grudge match. What makes the UFC so great were its grudge matches, how am I supposed to know which are real and which are fake? Lets me honest, we love watching two guys who absolutely hate each other jut go at it, you’d never be able to fake that intensity and get it past the main MMA fans/crowd.

[quote]Nothingface wrote:
hoosierdaddy wrote:
I just saw the commercial today (sorry if this is old news to you guys already, I didn’t see any other posts).

So many questions:

Is this UFC trying to make up for the Tito v Dana fiasco?

I thought CroCup wasn’t fighting in UFC 70 (originally)?

Is anybody in the U.S. (the only country its free for) actually going to pay 50 bucks just to see it live, when they can wait a few hours and watch in later in the evening?

Is it just me or is UFC turning all WWE gimicky since the purchase of Pride?

I got questions, whose got answers?

UFC 70 has been scheduled to be on Spike in the US fort a while. It is being held in London, so for it to be live in the US it would be in the middle of the afternoon. I don’t think that’s even an option, so now one will pay for it.

I think it’s just a business move. With all of the events that they are holding now, they know they can’t expect fans to shell out $40 every month. So they put some on Spike, Spike TV pays the UFC and fans feel like they’re getting something for free. The rumor is that UFC 72 in June will also be on Spike, but that is not confirmed. That event will be in Ireland.

Crocop has been scheduled for this card from the start.

a lot of people are complaining of the gimmicks that you speak of. Personally, I don’t see. They are marketing their product, simple as that. The Tito vs. Dana thing should not have aired since there was no fight. Other than that, I don’t see anything that makes them look like the WWE.

Also, I’m tired of hearing people complain about the Pride purchase and the potential lack of competition hurting the sport. That is complete BS. All major sports have one major league, and no competition at the top level. That puts all of the best talent in the same league, and therefore, the best product possible. Having all of the best fighters in one organization would be the best thing for the sport.

The only reason that Pride will be kept separate from the UFC is geography. It is simply to great a distance to successfully integrate both into one cohesive unit with multiple events per month. I think they are going the best possible route keeping the two separate and having superfights a couple times per year.
[/quote]

7

[quote]Rah-Knee wrote:
It was originally supposed to air on Showtime, but the deal fell through. They missed the deadline for it to be a PPV in the US because of that, so they’re airing on Spike.[/quote]

HBO. They couldn’t get it worked out in time, and it was too late to schedule a PPB block so we get a free card.

8

its free cause there is no title fight on this card. We will see more events like this without a title fight since the talent pool is increasing, and they can’t fit everyone in on one ppv per month.

I like it and look forward to it. Besides UFC will probably have alot more viewers during this spike event than on a ppv.

9

[quote]Donut62 wrote:
Rah-Knee wrote:
It was originally supposed to air on Showtime, but the deal fell through. They missed the deadline for it to be a PPV in the US because of that, so they’re airing on Spike.

HBO. They couldn’t get it worked out in time, and it was too late to schedule a PPB block so we get a free card.[/quote]

That sounds right. They were talking to HBO. I heard that HBO wanted to control everything, but Dana wouldn’t agree to that. People were giving Dana shit for that, but I don’t understand why. You can’t blame a guy for wanting to keep control of the product his company puts out.

10

[quote]kingkrs wrote:
its free cause there is no title fight on this card. We will see more events like this without a title fight since the talent pool is increasing, and they can’t fit everyone in on one ppv per month.

I like it and look forward to it. Besides UFC will probably have alot more viewers during this spike event than on a ppv.[/quote]

You’re probably right about the non-title card. I think that if they are going to have so many events, they can’t all be on PPV. No fan is going to buy a PPV every month. This month would have been 2 PPV’s. It makes sense that the cards they don’t feel are as strong would be on Spike.

11

More rampant speculation in several posts that reveal an ignorance of the business. Does anyone even read MMA Weekly?

UFC though they had a deal with HBO. By the time the deal broke down, it was too late to put UFC 70 on PPV.

This was reported over a month ago:
http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=3578&zoneid=13

Why post speculation when the facts are readily available? Seriously.

12

The funny thing is that this card, at least IMO, looks better on paper* than the UFC 69 PPV.

(The GSP/Serra fight was priceless, but who expected that?)

13

[quote]CaliforniaLaw wrote:
More rampant speculation in several posts that reveal an ignorance of the business. Does anyone even read MMA Weekly?

UFC though they had a deal with HBO. By the time the deal broke down, it was too late to put UFC 70 on PPV.

This was reported over a month ago:
http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=3578&zoneid=13

Why post speculation when the facts are readily available? Seriously.[/quote]

Wow, thanks for taking time out of your busy schedule to grace us with your infinte wisdom. I know that this ignorance of the inner workings of the MMA world can be really frustrating, so thanks for being patient and not condescending at all in your reply.

14

[quote]CaliforniaLaw wrote:
More rampant speculation in several posts that reveal an ignorance of the business. Does anyone even read MMA Weekly?

UFC though they had a deal with HBO. By the time the deal broke down, it was too late to put UFC 70 on PPV.

This was reported over a month ago:
http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=3578&zoneid=13

Why post speculation when the facts are readily available? Seriously.[/quote]

That links talks about just what I said:

“Left only to come to terms on the details, some of the key disagreements between Zuffa and HBO Sports have been whose production crew will film the event, whose announcers will commentate on the event, and how those announcers will go about commentating on the event.”

Also, if they continue to have major events monthly, some of them will be on some non-PPV outlet. UFC 72 in Ireland is rumored to be the next one.