What Should the UFC Do About Anheuser-Busch and Fighter Behavior?

Piss-poor beer didn’t make the UFC popular, so the UFC shouldn’t worry about Anheuser-Busch’s warning about fighter behavior.No really, they should completely ignore Anheuser-Busch, the Bud Light sponsorship notwithstanding. Why?The sport of fight…

Piss-poor beer didn’t make the UFC popular, so the UFC shouldn’t worry about Anheuser-Busch’s warning about fighter behavior.

No really, they should completely ignore Anheuser-Busch, the Bud Light sponsorship notwithstanding. 

Why?

The sport of fighting appeals primarily to the sacrosanct males ages 18-34 demographic. What testosterone-laden youth wouldn’t like to see fights?

The UFC’s popularity therefore exploded with the demographic, in large part thanks to Spike TV and The Ultimate Fighter reality show, which debuted in 2005.

But that’s only part of the story. 

The uptick in popularity wasn’t only because of the product and the subject matter of the broadcasts, it was because of the athletes themselves. 

The fighters that the UFC employs are human. They are, for the most part, down to earth and honest. They tweet often, and their tweets read like they come from real people, not a PR intern. When they’re interviewed they don’t often spew out canned, corporate-sounding PC crap, but rather they give candid answers.

Most fighters talk like fans, like regular people. This gives them a tremendous appeal that most other athletes don’t have. It makes them relatable and therefore lovable. It gives the athlete a personality, a story and a brand.

Fighters have a “I’d like to have a beer with this guy” thing going for them because they’re real; they act like themselves. The UFC prides itself on being “as real as it gets,” and their athletes reflect that. That’s a huge part of the sport’s popularity. 

And it’s not just the fighters. 

UFC president Dana White and UFC commentator Joe Rogan also appeal to the demographic with their frank, genuine approach to things. Dana White doesn’t act like a stonefaced corporate suit and Joe Rogan is an outspoken advocate of legalizing marijuana.

The UFC and their employees were acting this way and achieving astounding success before Bud Light—who began sponsoring the company in 2008—and they can do so after Bud Light.

Losing the sponsorship of a hypocritical (they’re worried about derogatory comments yet how many such comments are fueled by people drunk off Anheuser-Busch products? This is not to mention how many people are killed off drunk driving) beer manufacturer is no disaster.

Another sponsor, eager to showcase their product to the demographic, will take their place in time. 

This is typically where the moralizer contingent asserts that to be a major force in sports like the NFL, the UFC has to act more “professional” and have their fighters (as well as White and Rogan) adhere to a strict code of conduct like that of the other sports organizations.

There are four problems with this argument. 

First, the UFC already is a major force in sports/a major sports organization. Despite lackluster ratings for UFC on FOX 3 and declining pay-per-view numbers, the UFC is still a household name in the United States.

Furthermore, the promotion has a massive following in Canada and Brazil and is undergoing successful expansion overseas, a feat that the NFL attempted and failed miserably at. It’s done all this despite the fact that Dana White curses and sometimes their fighters make lapses in judgement. 

Second, forcing the UFC into having its employees act a certain way is tantamount to trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

UFC has built itself on the back of having real people working for them rather than corporate drones.

Third, the NFL isn’t so pure either. Just how many convicted criminals are there in the ranks of the various 32 teams? Exactly how big was Sam Hurd’s NFL drug ring?

Fourth, proponents of the theory that the UFC should act differently are not thinking “fourth-dimensionally,” as Doc Brown would say.

This is to say that people who think the UFC should change its act aren’t thinking about the future. 

Yes, in modern-day America it’s apropos for famous athletes and CEOs to act a certain way (like they have no soul or personality). 

However, just because it’s that way today doesn’t mean it’ll stay that way forever. 

The modern day UFC was born amidst the changing of the cultural zeitgeist. People no longer trust corporations or cold-hearted CEOs. Being real is posh, as is being a down-dressed CEO (see: Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs).

The 18-34-year-olds who grew up in this cultural climate don’t see the UFC as in the wrong, that’s why they watch it and love it. Thus, when these 18-34-year-olds have kids of their own, this affinity towards candidness will be passed on and the next generation of people will grow up with it. 

So, over time, the behavior that is currently frowned upon in the UFC will actually become behavior that is expected, no more than athletes giving stock answers is expected today.

When we look at recent events this way, we can see that Anheuser-Busch has no real power over the UFC and the UFC must understand that. For if they acquiesce to Anheuser-Busch and effectively castrate their fighters, they’ll lose one of their main selling points! 

Athletes, not sponsors, earn fans. The UFC would do well to remember that, lest they lose their soul at the cost of a sponsorship.

 

Read more MMA news on BleacherReport.com