Author: Luke Thomas

There’s not much either Jon Jones or Rashad Evans aren’t good at in mixed martial arts. If the numbers tell us anything, it’s that these are superb fighters and their impending bout at UFC 145 is something akin to a MMA all-star match-up.

Jones and Evans are statistically record holders in the stand-up and ground portions of the fight. Both have tasted championship glory. Both only have one loss on their record (though the complexions of their losses differ dramatically). Both have mutual opposition they’ve defeated. These two may be rivals, but they’re more similar than each cares to admit in small part due to what they’ve accomplished and how they did it.

But neither light heavyweight is without shortcomings and the data demonstrates that quite clearly. The real question is can whatever statistical weakness that exist also offer blueprints for game plans or predict an eventual outcome?

Probably not. It’s frankly hard to overstate just how good these bitter enemies really are. It’s also had to walk away from these numbers and not consider the uphill climb for Evans may not be insurmountable.

Before we begin enumerating their superlative skills or accomplishments, it should be noted Jones and Evans have three opponents in common: Stephan Bonnar, Lyoto Machida and Quinton Jackson. Jones defeated all three, stopping Machida and Jackson by submission. Evans lost to Machida, but defeated both Bonnar and Jackson by decision.

Typically mutual opposition is the best way to compare to fighters’ abilities or tendencies, but that’s not necessarily the case here. In short, the Bonnar who fought Evans isn’t the same Bonnar who necessarily fought Jones. And the Evans or Jones who fought Bonnar won’t be the same Evans or Jones who show up Saturday night. The only commonality is both Evans and Jones landed seven takedowns against Bonnar, but that tells us more about ‘The Ultimate Fighter’ season one alum’s takedown defense than anything else.

We should also resist trying to glean too much from the stats from each of their Machida fights. They lack a sufficient amount of information to make any sort of definitive conclusions. That Machida stopped Evans and yet was stopped by Jones is indicative of something. But what? Without overreaching, we can only safely say Jones was more effective striking in his bout with Machida than Evans. But relative to Evans, it’s hard to say much else insofar as drawing conclusions from data is concerned.

The fights with Rampage, however, might be more helpful. For starters, the bouts took place in reasonably close proximity. And from Jackson’s perspective, his performance against each was nearly identical. Against Evans, he landed 17 significant strikes, 27 total. Facing Jones, Jackson landed 16 significant strikes, 24 total. Against both Evans and Jones, Rampage attempted one takedown in each fight and was stuffed both times.

The only real differentiator is Rampage’s knockdown of Evans. And that fact speaks to some larger trends in Evans’ striking. Namely, his opponent’s ability to land on him.

Let’s keep things in perspective. Evans’ striking – offensively and defensively – is very good. He has a 66.7% career striking defense, making it the third best in light heavyweight history and better than Jones’ current defensive rate. But his striking differential – the number of strikes he lands relative to those he absorbs per minute – is only .23. Jones’ mark, by contrast, is 2.40, the fourth best total in UFC history. In addition, Evans’ measured striking accuracy is 39.5% to Jones’ 51.9%.

Evans may have only been stopped once by strikes in his MMA career, but that it was by strikes is in concert with what the larger data set says of of Evans’ striking ability.

Striking stats also tell us Evans is something of a head hunter. That isn’t to suggest he doesn’t enjoy body work, but he’s gone to the head 84% of the time. As for the body and legs? Just 11.2% and 4.1%, respectively. The UFC light heavyweight champion is the much more diverse in terms of where he throws and subsequently lands strikes: 53% to the head, 25.4% to the body and 21.5% to the legs. When Jones is throwing, there’s a lot more confusion about what might be thrown and where it might land.

None of this is to suggest Evans can’t land on Jones. Instead, it’s that while Evans is statistically speaking hard to hit, he has to throw a lot more to eventually find the mark and also gets hit more often per fight than Jones.

There is less of an advantage, however, for Jones on the ground. Again, that isn’t to say he can’t or won’t win there. Jones is deadly essentially everywhere and my personal hunch is who dominates this space ultimately wins the contest. But Evans’ comfort zone is historically on top on the ground after executing a takedown.

In fact, Evans has taken down everyone he’s every fought. According to FightMetric, “Evans’ average of 4.32 takedowns per 15 minutes of fighting is the 2nd highest average in light heavyweight history. He’s managed to takedown every single opponent that he has tried to get to the ground. His takedown accuracy is second only to Jon Jones, with a 53.3% success rate, 2nd best in division history.”

But Jones is no slouch himself. FightMetric also notes Jones’ “takedown accuracy of 63.6% is the very best in light heavyweight history. He’s already scored 21 takedowns, 4th most in division history, and his 3.32 takedowns per 15 minutes average is the 4th highest in division.”

Some will suggest even if we were to grant Evans and Jones are basically commensurate as takedown artists, Jones is more grappling and submission savvy. And they could be right.

Both are actually adept guard passers. Jones routinely passes guard: once on Machida, three times on Rampage, twice on Bader and so on; Evans accrued no guard passes against Rampage, Bonnar or Machida, but in the two fights since defeating Rampage – two wins over Tito Ortiz and Phil Davis – he managed 10 guard passes in a little over seven rounds.

Yet, Evans has not attempted a submission in his entire MMA career. He advances position, but only to facilitate ground and pound. Jones, on the other hand, has historically attempted 1.11 submissions per 15-minute fight. The reigning light heavyweight champion has tapped out 3 of last 4 opponents and has 5 submission wins in his MMA career. Submissions as a portion of his finishing arsenal is the clearest demonstration of Jones’ superior offense given that Evans doesn’t even try in this aspect.

Taking all of this information into account, what can we reasonably conclude about Jones’ or Evans’ chances on Saturday night? On balance, Jones has the advantages. That’s especially true in striking and submissions. Yet it’s hard to look at the accumulated data and conclude Evans is somehow doomed. Evans can be taken down, but he’s only spent 4.4% of the time in his UFC career on bottom – not a ton of time to do significant damage. Jones is clearly better at submissions, but Evans has never been submitted. Jones has never been taken down, but Evans has taken down everyone he’s fought. Jones has the statistical wind at his back, but Evans has a demonstrated ability to rise to the occasion. There’s also the x-factor of how much their perceived intimate knowledge of each others game plays a role.

What we have with Evans vs. Jones is a perfectly good case where relying on quantitative information for predictive insight can be tricky. I suspect whoever prevails at UFC 145 will do so by re-writing today’s numbers, not fulfilling historical patterns.

The real test for both will be to get takedowns where others couldn’t; to score from spaces where others couldn’t; to control position and times held in those positions where others couldn’t; in short, to make the other fight in ways they haven’t.

Jones is the odds-on favorite. He should be. He’s got more ways to win and is statistically impressive almost everywhere. But Evans offers challenges in professional competition Jones has not faced. By the time Saturday night is over, the real story on the numbers behind these two fighters may be less how much they foreshadowed the future and more about how drastically they need to be amended.

All quantitative data provided by FightMetric.

We’re almost halfway through Bellator’s sixth season, if you can believe it. Tonight’s fighters don’t quite have the name value of a Ben Askren or Rick Hawn, but they’re still very respectable talents. Bellator’s bantamweight tournament continues tonight and the bantamweight title itself is up for grabs. There’s also a featherweight tournament semifinal. In addition, UFC veteran Kris McCray and Bellator standout Lyman Good look to secure their spots tonight (although, not against one another) in the season seven welterweight tournament on tonight’s preliminary card.

What: Bellator 65

When: Friday, the MTV2-televised card begins at 8 p.m. Eastern on Friday. However, Spike.com will carry the entire fight card.

Where: Boardwalk Hall, Atlantic City, New Jersey

Predictions below for the bantamweight title fight, a featherweight tournament semi-final and two bantamweight quarterfinals.

Alexis Vila vs Luis Nogueira (bantamweight tournament quarterfinal bout)

I actually think Nogueira is a talented upstart with a respectable upside. I’m not sure he’ll carry championship gold from a major organization during his MMA career, but he’s got a lot of tools to be competitive with upper echelon fighters. And it’s a shame Vila is as old as he even if he’s still very competitive. Despite Nogueira’s potential and Vila’s age, though, I still believe Vila has more than enough tools to move on into the semis of this tournament. Nogueira won’t necessarily go easy, but Vila is a different class of fighter.

Pick: Vila

Ed West vs Marcos Galvao (bantamweight tournament quarterfinal bout)

Oddsmakers have Galvao as the slight favorite heading into this bout and that’s understandable, but West is flying under the radar. His only Bellator losses – both highly competitive affairs – came to current champion Makovsky and top challenger Dantas. I don’t know if West will be able to lord over Galvao any submission prowess, but he should be able to avoid trouble by maintaining dominant top position. Either way, should be a highly competitive affair.

Pick: West

Mike Corey vs Daniel Straus (featherweight tournament semifinal bout)

Pick: I like Mike Corey quite a bit, if for no other reason than I am also a former United States Marine. But Straus is going to be handful for him. Corey’s obviously more comfortable on the ground and while he does have the edge there, Straus’ takedown defense should be sufficient to keep him upright long enough to do damage. On the feet, Ronnie Mann was able to light Corey on fire. I see Straus having similar ease.

Pick: Straus

Zach Makovsky vs Eduardo Dantas (bantamweight championship)

I’ve gone back and forth on this one. Honestly, it’s so close that a pick for either guy is justified. Without going into detail about skills – both guys are capable of hurting and scoring on one another virtually anywhere – I ultimately think Makovsky’s base and ability to win the scrambles will be the difference. It won’t be easy and it wouldn’t shock me at all if he lost. But over the course of a five-round fight, Makovsky’s wrestling and submission grappling transitions are going to be the difference maker.

Pick: Makovsky

From the preliminary card:

Lyman Good vs. LeVon Maynard (season 7 welterweight tournament qualifier)

Maynard is a staple of the Mid-Atlantic MMA regional circuit. I’ve actually commentated a few of his fights. I know and respect him enormously. He’s a very good athlete and has meaningful experience, but Good is probably just too much for him. He’s as good if not better of an athlete, but more importantly, is a more powerful and technical striker. I wouldn’t say Maynard is chiny, but I wouldn’t say he’s Nogueira either. This is Good’s fight to lose.

Pick: Good

Ailton Barbosa vs. Kris McCray (season 7 welterweight tournament qualifier)

Not much to add here. I’d be surprised if Barbosa won. His strengths are McCray’s strengths, which is to say McCray’s got the better strengths of the two. McCray didn’t have the UFC career he’d hoped for, but he is a strong, physical wrestler with respectable submission skills. That should be enough to get the win.

Pick: McCray

The UFC spring break officially ends Saturday as UFC makes its promotional debut in Sweden with one of MMA’s top prospects (coincidentally, a Swede) in the main event. The event – UFC on Fuel 2 – offers the typical fare of what we’re accustomed to seeing on the channel: prospects in important fights in their careers looking for advancement and some other bouts thrown in for good measure.

Not every bout on the card carries the weight of the world, but it’d also be wrong to not recognize how much is riding on the main event and even the co-main. Not only does Alexander Gustafsson have a lot to lose, but his opponent Thiago Silva has quite a bit to prove in the headlining fight of the night. The same can be said for Brian Stann as he locks horns with Alessio Sakara in the evening’s second biggest bout of the night.

Let’s take a closer look at the main card and even a few preliminary card fights to see what Saturday’s fighters are up against, what can be gained from a win and where they could find themselves after a loss.

Alexander Gustafsson vs. Thiago Silva

At stake: fulfilling expectations. Some are suggesting should the Swede defeat Silva, he’d be in line for a title shot. That could be true, but between UFC 145 and Dan Henderson waiting in the wings, I’ll bet Gustafsson has at least a couple more fights in front of him.

And that’s just fine. Some fighters are preternaturally quick to pick up the MMA game. Say, fighters like UFC light heavyweight champion Jon Jones. He’s able to technically improve on a timeline that is either too rapid or altogether impossible for others to match. To be fair to Gustafsson, he is warming to the higher end of the game extremely fast, too. Maybe not as fast as Jones, but quick nonetheless. He needs a little bit more seasoning than Jones and there’s nothing remotely wrong with that.

That’s sort of the point. Jones may ultimately be able to improve more quickly, but Gustafsson shows the sort of promise that tells us he could arrive at the same point as Jones in the future.

Silva is an important test for Gustafsson, but not the type of opponent that springboards him to title shot status. He needs to face a former champion first and given how many times the light heavyweight title has been handed off, that shouldn’t be too hard to arrange.

As for Silva, this post probably sounds like I’m discounting his chances. I probably am. I will never rule out the possibility of anyone winning in MMA, let anyone someone as capable of Silva. And a win over Gustafsson would be arguably the best way to re-launch himself into the light heavyweight division after a long hiatus. All sorts of possibilities open up after that, but getting to that point is going to be a herculean climb for the American Top Team product.

Brian Stann vs. Alessio Sakara

At stake: UFC contender viability. This is far less true for Sakara than Stann. The former U.S. Marine suffered a rather dominating defeat at the hands of Chael Sonnen at UFC 136, but is still capable of a real rebound. Overcoming the top-heavy wrestling talent in the middleweight division may prove difficult, but he’s got enough existing tools and time to round out the edges on his other skill sets to still give it a go. Besides, Sakara will likely slug it out with Stann. That’s a fight I’m betting Sakara loses and the entire experience may end up serving as tune-up for Stann.

Then again, a win over Stann would arguably be Sakara’s best to date and would majorly derail a tough divisional talent. Sakara would still have his work cut out for him to continue climbing the ranks, but defeating Stann at least gets that ship sailing in the appropriate direction.

Paulo Thiago vs. Siyar Bahadurzada

At stake: Momentum. Two different kinds of momentum, though.

For Thiago, he did win his last bout against David Mitchell at UFC 134, but he hasn’t quick had the same spark as he did in strong performances against Jacob Volkmann or Josh Koscheck. In fact, he’s dropped two of his last three. He’ll need to build off the Mitchell win by defeating a talented veteran-yet-newcomer in Bahadurzada to really gather some steam and make some noise in the UFC welterweight division.

Bahadurzada already has momentum going. He hasn’t lost since November of 2008, but he also hasn’t been facing a commensurate level of competition to Thiago. For hardcore fans of MMA, there’s much intrigue and expectation for the first Afghan fighter in the UFC. He’s with a strong camp, has the wind at his back and the right kind of opponent to validate interest in him. The last thing he wants to do, though, is start his UFC career off on the wrong foot.

Dennis Siver vs. Diego Nunes

At stake: finding a home. Why is Siver dropping to featherweight? Apparently the lightweights are just getting too big. That’s only a mildly surprising justification to hear from Siver given his stocky frame and very respectable power. But, he isn’t lording his physical strength over anyone at 155 pounds and wants to see what it feels like there. He’s had success at lightweight, but recognizes a title climb is not going to happen for him there.

Can 145 pounds be the answer? Let’s see how he looks on Saturday. Does the cut kill him? Is he faster? Stronger? Depending on what kind of effort he turns in, we’ll either have a new contender at 145 pounds or a lightweight trying anything to get ahead. In fact, Siver hasn’t ruled out a return to lightweight should this gambit prove fruitless. But that’s what Siver is looking for: a sweet spot where his talents shine best. Is it at 145 pounds or is it an illusion that doesn’t even exist?

Nunes seems to be good; just short of great. He’s lightning quick, can fight the full distance of three rounds no problem, has a world-class support system and plenty of other positive traits. He hasn’t quite put all of the pieces of his game into place and seems to lack focus fighting even in winning efforts. A win over Siver would not only provide bragging rights, but would likely have to come by uniting many of the things he does well but does so apart from one another.

DaMarques Johnson vs. John Maguire

At stake: a win or a loss. Let’s not overstate the stakes. It’s true a win or loss in the UFC is no small matter. To Johnson and Maguire it likely means everything. It should. But there aren’t divisional implications here. It’s also unlikely (though not impossible) either would be cut in the event of a loss. May the best man win.

Brad Pickett vs. Damacio Page

At stake: positive return from setback. Bantamweight is an increasingly improving division and MMA is no forgiving game. When you lose, sometimes you lose badly and sometimes it damages your career in profound ways.

Both Page and Pickett aren’t there yet. The two of them head into the Octagon on Saturday having suffered rather crushing defeats in their last fights, however. Pickett was thrashed by top contender Renan Barao in a one-round tornado of pain while Page lost to Brian Bowles for the second time in a manner – quite literally – identical to the last time he lost to Bowles. Page is also on a two-fight losing streak.

Rebounds matter more in MMA than basketball. Getting on the right path after setbacks is both hard to do and necessary. One defeat, especially a stinging loss, can change a fighter’s psyche. Two or three of them in a row will cause them to lose more than their UFC employment. Getting back on the horse is hard, but it’s the only option if you plan on riding again.

From the preliminary card:

– Ricardo Almeida black belt Tom DeBlass makes his UFC debut on short notice against Cyrille Diabate. He fills in for Jörgen Kruth, who had to withdraw late due to injury. It’s a huge opportunity for the upstart DeBlass. Diabate, meanwhile, has lost two of his last three.

– Top prospect Papy Abedi returns to action after being outclassed by Thiago Alves. While the Alves bout proved he needs more time before he’s ready for elite competition, he’s still a fighter whose development deserves observation.

– Key an eye out for Reza Madadi. The Iranian-Swede makes his UFC debut after defeating three UFC veterans in a row: Junie Browning, Carlo Prater and Rich Clementi.

The long absence of UFC-event weekends is officially coming to a close this Saturday. On top of that, the UFC returns to Europe, this time making their debut in Sweden. That’s important because it’s the home of headliner and rising MMA contender Alexander Gustafsson. He’ll lock horns with American Top Team’s Thiago Silva, who returns to action for the first time since being suspended by the Nevada State Athletic Commission for PED-related test infraction. Silva also took the time to heal from a nagging back injury.

Can the Swede make good on the promise of expectations? Will he be the first fighter other than former UFC light heavyweight champions Rashad Evans and Lyoto Machida to defeat Silva? Or can the ATT light heavyweight stalwart return to form after a lengthy layoff.

We’ll attempt to answer those questions and more as we predict the winners at UFC on FUEL TV 2.

What: UFC on FUEL TV 2: Gustafsson vs. Silva

When: Saturday, the Facebook fights begin at 12:30 PM ET, the main card on Fuel begins at 3 pm ET.

Where: Ericsson Globe Arena, Stockholm, Sweden

Predictions on the six television fights below.

Alexander Gustafsson vs. Thiago Silva

As I’ve previously discussed, there could be a path to defeating Silva that uses a healthy mix of takedowns and strikes. Either way, though, I don’t think we’re going to see Gustafsson have too much trouble. He isn’t a blitzkrieg fighter, which is a good thing. He is more patient with his opportunities and I think either striking or with offensive grappling he’s going to pressure Silva into a mistake. I also cannot ignore the time lost Silva had both in his suspension and with his back injury. Silva’s talented and not beyond defeating virtually anyone in the division, but I just don’t see him controlling Gustafsson en route to a decision like he did with Vera or blasting him out as he did with Jardine.

Pick: Gustafsson.

Brian Stann vs. Alessio Sakara

Stann has had a number of issues in this camp relating to family issues he had to attend to. As a result. he had to relocate it and had to communicate with coaches Greg Jackson and Mike Winkeljohn over the phone, sending video tapes back and forth, and more. It’s not clear what this will do to his performance, but suffice it to say Stann didn’t get the best camp he’s ever had.

Still, I like him to beat Sakara. Stann’s offensive striking style – power heavy, combination punching, head focused without being head hunting – is just the sort of style that gives Sakara all sorts of problems. Stann won’t want to revert to his old WEC days and charge forward, but if he can pressure Sakara back and do what he does best he emerge the victor.

Pick: Stann

Paulo Thiago vs. Siyar Bahadurzada

Bahadurzada is a talented fighter, but I tend to believe he’s going to come up short here. Thiago’s not a dynamic takedown machine, but he’s got enough submission grappling credentials – especially from the clinch – to lord those skills over the Afghan. Bahadurzada obviously has more than a puncher’s chance, but I see Thiago’s striking as potent even if it’s not as dangerous as Bahadurzada’s. Between than and the clear superiority of Thiago’s grappling game, it’s hard for me to pick against the Brazilian.

Pick: Thiago.

Dennis Siver vs. Diego Nunes

Nunes is the more active of the two inside the cage, but does he really put that activity to effective use? I’m not convinced. Nunes doesn’t get enough credit for his defensive skills. He’s hard to hurt and is respectably talented elsewhere in terms of slowing down or stopping his opponents. But his offense is all over the place. He isn’t a combination or power puncher. He isn’t a dynamic offensive grappler. He can strike, yes and he’s good on the ground, yes. But against a more thoughtful and direct striker like Siver – and one who can fight at range – Nunes is going to have a tough road.

Pick: Siver

DaMarques Johnson vs. John Maguire

I’m not really sure what to make of either of them given the lack of well-rounded skills and questionable competition. Johnson should win this fight, but I’ve got a feeling Maguire might be able to dictate fight location and complexion if not for a finish then a decision win. I’ll be honest and say I’m not sure Maguire is the guy to exploit Johnson’s weaknesses grappling, but if we are measuring liability against liability I’ll tip my hat to the European.

Pick: Maguire

Brad Pickett vs. Damacio Page

I’ll take the Brit over the American, which is not something I often say. Page is a live dog here, but gets himself out of position with his wild attacks. I don’t know if I see Pickett jumping guillotine to seal the win and Page has tremendous power punching. But the New Mexico-native can be controlled over the course of the fight. Pickett’s wrestling is actually pretty solid. And Page is no Renan Barao who can both fight technically and with a sense of urgency when an opponent is hurt.

Pick: Pickett

The online ‘rally’ to get Mark Hunt a UFC title shot against Junior dos Santos at UFC 146 continues. Despite having an outrageous amount of testosterone in his system, Alistair Overeem intends on getting a license to fight in Nevada. And hey, there’s a UFC event this weekend, so the cold winter is officially over. That means there is much to discuss.

Join me at 1 p.m. ET today for the MMA Fighting Live Chat. We’ll discuss about whether the online campaign for Hunt has been effective, what Alistair Overeem could possibly say to still get a license, offer fight predictions for UFC on FUEL TV 2 and go over anything YOU want to talk.

Remember: you can login with your Twitter or Facebook account into the ScribbleLive service, or you can just create a profile with the service. It doesn’t matter how you get involved as long as you get involved.

Be back here at 1 p.m. ET to share your best questions, comments and complaints. Talk with you then, friends.

If you haven’t watched this season of The Ultimate Fighter on FX, you’re missing out. It’s expertly produced, the live format is significantly more engaging, much of the unpleasant, fabricated variety of ‘drama’ has been mercifully stripped out and the talent is at least on par with previous seasons.

But if ratings are any indication, the adjustments to the show and the changing of platform have not yielded the results Zuffa anticipated. The most recent episode of TUF: Live pulled in 947,000 viewers, thereby making it the lowest-rated episode in the history of the show. The season itself is on track to be the lowest-rated to date.

How can that be? FX is in as many homes as Spike TV, the show was heavily advertised across a variety of sports media platforms and the addition of the live fight should have made the show more DVR-proof than ever.

Except that it didn’t. And it didn’t for reasons that are potentially disconcerting. What’s impeding the show could be less about cosmetic adjustments that UFC or FX need to make. It’s perhaps existential and intractable realities of television and today’s MMA that no amount of adjusting can necessarily fix.

Why are things where they are? Let’s take a look at what may be causing the declining numbers in the most important show in the history of the sport:

1. MMA Is Deeper and the Climb Steeper

Consider this: Forrest Griffin’s fourth fight in the UFC was the feature bout for UFC 59 against Tito Ortiz. In fact, the promotional poster for the event had the Griffin vs. Ortiz imagery ahead of Sean Sherk vs. Nick Diaz, the actual co-main of the fight card.

Griffin would eventually lose by split decision, but many feel he was the rightful winner. That means Griffin was a legitimate challenge to Ortiz and merited a key fight card promotional position. The point is this: TUF winners or standouts cannot advance through the UFC system as quickly as they once could.

There are a few reasons for that. The talent level among more recent cast members isn’t as high as it once was. Smaller promotions like Bellator take many high-level prospects away. In fact, so does the UFC. They often take developing talents, e.g. Michael McDonald, and place them directly into the UFC fighting pipeline.

UFC also has more shows with different tiers and implications for victory. There’s UFC on FUEL TV, UFC on FX, UFC on FOX (which is becoming more than a FX show, but slightly less than a pay-per-view) and pay-per-view shows. High-level talent can be placed on any of these cards, but there is a general sense of hierarchy when it comes to importance, prestige and skill levels of rosters.

Let’s also contrast the experience of Jonathan Brookins (season 12 winner) with that of Griffin. Three fights into his UFC career and where is he? He just defeated Vagner Rocha on the undercard of FUEL TV. He’s about to face Charles Oliveira on the undercard of UFC on FOX 3 for his fourth bout.

Simply stated, it’s a lot harder and a much slower process for TUF grads to advance through the UFC to the point where they’re in relevant fights against known commodities on grand stages. If it takes that long for prospects to turn into stars – and that alteration is by no means a given – is there really a strong incentive to watch the early stages of ascension?

2. Friday Nights Makes Anything DVR-Friendly

Part of the impetus to turn TUF fights into live fights was to make them DVR-proof. If the television industry has learned anything, it’s that sports are far less likely to be recorded for later consumption. Either you watch sports live or you don’t watch them at all.

There’s an open debate about whether adding the live element to TUF contests – namely, bouts between unknown and still developing fighters – enhances the interest, but we haven’t really tested the theory. Friday nights appear to be directly undercutting the effort. Much of the demographic that would or does watch TUF isn’t at home on a Friday or is busy with other engagements.

TUF on Fridays might be good for FX (more on this later), but it isn’t the right format to test the theory about live vs. recorded fights.

And of all of TUF’s problems, this appears to be the easiest to fix. While such a change wouldn’t fix all of the show’s issues, the improvement would likely be more than negligible.

3. Changing Channels Isn’t Easy

Not for programs, anyway. Ask anyone in radio or television: if you change time slots, you risk losing listeners or viewers. Sometimes a lot of them. Now imagine what happens when you change stations or channels.

There isn’t much the UFC can do about this problem. They aggressively advertised the new show and the change to Spike. And as hard as it may be to believe for the hardcore that it’s essentially common knowledge the show moved to FX, it’s not. How sizable the casual audience is that is unaware of the transition is not clear. It’s likely not a major contributor to the ratings decline. Still, it’s another challenge the show is up against and one without any obvious remedy.

4. What’s Good for the Goose Is Not Good for the Gander

There is a suggestion that while TUF might not be setting the world on fire, this is an improvement for FX. Friday nights are typically dead nights, so if UFC content can spruce this up even just a little, that’s a win.

The claim is debatable, but let’s assume it’s true. If it is, only FX wins. This is much more a zero-sum game than one of mutual benefit.

The UFC is in a position where it needs to do everything it can to facilitate star growth. Not only does TUF’s positioning compromise what it can do with cast members and winners, but it’s not helping as a lead-in programming for Primetime shows either. High TUF and Primetime ratings don’t necessarily translate to strong gate receipts or pay-per-view buyrates, at least not on a one-to-one basis. But the mass exodus of several top UFC stars in their thirties (BJ Penn, Tito Ortiz, Rampage Jackson, Anderson Silva, Rich Franklin and many, many more) is just a few years away or less. The UFC needs all the star power it can get. Creating figures of public appeal is as much luck as it is craft. Knowing that key programming designed to promote future fights is not being maximized is not a reality the UFC can blithely accept.

5. The Coaching Rivalry is PG

Urijah Faber and Dominick Cruz are by no means also-rans or unknowns. They are as adept as coaches as they are fighters. They are also active participants in the ‘reality show’ trimmings of pranks, stunts and squabbling. Unfortunately, their rivalry isn’t a rising tide floating others’ boats. Both men are simply too professional to let themselves descend into the frothing at the mouth style of reckless abandon that’s historically pulled ratings. That isn’t to suggest there’s nothing redeeming about their inclusion on the show. But there is reason to reconsider not all rivalries are the same. The ingredients of a successful dispute are more than an impending fight or vocal displeasure. There has to be exquisite disgust and neither Cruz nor Faber seem really capable of it.

6. MMA Is a Star-Powered Sport

The highest-rated season of TUF was season 10. It featured all heavyweights, several former NFL players and one Internet sensation who fought people in backyards named Kimbo Slice. Almost unilaterally, it was Slice who helped deliver records for Spike TV and the UFC during that season.

The rule in MMA is incontestable: stars move the needle. Yes, they need the right platform. And it’s true outside of the UFC many MMA stars have no star power at all. But every conceivable metric – gate receipts, pay-per-view buys, merchandise sales – confirms MMA is a star-driven sport.

Reproducing a Kimbo Slice-effect each season is like asking UFC to catch lightning in a bottle. In series history, though, star coaches have provided that role. But even that effect is hard to create. The biggest MMA star of the last five years in Brock Lesnar turned in very tepid numbers as his ‘rivalry’ with Junior dos Santos never heated up. Season 11 featured coaches Tito Ortiz and Chuck Liddell, but those ratings don’t stack up against season 3’s Ortiz vs. Shamrock.

This isn’t to suggest star power doesn’t matter. Rather, it’s in tighter supply now than it once was. And even when it’s available, getting the application of it right can be tricky.

Underscoring problems is a far simpler task than providing meaningful solutions. I am not attempting to draw attention to alleged UFC or FX mismanagement. What we should bear in mind is just how significant the challenge is of maintaining a reality show. That’s especially true when the reality show has the rare honor of being the most important television programming in the history of a burgeoning sport.

Maybe it’s that importance that makes TUF’s issues so sticky. Most shows in this genre are eminently disposable programming. There appears to be a natural half-life to them and when a tipping point is reached where the effect the show once had can no longer be duplicated without excess cost or effort (or at all), they are discarded. No show is meant to last forever, but the reality aspect tends to accelerate the timeline. Easy come, easy go and there’s relatively low production costs along the way. TUF, by contrast, does not share the luxury of being ephemeral without consequence.

The changes the UFC has made are not cosmetic. They’re substantive and forward-thinking. It’s true the show still revolves around the core concept of fighting in a reality show tournament for a six-figure contract in the UFC. Yet, compare the first season to today’s and for better or worse the contrast becomes stark. It’s true all reality programming has a dose of gimmick to it, but today’s show is truer to MMA than ever before.

Most importantly, the show has historically been central to the popularity of the sport and many of its top stars. It’s at a minimum responsible for keeping the UFC brand on television on a weekly basis in front of young men 18 to 34 years of age. More than creating tomorrow’s stars, that’s the real value of TUF today. That’s why letting go of it is not an option now or anytime in the foreseeable future. The undeniable issue is what trajectory the show is on and how long it can maintain a steady path.

There’s a rule in computer programming called GIGO (‘garbage in, garbage out’) that is as applicable to that science as any other. If you put nothing of value into a system, you get nothing of value out. UFC is still getting value out of the TUF system, but at a significantly greater cost and with less return. And they’re not putting proverbial ‘garbage’ in. Real financial and manpower resources are being invested. That could mean there’s a potential issue with the system, not what’s being put in or spit out.

So what happens when that machine can’t run anymore? No one knows and I am not advocating the dismissal of TUF. Not by a long shot. But given how tenuous the hold reality programming is over audiences – especially as those audiences mature – alternatives to showcasing UFC content need to be considered.

Calling for revision of the show is helpful in certain respects, but the time for comprehensive overhaul has long passed. It’s not clear drastic changes would help. Frankly, it’s not clear they’re even possible.

We have to at least entertain the idea iterating something isn’t enough to keep it viable. In the capricious and fast-changing world of reality television, sometimes being new is better than being different from what’s old.