There are countless legitimate debates to be had within mixed martial arts. Quarrelling over the particulars of drug testing, fighter safety, oversaturation of the market, fighter pay, etc., is a popular pastime among fans and media alike.
However, MMA is arguably unique among sports in the sense that its legitimacy is frequently contested by those who dedicate much of their lives consuming its product. Indeed, a vocal minority of fans give the paradoxical impression that they are emotionally invested in the sport’s ruin.
I have previously written about the rich vein of anti-establishmentarianism that runs through parts of the MMA community. Certain fans and media outlets have long held a peculiar desire to demonize the UFC for any perceived misstep, as though publishing an avalanche of anti-UFC rhetoric demonstrates a freedom from bias.
Perhaps by dint of the fact that the UFC currently is MMA for all intents and purposes, this attitude now extends to the sport as a whole. Said attitude was on full display when UFC light heavyweight champion Jon Jones recently tested positive for cocaine metabolites.
For the most part, the community responded to the news by posing legitimate questions for the UFC and its star athlete, but there were others gleefully promoting conspiracy theories and declaring the entire sport a farce within five minutes of the story breaking.
It’s an odd feeling taking on the role of MMA apologist in response to the views of purported MMA fans. One almost wishes the sport would succumb to the tide of negativity, if for no other reason than it would render these malcontents mute.
The notion that MMA is in dire straits appears to be a fairly well-subscribed narrative. Given the annus horribilis endured by the UFC in 2014, one could certainly be forgiven for thinking that the sport is on rubber legs.
Pay-per-view numbers and television ratings are down; injuries are so pervasive that the collective fan response to big fight announcements looks like a study on mass prayer; MMA judging is often so egregious that it practically warrants a civil suit; and fighter pay continues to give the sport a black eye. I could go on, but you probably get the point: MMA has its share of problems.
Nothing that follows should be interpreted as a tacit endorsement of everything that is currently happening in the sport, but it has become trivially easy to overstate the extent of MMA’s issues.
Few would argue that MMA is as popular in the United States now as it was from 2008-2010, or that its domestic appeal has dropped off the proverbial cliff. The more cynical among you will doubtless think I’m flirting with sophistry, but the numerical slump can be rationalized to some degree.
From 2007 until the middle of 2012, the baseline buyrate for a UFC pay-per-view was approximately 200,000. The current baseline is much closer to 100,000, with four of the last eight pay-per-views dropping under 200,000—and as low as 115,000 for UFC 174.
This trend is by no means unique to the UFC, though. The current pay-per-view model is archaic, and buyrates are down across the board. Boxing has leaned heavily on Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao in recent years, and the industry is now posting its lowest numbers since 2005, while the WWE currently offers all of its premium content on the WWE Network for a monthly fee.
Most of us are used to getting all of our content for the price of an Internet connection, and downloading or streaming premium programming for free has become a painless process. Is it any surprise, then, that pay-per-view numbers are in free fall?
The downturn in television ratings has been similarly exaggerated. While it’s certainly true that the move from Spike to Fox Sports has led to lower viewing figures for the UFC, the reality is that not all cable networks are created equal.
Spike is in approximately 100 million homes, whereas Fox Sports 1 is in around 90 million. That accounts for a 10 percent drop in viewership. “Where did the rest of the viewers go, James?” I hear you mewl.
The truth is that it takes time for a network to establish itself as a regular part of the average viewer’s television diet. Longevity has its privileges, and networks like Spike, Syfy, ESPN, et al. have carved out a spot in the general consciousness of the cable audience.
Those facts aside, the UFC still bears an awful lot of responsibility for its declining viewing figures. Events are so numerous that we rarely get to see the kind of stacked line-up that was once taken for granted.
There is an unfortunate trend towards the retrograde, main-event-centric approach of boxing promotions, with pay-per-view cards being more top-heavy than the average glamour model. It remains to be seen whether this paradigm shift is merely temporary or a more permanent strategy that is necessary for global expansion.
The good news is that there is some cause for optimism. The recent 750,000-800,000 buyrate for UFC 182 is a return to form of sorts after an injury-plagued 2014. More impressive still, UFC Fight Night 59 pulled in the sport’s biggest cable audience since 2009 with a record-breaking average of 2,751,000 viewers on Fox Sports 1, establishing Conor McGregor as a bona fide star in the process—something the UFC has sorely lacked in recent years.
In addition, Bellator has had a promising start under new president Scott Coker. Unfettered from the stifling tournament format, MMA’s second largest organisation attracted an average of 1,800,000 viewers for Bellator 131 on Spike. Perhaps more importantly, Coker has made it clear that Bellator will go head-to-head with the UFC in pursuit of available talent.
The success of MMA will inevitably be judged by the success of the UFC, but the emergence of Bellator as a viable competitor is a good thing for the sport. Make no mistake, Dana White and Co. realise they are no longer playing tennis without a net. Unless you think the decision to re-sign Quinton “Rampage” Jackson and Mirko “Cro Cop” Filipovic was based on merit? In which case, I have a 36-year-old professional wrestler with no MMA experience I’d like to sell you.
The prohibitive focus on the health of MMA in the United States means that it is easy to overlook the strides it has taken globally. Even a minor decline in MMA’s most bankable market is a significant issue, but one could easily make the case that the sport is more popular worldwide than it has ever been before.
For many years, the UFC was essentially a North American organisation that staged the occasional international card. A mere 20 events were held in 2009 and, as a consequence, they tended to be stacked from top to bottom. MMA was booming in North America because the UFC hadn’t yet put forth a serious effort to make its mark anywhere else—with the notable exception of UFC 75 in London, England.
As Dana White has often said, establishing a presence in the UK was a no-brainer for the UFC. Even still, it took a long time to gain any traction on this side of the pond. Until BT Sport came along in 2013, UFC coverage was largely restricted to broadcasting live events, most of which were accompanied by little to no media interest
This climate wasn’t exclusive to the UK, either. The same was true for many markets that now do strong business for the UFC—Brazil, anyone? Global domination continues to be at the top of Zuffa’s to-do list. Last year saw the UFC stage events in Mexico, Singapore and New Zealand, and shows in Scotland and Poland have already been announced for 2015. Even Genghis Khan would balk at such ambitious expansionism.
MMA’s potential for growth is up for debate. One suspects the ceiling is significantly lower than the Zuffa brass seem to think. The idea that MMA could surpass the global appeal of soccer should only ever come from the mind of the George R.R. Martins of this world, never from someone who plies his trade in reality.
However, it’s time we cease with the never-ending pessimism. MMA isn’t dying, and its average news cycle is no more farcical than that of every other sport with a significant following. There are many problems that need to be addressed, but be under no illusions: MMA is doing just fine.
James MacDonald is a freelance writer and featured columnist for Bleacher Report. Follow James on Twitter.
Read more MMA news on BleacherReport.com