Let's point a few things - Conor was already a megastar before the Aldo fight. You don't go there and sell 1mi+ ppv against a guy like Aldo, who don't promote, without being a megastar already. He earned, no problem about that. Now, about his later career, though, there's absolutely nothing that justifies his numbers from a pure sport perspective. Since Aldo, Conor's record in MMA in 3-3. If you count his adventure in boxing, it's 3-4. And two of his three victories where a majority decision against 19-10 (!!!) Nate Diaz and 36-13, coming from 2 defeats, Donald Cerrone. Alvarez it's the only decent victory Conor has had since 2015! How can you look at that and say anyone is buying Conor ppv because they want to see him fight? No, I never said that. Of course, there are many reasons behind a fighter capability to bring in the numbers, but your 3 examples have something in common: They're boxing legends with incredible consistent results over the years. When people buy a Canelo fight, they buy it because they want to see an all-time great fight. His mexican heritage helps to bring mexicans closer to him, but they are buying because of the fight. The same for Pacquiao, the same even for Floyd. 1) Canelo is 56-1-2. Even if you consider he lost to GGG in the first fight, he would still be 56-2-1. He's a 4-division world champion. His only defeat was for another all-time great. Since his last defeat, his record is 14-0-1 (8 KOs). He's considered #1 pound-for-pound right now. 2) Manny Pacquiao is an 8-division world champion. The only in history. He's considered by many one of the biggest legends in the sport of boxing and sport overall. He's also treated as a semi-god in the Phillipines, where he's a few steps away from being the President. All-time great. Pound-for-pound best at the height of his career. Fought and won against the best of his time. 3) Even Mayweather, who is the closest to having a non-boxing related reason for his success, it's an all-time great. Pound-for-pound best at the height of his career. 50-0 undefeated. 5-division world champion. Fought and won against the best of his time. They all have used their heritage to highlight their performances in the ring. It was hose performances in the ring that solidify their positions in boxing. Indeed, as soon as Pacquiao lost for real, in his JMM IV fight, his numbers dropped, with the exception of the Mayweather fight. There's no comparison between these man and what Brock Lesnar or Conor did. HAHAHAHA. Mate, do you think people promote events on the social media here in Brazil? We're talking about some small local fights where the fighters earn almost nothing and most of them train in the local gym. Do you know which still is the most efficient way to promote an event in Brazil? Glue posters of the event in the walls of local streets and put cars with huge speakers to cut the city talking about the event. Based on the number of posters and numbers of speakers, you can measure better the success of the event than by looking at the number of likes on Facebook. That's something you seem to have some problem in understand - despite Internet being huge, despite social media being huge, they're only a part of the overall society.
His losses were to undefeated ATG Khabib, to Dustin who he is now 1-1 with and whos only loss in 5 years is to Khabib, and going up two weight classes to face a guy who, though not elite, was a bad stylistic match up for Conor. There was no reason to believe Conor couldnt beat Dustin in the rematch earlier this year, even now he shouldnt be written off. But you're acting like hes some bum. Okay okay, so it doesnt matter that this week MMA has more events booked and across a wider range of countries than "global phenomenon" boxing, and it also wouldnt matter if YT views or social media numbers indicated that those MMA events were often generating more attention than the boxing events either. I know the drill by now.
Man, the problem is not him losing, but the fact he loses against any decent competion, has been like that for half a decade and still is UFC/MMA biggest draw. No problem about losing, but is very clear that McGregor appeal has absolutely nothing to do with his MMA skills and everything to do with his controversial public persona. Now, it's not like boxing didn't their own controversial public personas as well, BUT 1) It's also able to produce million ppv superstars based on their skillset, like Canelo and Pacquiao. Something UFC/MMA hasn't been able yet. 2) Even the controversial figures are ATG, like Mayweather. Indeed, much of Mayweather's appeal was because many fans wanted to see him fail. If he was losing against every single opponent, people would certainly not buy as much as they did. For Conor, his defeats didn't impact his numbers at all. He is. There was a point in time, by the end of 2015, where you could argue that McGregor was a good fighter. Now, that's impossible. In the last 5 years, almost 6 now, he fought 6 times in MMA, won 3, lost 3, being 2 of 3 wins coming against easy opposition. You put him against a decent opponent, he loses. Conor, today, shouldn't be anywhere the level of competition he faces, he's in the level of some midrank prelimnary fighters, but somewhat he's the sport biggest name. Again, no problem with that, but compare that with the level of opposition and the results of boxing's biggest drawers. It truly doesn't. Boxing promotion works different from MMA promotion. MMA promotion has a central company that's up to bring their top stars to fight in certain unusual locations to 1) Appeal to the local fans. 2) Generate engagement to the brand. That's possible because these MMA companies underpay the fighters. In boxing, where you need to make budgets and then give the fighters the biggest share of the money, that's almost impossible, because no fighter will let money on the table to bring a fighting event to X country. So, if you want to make a boxing event in x country, you need a local promoter to pull that off. Also, YT views is a bad way to see how much something is trending, for the reasons I've already explained. Who watches the weight in for a fight? More often than not, hardcore fans. If you have 30k hardcore fans and 20k casuals, your events has an engagement of 50k people. If you have 20k hardcore fans and 30k casual, you also have an engagement of 50k people. But by looking at things more often looked by harcore fans, you'll have a false perspective the first event is more popular than the second, when they both are actually the same.
