Explain, to me this is like comparing the skill needed in one sport to a completely different sport which imo is impossible really.
I know this thread was started with the best of intentions but it didn't take a genius to predict how it was going to end up.
TBH I tried to get into MMA about 7 or 8 years, and had the same entertainment problem that a lot of people had - the ol "when the fight goes to the ground" problem. It bored me shitless, because I basically didn't know what I was watching, what was the purpose of being down there and why the ref just didn't try and stand them up again. I gave it another try about two years ago, because I have a mate who is a black belt in jiujitsu (sp?), and he had watched boxing events with me and tried to learn more about "our" sport, so I thought I would reciprocate and learn more about "his" chosen sport (ie: MMA). I read up alot about mixed martial arts, and about what they're trying to do on the ground, like advancing position and trying to lock on submissions, and after watching a few more UFC/Strikeforce/WEC events I started to appreciate what they were trying to do down there, and to be honest I now appreciate watching a good ground fight more than I do a stand-up battle (precisely because the striking battle is not as entertaining or as professional looking to me as a top-notch bout in boxing - and there are mitigating factors here, like guarding against kicks and takedowns). Boxing was and is still No.1 for me, but I now enjoy watching both sports now. And as Rob said in his opening post, boxing could learn a lot from UFC in relation to the presentation of an event. But apart from that, they are two different sports with two different skill sets, and accordingly should be treated seperately when it comes down to a skill-level debate.
I am sure I speak for all ESB members when I state categorically that your missus is a very fine woman.....