Joe was wrong because there have been two stars in boxing since that interview, kelly pavlik and migeul cotto. They both came about after he made that statement and will continue to be the next superstars. Joe did however eat dibella up in that argument.
Well, to be fair, it's not like Bart Gunn is the best MMA has to offer. And we all saw Butterbean get beaten by that tiny japanese...
We are talking about two completly difrent sports. However the UFC and MMA in genrel is smart to market themselves against boxing. It is also possible that the rise of MMA forced boxing to make the outstanding match ups that hapened in 2007 and will take place in 2008, and hopefuly beyond. Compoition can be a good thing.
WHAT?? He sounded like a meat-head. He missed the point completely! Whatever. Lou is very successful at what he does and I'm sure he couldn't care less what anybody thought of that interview.
How is UFC real fighting? I have never seen a street fight take place in an octagon with a referee and rules. Real fights have no rules and they can take place any where. But yes it is closer to real fight than Boxing. But Boxing has way more drama, way more glory, and excitement than any UFC fight I've ever seen. UFC is well managed and well marketed thats for sure. For example, for major fights they advertise on MSN, Yahoo and all major web sites.
Because he had the bigger faster mouth and more enthusiasm? Puhlease.Rogan makes sense only 50% of the time.Most of what Rogan said there was garbage.Boxing isnt dying and its not going anywhere.There 2 entirely diffrent sports that can co exist and live together without MMA fan boys bashign boxing every other day.
Real fighting doesnt include submmisions and ground fighting.Any trained fighter in ANY trained disciple always has the advantage over someone that knows squat.A street fight is just that a street fight.The 2 cant be compared when your talking about a fight with NO rules, one with plenty of rules and one under Marquis of Queensbury rules.You may aswell compare an Apple and an Orange because there both fruits.Both will leave a diffrent taste in your mouth.
Bottom line is that although the UFC is growing i dont think it will ever generate the $$ boxing brings in. I'm a fan of both sports but if i had to choose one, i'd rather watch a good boxing match over a MMA fight. And to the Lidell/PBF comments: A good boxer will not make it in MMA and vice versa. It's that simple! No point in arguing this issue
Rogan needs to be reminded this was boxing biggest PPV buys in years. Rogan gets excited at the slightest hint of action in UFC fights.
UFC has established its fan base already. That would be, mainly, young white males. UFC's growth is slowing because it just can't make the jump to other demographics. Boxing has a more mature audience because it is a more mature sport, with more subtle techniques, within a narrower focus. Boxing will always have fans because of this. Like Brian Kenny said, it's more asthetically pleasing. Basically, the UFC is like beer. It appeals to certain groups and not others and it is a known commodity, people know what to expect. Plently of violence and action, with less empahsis on polish or sophistication. Boxing is more like wine or champagne. It requires more effort to truly understand and appreciate, but the reward is, to my mind, a higher quality product for a more refined and mature audience.
