#1 in the MMAlulz Aggregate
Posted by Alan Conceicao on March 30th, 2009
Dear Bloodyelbow,
Posting at epic length about how your rankings are in USA Today as part of the development of the sport, working for promoters, demanding/begging for credentials, to say nothing of internet ad revenue and its disbursment, may in fact be the very definition of having a “self interested agenda”.
Your friends,
T-MMA
p.s. - Arguing that the overall value of MMA rankings as being nil, including your own, as a defense for your ranking’s comparative value? Probably not the wise way to do that.
March 31st, 2009 at 8:28 am
Surprised this didn’t get any comments. Guess we should have sent some of our readers over here to gin up a discussion.
Seriously though, you’re making some fair points but you’re also conflating different opinions by different BE writers.
We’re a community blog and we don’t always agree with each other.
Thanks for paying attention though.
March 31st, 2009 at 11:58 am
Dear Total MMA,
No one reads your site or anything you write.
Your friends,
Everyone
March 31st, 2009 at 6:59 pm
I can agree with Kid Nate’s point and respect that.
Luke, on the other hand, well, this is just pure Luke bullshit. Dear Luke, we really don’t care. This site has never had intentions of taking over the world or giving a shit. We are dudes who have fun with MMA and have fun talking about it. That is it.
You take this stuff very seriously, and really, did you just walk into a clear troll by Alan? Seriously?
March 31st, 2009 at 8:54 pm
BE thinks their rankings are interesting because they represent the community. They do it because they’re a bunch of nerds who find social trend statistics useful to study fans of the sport.
Wamma thinks their rankings should actually be sport-influencing to the point that they should get to control who gets belts even though they haven’t paid any of the fighters, organized, promoted or produced any of the bouts.
Is this really about rankings?
BE’s issue is that WAMMA is trying to force its way onto a sport without (A) actually doing any of the work to build the sport (Professional Martial Artists, Zuffa, SF, PRIDE and even Elite) or (B) Even standing by their own goal of definitive ranking regardless of promotion/league. So for BE to waste time/energy dismissing the constant attempts by WAMMA members to turn this into “Our Ranking Versus Theirs” would be smart if they could do it intelligently.
But as Luke has just shown, that’s not something they always do.
PS - I like your comments on FightOpinion. Very well thought-out in the face of crazy people.
March 31st, 2009 at 9:16 pm
Oh man, and I was so looking forward to signing the e-petition to get you on ESPN, Luke.
March 31st, 2009 at 9:32 pm
I think we should all take a step back and start just block quoting Sherdog and Cage Potato articles and that can be our content. Also maybe post YouTube clips. That’ll tell the world what we are all about.
March 31st, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Asa –
This isn’t a matter of rankings, really. I’m sure some of the dudes on BE really do have their hearts into the project and care about it. Which you know what, that is cool. It isn’t my bag, but somebody has to care.
It is about self-importance. WAMMA has no right to do anything, nor does any blog.
March 31st, 2009 at 11:23 pm
Shook
April 1st, 2009 at 9:02 am
BE’s issue is that WAMMA is trying to force its way onto a sport without actually doing any of the work to build the sport
I’m sorry, what? BE’s decision to ratchet up the complaining comes at the same time their ranking system has been co-opted by the folks at USA Today. The same one they suddenly wish to argue about on ESPN with a designate of WAMMA. The same one that uses *our* rankings as part of its aggregated score (in spite of us not mattering! Hah!). Their rankings are important to them because it legitimizes them and their opinions in the world of mainstream media, at least as far as they are concerned. With that legitimacy comes more traffic, more ad revenue, more promoters coming to them with fights to sell. Or, at least, that is the goal.
And hey, that’s fine. If I were looking for a job or to make money in the fight industry, boy howdy, I’d love to get my rankings in USA Today. But don’t sit here feigning impartiality or that you’re doing this for the good of the sport alone. And worst of all, don’t start arguing that they aren’t “our rankings” when pushed. What a horrible copout. If your rankings are based on the lists of a bunch of other people, then that’s your method to creating them. If WAMMA’s are based on a chosen voting bloc, that’s their’s. There’s no argument that BE can use about their rankings that a WAMMA exec couldn’t rationally use about their own.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:51 am
Brookhouse has been going after WAMMA for months — first he gave them a lot of rope — then they hung themselves.
Here are the posts:
WAMMA: Hard Truths and Failed Promises October 20th, 2008
WAMMA Officials Respond to Bloody Elbow Reader Questions October 15th, 2008
Interview With WAMMA CEO Dave Szady and COO Michael Lynch June 20, 2008
My beef with WAMMA started when they threatened to sue a kid who posted on our site:
Don’t Mess With the WAMMA
And we have not one but two iron clad reasons why our rankings are 100% better than theirs:
1) We’re not trying to muscle our way into the MMA business by sanctioning title fights for a piece of the action.
2) We’re not dismissing the results of our ranking system so we can crown “champions” in the hopes of sanctioning title fights featuring same.
Anything else?
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:43 am
You guys take things too seriously. Who the fuck cares about WAMMA? Why bother pointing out that WAMMA does nothing or even “going after them?” It is like getting into a hockey fight with a retard, it just makes you look like an idiot.
Why would anybody take that “lawsuit” claim seriously? Especially on your site, you guys have Mike Rome who knows all that shit. You should know grandstanding like that means absolutely nothing. If you really dislike WAMMA, just ignore it. I can assure you if you ignore it completely and give it no press it’ll just go away eventually. We all know it is worthless.
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:22 am
Whether or not Brookhouse has written before doesn’t change that your front page this week has been flooded with endless griping WAMMA rankings, not to mention your “demands” to be on ESPN. None of you have even entertained why the ESPN might be interested in WAMMA’s rankings. Maybe there are long term plans to promote MMA that isn’t Zuffa related? Maybe their plans don’t include you? Maybe its a tough pill to swallow after working for the “Strikeforce of the East Coast” that you aren’t valuable to the big dogs in Bristol. Don’t know. Don’t care.
The only thing that I admit I find funnier is the whole “WHERE IS PRESS ROW” thing. From what I’ve heard about the press agents, those there were probably in the back hitting the catering spread while watching a bunch of nobodies fight on the flat screens set up for them. Sorry they aren’t letting you in on the BBQ I’m sure they hauled in. Then again, its Nashville. Maybe they had Meat and Three?
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:25 am
I should note that you don’t have to be sanctioning world title fights to profit. And hey, that’s fine! Who says you can’t? But don’t go telling me that you have no financial interest in this. Besides, what is to hold you back were you to grab any sort of dominance in the world of MMA rankings from handing out world titles, a la Ring Magazine?
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:16 pm
Alan, you’re conflating our having an interest in being successful with WAMMA’s conflict of interest. They’re promoting themselves as a source of unbiased rankings while seeking to profit by manipulating those rankings.
The “demand” to be on ESPN was a post by a reader who means well. Personally I could give a fuck about that.
I also learned a great deal working for the UWC — namely that I never want to work for an MMA promotion ever again.
I enjoy writing about MMA, don’t care for the behind the scenes antics.
The reason we’ve been writing about WAMMA is because they’re on ESPN and we think its a travesty since people watch ESPN and take them seriously.
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:08 am
And so we I return to my two base points:
-As much as you would like to claim that you are in it for the growth of the sport, there is a definite financial element to it as well. Trying to replace WAMMA with yourselves is integral in achieving that goal, because let’s be honest here, you’d like to be as big as Sherdog, MMA Weekly, et al., right?
-Clearly, there is some reason why ESPN decided to go the WAMMA route. An MMA show run by some characters of ill repute is being taped for an ESPN network tonight for airing tomorrow. What value could WAMMA hold for ESPN?
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:02 am
These the lessons of 2009 are important ones. Behind the scenes antics are BS, for what it is worth. I can agree with you there.