Rich Hansen's Take
THE MMA BLOWTORCH: Five possible drawbacks to the UFC/WEC merger to consider in 2011
Nov 9, 2010 - 7:40:55 PM THE MMA BLOWTORCH: Five possible drawbacks to the UFC/WEC merger to consider in 2011

DISCUSS ALL THIS IN OUR NEW MMATORCH FORUM

...OH, ONE MORE THING - PLEASE BOOKMARK US & VISIT DAILY!

By: Rich Hansen, MMATorch Columnist

There are two WEC events left on the MMA schedule. At the conclusion of WEC 53 in December, the WEC will cease to exist. Eleven days after Zuffa announced that the WEC was being melded into the UFC banner, the general opinion of the internet MMA fanbase is pretty much, "F*** YEAH! WOOHOO!" When pressed for what they like most about the merger, the most popular response is, "Because, F*** YEAH! WOOHOO!" And when asked to point out the best part about the merger, the most popular response is usually, "F***ING EVERYTHING! WOOHOO!"

Now, I too am happy to see this merger finally occur. I think it's an overall net positive for the MMA landscape, and an even larger positive for Zuffa. But whenever I see such a large majority of people taking the exact same position on a topic, it gets my hackles up and leaves me feeling a little suspicious. There has been almost no criticism of this move, and even less analysis of the potential pitfalls. So, with no further adieu, I present to you, gentle reader, my list of five potential drawbacks to the WEC/UFC merger.

LESS FREE MMA

Every WEC event since WEC 25 in 2007 has been promoted under Zuffa ownership. Every WEC event since WEC 28 in June of 2007 has aired on Versus, with the exception of WEC 48 which aired on pay per view.

In the last seven months of 2007, four events aired on Versus.
In 2008, six events aired on Versus.
In 2009, eight events aired on Versus.
In 2010, seven of the WEC's eight events aired on Versus.

Doing a little math, the WEC has placed seven events per year on basic cable. In 2010, the UFC also put two of their shows on Versus. In 2011, Versus will air four UFC events, and obviously zero WEC events. Meaning, of course, that Versus will be airing five fewer events on their network in 2011 than they did in 2010.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm a member of the camp that says that we are nearing the saturation point. So losing five free shows on Versus won't be the end of the world. And, confession time, in 2010 I missed more WEC shows than Strikeforce, Affliction, Dream, and UFC events combined. It's a small number, but still. But the talk of potential oversaturation isn't the point. The real danger of the reduced number of free shows is that there will be less high-quality MMA on free television.

Assuming that the WEC 53 card doesn't get changed, there will be six WEC title fights airing on Versus in 2010. In 2009, there were seven WEC title fights (one of which was for an interim title, but I'm trying to make a point here, people!). In 2008 there were eleven WEC title fights on Versus, and that doesn't account for Paulo Filho missing weight in what would have been the twelfth title fight of that year. And, to be fair, back in 2008 the WEC had more weight classes than they do now. But if anything, the extra weight classes only further illustrates my point.

Tell me, sir, how many UFC title fights, (SIR, I feel like Keith Olbermann here), do you think are going to be on Versus this year. Hell, on Versus and Spike even? None. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Pi divided by pi minus one. The quantity of infinity minus one multiplied by zero. So be as ecstatic as you want about the WEC joining the UFC, but the quality of free MMA is going to plummet in 2011. The WEC fights that made the WEC the event to watch are going to be on pay per view now.


THE FIGHTS THAT MADE THE WEC SPECIAL ARE NOT GOING TO BE ON FREE TV ANYMORE

The reason that the WEC became the most consistent source of excellent fights was because of, well, the consistently excellent fights. I know, that wasn't worth the wait was it?

Anyhooo, when you turned on Versus to watch a WEC event, you knew that it was very likely that the first fight on the card was likely to be a barn burner. That fight is now going to be on the unaired portion of a UFC pay per view.

When it was time for the main event, you knew that the WEC title fight you were about to see was a fight of the year candidate even before the opening bell rang. That title fight will now be on pay per view.

Versus was notorious for letting WEC shows run long. If there was ever a good show on the prelims, that fight was going to make its way onto the Versus broadcast (with the notable exception of Cerrone vs. McCullough at WEC 38. That particular fight was a 2008 fight of the year candidate, but didn’t air because it went to a decision. Heads rolled after WEC 38 because of that fight being booked on the prelims instead of the main card, but that's neither here nor there). So that barnburner between two unknown guys isn't going to be on TV because, most likely, those two unknown fighters who put on the amazing fight won't even have a spot in the new UFC. Because…..

THERE WILL BE FEWER FIGHTS PER DIVISION

The UFC will be taking on three full divisions of fighters from the WEC. Those fighters had eight events per year on which they could be booked, and of course those events were exclusive to those specific fighters. In 2011, the UFC is tentatively scheduled to put on an extra two shows, as they will run four shows on Versus as opposed to the two they ran in 2010.

So let’s do a little exercise here:

In 2010, there will have been twenty-four UFC events:

Fourteen pay per views
Two numbered events on Spike
Four Ultimate Fight Night events on Spike
Two Ultimate Fighter Finales on Spike
Two UFC on Versus shows

In those twenty four cards, 253 fights will have taken place, for an average of slightly more than 10.5 fights per card. The UFC had five weight classes in 2010, so that's an average of 50 fights per weight class.

Let's assume that there will be the same twenty four events in 2011, plus two more Versus events, for a total of 26 events. Let's also assume 10.5 fights per card, for a total of 273 fights in 2011. Those 273 fights will encompass seven weight classes in 2011, not five, for an average of 39 fights per division in 2011.

2010 – 50 fights per division

2011 – 39 fights per division.

The impact of losing eleven fights per division can not be overstated. In essence, the featherweights and the bantamweights that made the WEC such a phenomenon are going to have fewer chances to fight. And the less often they get to fight, the more we, the fans of these fighters, lose.


FEWER FIGHTERS PER DIVISION

So, if there are going to be fewer fights per division, it stands to reason that the UFC will be trimming the chaff. Now, I suppose that could be considered a positive, because as you cut the bottom of the division out, the average talent level per division will rise. And with elevated pressure one could safely expect elevated performances. And as spots open up, new and exciting talent will be brought in. And since more guys will be on the market, more UFC castoffs will be available for Strikeforce (and Bellator, if they continue to exist).

But I just can't declare the release of dozens of fighters as anything but a net negative. Awwww, he has a heart.


EVEN LESS COMPETITION FOR THE UFC

Undeniably, the UFC has been the number one promotion in the sport, but who has been number two? A large portion of people would say that the WEC, taken as a separate promotion and ignoring that they were under Zuffa ownership, was the number two promotion in the world. So in essence, numbers one and two have combined to form a near total monopoly in their industry. I don't think anyone with a sane mind would consider Strikeforce, Bellator, or any Japanese promotion to be true competition with the UFC. So for the sake of conversation, the UFC has no competition.

Is this a good thing or a bad thing? It's hard to tell, what with there being no direct precedents for us to study. There is one indirect precedent that comes to mind, though, and that is the acquisition of WCW by Vince McMahon.

Now, with MMA Torch being an affiliate of PWTorch, there is plenty of information to be had over there. Some of the archives may be walled off, but drop my name and I'm sure Wade will be glad to offer you a discount equal to aforementioned number of title fights the UFC will put on Versus in 2011. So I'm going to skip the nitty gritty of the aftermath of the WWE’s acquisition of WCW, and go right to the important parts.

Simply put, right now, all professional wrestling sucks. Back then, it didn't.

OK, so at best that's anecdotal evidence. And maybe it's more opinion than fact. But my opinion shall not waver, and I believe that the consensus opinion of civilization is on my side on this one. And maybe it's an uneducated guess on my part when I say that the reason pro wrestling has lost it's cachet as the cool thing to like (as it was back in 1997 or so), is directly due to the lack of competition that Vince McMahon and his lackeys in Connecticut have had in the last decade or so. But history has shown that the most successful eras in WWE history were the Hogan era (when Ric Flair and company had a loyal and rabid, albeit primarily southern, fanbase), and the Attitude era, which happened as a direct reaction to the WCW and their nWo gimmick.

Look, I'm not trying to say that the lack of competition in the marketplace is going to doom, or even slightly harm, the UFC. I'm just saying that it's something to keep your eye on. It is possible that the lack of competition could be a detriment to the UFC's growth.

As a matter of fact, I'm not saying that any or all of these factors are going to have a negative impact on the UFC. For all anybody knows, none of these issues will slow down the UFC's conquest of all that is good and holy. It's eminently possible that everything I've pointed out will have zero impact.

All I'm trying to accomplish here is to point out that the community is looking at this merger with rose coloured (that 'u' is for you, Chris Park) blinders on. Let's all take a deep breath and slow down here, and realize that it is at least possible that there are issues to consider. Maybe none of them will be land mines, but some of them could definitely be speed bumps.