"Too Much UFC"......not for me.

Listening to my favourite podcast recently "The MMA Hour" with the excellent Ariel Helwani, the subject of "too much UFC" is often raised. Ariel and many other guests have been in agreement that there are simply too many UFC events these days. I've been thinking about this subject for a while now and it's something that I just can't agree with. Dana White has often stated that their long term aim is to make MMA the biggest sport in the world. It's a lofty goal but one which I would love to see realized. In all honesty I can't ever see MMA overtaking football (soccer for my American readers) in world wide appeal, but if it could even get close I'd be more than happy. The UFC has seriously ramped up the number of events over the last 12 months and the frequency of cards is only set to keep increasing. Being honest I can only see benefits to this "saturation approach". Look at other sports for a start, the most popular sports in the world saturate TV channels with live events and replays most nights of the week. Most of these sports don't operate a PPV model but the rational is still the same. More UFC events is surely better for the fighters, it means that they have to carry more fighters on the roster (giving more fighters access to the UFC health care), this raises standards across the sport allowing more fighters to train professionally with the increased financial security of being associated with the UFC. It also allows fighters to fight more often, increasing their visibility and marketability. The recent Fox deal will also have a major impact on the sport, giving fighters access to a wider market in which they can promote their brand. There is an argument that PPV numbers will suffer with an increase in the number of events. This is inevitable initially as viewers pick and choose cards in a time of economic uncertainty, but whilst individual cards may have slightly lower figures, the overall number of PPV buys should be higher with the vastly increased number of events. The fights on Fox will also introduce MMA to a whole new audience which should mean increased PPV buys with time. The increased number of shows combined with The UFC soon to be shown on network television also goes a long way to help the legitimization of the sport. MMA is still tarred with the brush of being a "no holds barred" "barbaric sport" in many quarters. The "saturation approach" should slowly erode this misconception as the sport becomes more and more accepted in the mainstream. I can't wait for the day that MMA is reported as a mainstream sport on the back pages of newspapers here in the UK. The more events we see, the higher profile fighters become in the USA and the rest of the world, the more likely it is to happen. The argument I've heard against this is that many fans can't afford to buy every PPV. We are lucky in the UK in that we pay an annual subscription fee and we then get to watch pretty much every event the UFC puts on. It's undoubtedly true that with an increased number of events more fans will have to pick and choose which events they watch, but that's always been the case. If the UFC only put on 6 shows a year there would still be fans that couldn't afford to watch all of them, so where do you draw the line? The important question is can the UFC genuinely have ambitions of being the biggest sport in the world whilst only having 12 or so shows a year? I'll let you make up your own mind...