- 3,938
- 11
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2007
Originally Posted by illphillip
I get what you're saying, and I understand Rampage's appeal to the urban audience and what that could do for the UFC.Originally Posted by MayhemMonkey000
Originally Posted by Bearcat23
If you don't think the UFC has a hand in the pocket of the NSAC you're kidding yourself. The UFC is the NSAC's money maker, and NSAC knows it. Boxing be damned.
I'm not saying there isn't, but I don't see why the UFC would want Rampage to lose his belt when he was one of the most popular figures in the sport. Honestly, Rampage touched more of a demographic then Forrest would. He had people in the hood training MMA. I got my homeboys calling me asking them to teach them some Thai and jits. Let it be before Rampage got big they'd still be on that "no *!#@" @@@* every time they watch a grappling match.
But the fact is the UFC's demo is far and away a white male, likely between 18-35 years old (they have younger fans, but those fans usually don't have their own $$ to buy PPV's).
Right now the UFC has a Hawaiian champ, a Canadian, 2 Brazilians, and what was an African-American champ in Rampage.
No Matt Hughes. No Chuck Lidell. No one that the core UFC consumer could relate to.
And there you have your new LHW champ.
Agreed. Completely forgot they didn't have a white American champ in there anymore after Serra lost. They do seem to be gaining more fans, but losing abunch of fans that started the whole UFC boom. Guess this is their way of evening it out.
Eddie Alvarez
Dude is a beast tho, 5'9 and walks around 215, big for a lightweight.
Waiiiiittttttttttttt... 2pac: Typo?