MMA  > General MMA  > News from presser.
June 9, 2011, 06:03 PM
From twitter @bokamotoESPN:

Breaking: Dana White says all non-title main events will be 5 rounds. Not Rashad/Phil though, bout agreements have already been signed.

Also, UFC will add flyweight division. Not sure when. Will start signing 125-pounders soon.
June 9, 2011  06:04 PM ET

Also it sounds like the ufc is done with spike. But i think every one knew that for awhile.

Comment #2 has been removed
Comment #3 has been removed
June 9, 2011  06:10 PM ET
QUOTE(#2):

I really hope this isn't true. Boo to all. Horrible, horrible, horrible.

Why?

June 9, 2011  06:13 PM ET
QUOTE(#3):

G4.

Ik. My freind with direct tv has it, hes a big gaming nerd. I think Charter doesn't.

Comment #6 has been removed
Comment #7 has been removed
June 9, 2011  06:23 PM ET
QUOTE(#6):

I don't care to see 125 lbs fighters. If I could lift two guys up at once and slam their heads together then I cant take them seriously in a fight. Just way too little. Zero interest.As far as the 5 round non title fights. First, I like fighters knowing they have no margin for error in a 3 round fight. Lose 1 round, and you're on the brink of losing. So, both guys come out hard and fast and turns into a better fight. Also, 5 rounds should just be for a championship fight. Gives a title fight a different feeling.

Idk who the top guy is at 125 but id still watch them fight. And tell me you wouldn't want 2 see past fights like Rampage vs Machida or Fitch vs. Penn go 5 rounds.

Comment #9 has been removed
June 9, 2011  07:44 PM ET

I can agree with 5 rounders for #1 contender fights and winner gets a title shot, like jds/carwin (even though we know it won't need those extra rounds) but don't agree with it for EVERY main event. Does that mean even ufc on versus fights like the davis/lil nog one would've gone 5 rounds? That's pointless.

Comment #11 has been removed
June 9, 2011  08:38 PM ET

Yeah if they have the tuf finalists go 5 rounds they are going to look like king of the cage fighters in a title fight. #gassed

June 10, 2011  06:23 AM ET

I agree every main event should be 5 rounds, but let me explain why.

We should not be paying for PPV's without a title fight as the main event. They have too many divisions for that to happen. Quit giving us BS ppv's with horrrible cards.

If every title holder defended his belt twice a year, there could be a PPV every month with a title on the line. Why is this so hard to do? I say if a fighter hasn't defended his belt in a year he should be stripped and when he comes back he can try to win it back.

So yes every main event should be 5 rounds, but that is because every main event should be for a title!!!!

Comment #14 has been removed
June 10, 2011  11:48 AM ET

If a champ doesn't want to defend his title "not due to injury" Then strip the belt from him.

Plus if they didn't have a PPV every month the fans wouldn't have the problem of seeing watered down cards..

Why not have a PPV every other month and just have a free showing every other month where you put lesser fighters on trying to make it to the PPV's.

June 10, 2011  04:13 PM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Also it sounds like the ufc is done with spike. But i think every one knew that for awhile.

aw man, I didn`t know that, I don`t have G4, and why the crap would they want MMA, I thought it was computer, gaming and stuff like that channel?

Comment #17 has been removed
June 10, 2011  11:10 PM ET

I'm pretty sure they're adding the 125 division as a favor for Kenny Florian so when he fails again at 145...and then at 135...his career won't be over.

 
June 10, 2011  11:22 PM ET

I think the 5 rounders for title eliminator fights is a pretty good idea - and like the examples mentioned by Adam, I'd be happy for Rampage/Machida or Penn/Fitch to have been 5 rounds.
If they keep it to #1 contender's fights (like the JDS/Carwin fight), I'm usually okay with it as some of these are not all that different from an interim title fight. And a champion is going to need to know how to fight 5 rounders anyway.
But for Fights Nights and UFC on Vs and random Strikeforce match-ups? Those guys aren't always in the hunt. In those cases, it's free entertainment, and the stakes don't really warrant a rule change.

I hadn't really thought about Jim's point in detail, but yeah that's a very legitimate concern. Especially since it's a blanket across the board policy instead of a sensible case-by-case option

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Tuukka Rask takes blame for Bruins' Game 1 loss
    Views
    2357
    Comments
    231
  2. 2
    Smush Parker allegedly punches high schooler
    Views
    1902
    Comments
    139
  3. 3
    Clippers, Warriors exchange barbs
    Views
    243
    Comments
    124
  4. 4
    Quarterback freefalling down draft boards
    Views
    6766
    Comments
    90
  5. 5
    Joel Quenneville's Midnight Hawk favored to win Illinois Derby
    Views
    488
    Comments
    88

SI.com

SI Photos