27 Dec 2013 09:10:31 AM
By Matt Saccaro
This is one of those articles where you actually have to read what I say before you bash me in the comments.
It has become fashionable to criticize the UFC because of the declining numbers and questionable business decisions. The main point of the decline of the UFC ™ argument is the lack of stars present on the UFC’s roster. Georges St-Pierre is gone, and there’s no Brock Lesnar (who’s definitely *not* coming back, BTW), Kimbo Slice or other massive promotional powerhouse to fill in the gap. Even worse, Anderson Silva‘s resplendently shining star was irrevocably dimmed by Chris Weidman via brutal (and somewhat hilarious) knockout.
If you subscribe to this narrative, UFC 168 represents a chance for the UFC to slow their decline. If Silva prevails, the UFC has a bankable champion again; the crisis of the UFC’s future isn’t averted per se but at least it’s delayed.
This is the wrong way to look at it.
First, Anderson Silva is 38 years old. Despite his ten-fight deal, he likely won’t be around much longer. Even if he does stay for a while, he won’t be the same fighter. UFC 162 taught us that. Silva was just a 1/2 second too slow against Weidman. How much slower will he be a year from now? Two years from now?Read More DIGG THIS