Media Dana White releases new self loving me vs the media video.
- Thread starter Pechan
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2010
- Messages
- 18,434
- Reaction score
- 10,999
Literally none of them are "media" though. "MMA media" (ie: the people that actually are allowed to ask a question to Dana at a conference) is entirely controlled by TKO Holdings down to the last individual.
The people in that video are just individuals. Literally ZERO of them have a press pass.
This is similar to showing a guy that is your neighbor on social media complaining about Biden and saying "look the media is against Biden!" No... that dude across the street isn't at the white house press conference... he isn't the media.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2019
- Messages
- 382
- Reaction score
- 734
He's already made a vid about not being included in it
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2016
- Messages
- 9,739
- Reaction score
- 8,455
I like how they highlighted "it was literally terrible"
Was it literally terrible? Not figuratively? Was that just an opinion?
Was it literally terrible? Not figuratively? Was that just an opinion?
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2016
- Messages
- 29,763
- Reaction score
- 52,987
They're not even media, it's YouTubers who suck at youtubing.
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2007
- Messages
- 4,962
- Reaction score
- 1,379
the pre ufc 300 criticisms were a bit harsh imo. the card always looked damn good to me! could it have been better (on paper)? sure. but dana isn't really wrong here. that being said, I don't think there's a bigger media bully in the history of sports.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2023
- Messages
- 7,015
- Reaction score
- 13,163
Lol those were more boring than anything on 300
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2017
- Messages
- 17,811
- Reaction score
- 31,518
It's really not a difficult situation to figure out.
The NORMAL argument that exists is: Is this card good (as in meaningful, like something that justifies a purchase beforehand) vs Was the card "good" (as in exciting and enjoyable and having been worth to watch during and after). This is not an unusual argument, and anyone watching like the WEC events or paying attention to tiny fight nights for years and years can tell you that unstacked cards not only could still be exciting, but oftentimes WERE BETTER than the expectation that stacked cards had.
UFC 300 added the ADDITIONAL caveat of Dana seemingly promising some kind of parade-like spectacle of bells and whistles, so the expectation part of the argument got split into: "Meaningful" vs "Pomp and Circumstance"
I found a lot of the criticism of the card to be overboard, because it was very clearly a relevant and meaningful card all around. There was only 1 fight out of 13 that didn't have a ranked fighter on it, and it featured Bo Nickal fighting Brundage. The only other unranked fighters out of the other 24 were Kayla Harrison, Diego Lopes, and Jim Miller, who pretty clearly have some weight to their names.
But a lot of the criticism was of Dana's seemingly fabricated expectations on the Pomp of it all, because while the card was filled with good fights throughout, they were all fights that would have probably been booked on any other card at the headline or top. There wasn't something on it that was all that unexpected.
Now, I'm not sure what kind of shooting star anyone was expecting for this event, because anything surprising wasn't realistic, imo. Dana being a big ol' liar is kinda expected of a promoter.
And speaking of being a big ol' liar, Dana is purposefully conflating the original argument, saying that the event was amazing means everyone was wrong for talking about their expectations. Again, the argument became one of two different types of booking expectation were being argued, and he thinks action deliverance answers that question, AND is fully in on picking quotes out of context to serve that ego.
In short: Promoter misleads on how the card was going to be booked. The card ended up very well-booked, but not in the same way he seemed to promise, so people critique. The event was great. Promoter should celebrate a great event. Uses it incorrectly to suggest that the criticisms were wrong.
The NORMAL argument that exists is: Is this card good (as in meaningful, like something that justifies a purchase beforehand) vs Was the card "good" (as in exciting and enjoyable and having been worth to watch during and after). This is not an unusual argument, and anyone watching like the WEC events or paying attention to tiny fight nights for years and years can tell you that unstacked cards not only could still be exciting, but oftentimes WERE BETTER than the expectation that stacked cards had.
UFC 300 added the ADDITIONAL caveat of Dana seemingly promising some kind of parade-like spectacle of bells and whistles, so the expectation part of the argument got split into: "Meaningful" vs "Pomp and Circumstance"
I found a lot of the criticism of the card to be overboard, because it was very clearly a relevant and meaningful card all around. There was only 1 fight out of 13 that didn't have a ranked fighter on it, and it featured Bo Nickal fighting Brundage. The only other unranked fighters out of the other 24 were Kayla Harrison, Diego Lopes, and Jim Miller, who pretty clearly have some weight to their names.
But a lot of the criticism was of Dana's seemingly fabricated expectations on the Pomp of it all, because while the card was filled with good fights throughout, they were all fights that would have probably been booked on any other card at the headline or top. There wasn't something on it that was all that unexpected.
Now, I'm not sure what kind of shooting star anyone was expecting for this event, because anything surprising wasn't realistic, imo. Dana being a big ol' liar is kinda expected of a promoter.
And speaking of being a big ol' liar, Dana is purposefully conflating the original argument, saying that the event was amazing means everyone was wrong for talking about their expectations. Again, the argument became one of two different types of booking expectation were being argued, and he thinks action deliverance answers that question, AND is fully in on picking quotes out of context to serve that ego.
In short: Promoter misleads on how the card was going to be booked. The card ended up very well-booked, but not in the same way he seemed to promise, so people critique. The event was great. Promoter should celebrate a great event. Uses it incorrectly to suggest that the criticisms were wrong.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2021
- Messages
- 6,203
- Reaction score
- 12,352
Who is not giving them their flowers? Did you read any thread here about the event?
The "media" also gave them their flowers.
Dana has really condition you shills to think that any criticism or not being 100% positive is some horrible sin.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2005
- Messages
- 61,314
- Reaction score
- 11,034
lol.
It's a comment on how you guys can't give UFC and Dana their flowers without back handed comments and complaints. You're all spoiled babies. "but but the promoter exaggerated!!" lol.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2008
- Messages
- 15,456
- Reaction score
- 13,460
Still, it felt big at the time
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2018
- Messages
- 2,145
- Reaction score
- 2,943
Bro the card delivered what the hell are you on about
Definitionally, they are media. They may not all be *journalists*. And John Morgan gets the first question in every presser. He's not getting his checks signed by TKO Holdings. Vox Media Corps. owns much of MMA media and they, like many in the MMA media, have a personal/political vendetta with White. And no it isnt similar at all since these are channels and podcasts with a couple hundred thousand to upwards of two million subscribers. Individuals & orgs with actual influence. Not a boomer on Facebook with 50 friends.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2009
- Messages
- 24,398
- Reaction score
- 12,981
It's the COVID tour all over again where everybody said he shouldn't hold an event and then he did with no issues.
No idea why people can't just admit when he's right. 80% of this board legitimately confuses me as to whether or not they actually enjoy MMA.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2021
- Messages
- 2,849
- Reaction score
- 4,281
Dana kept the receipts.
Not only is this in defense of himself and UFC 300 but as he said, the fighters he booked.
All the media shitting on the fighters because it wasn't 6 hours of Conor Instagram reels and then Conor vs Mike.
Not only is this in defense of himself and UFC 300 but as he said, the fighters he booked.
All the media shitting on the fighters because it wasn't 6 hours of Conor Instagram reels and then Conor vs Mike.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2009
- Messages
- 24,398
- Reaction score
- 12,981
Pereira vs Hill would've main evented in literally any scenario besides Jon vs Stipe/Aspinall or Conor vs Chandler occuring at UFC 300. The bout order structure goes by heaviest undisputed title fight unless Conor's involved and LHW's the 2nd heaviest division.
So even if shit like DDP vs Adesanya or Islam vs Justin/Charles had even happened it would've gone below Pereira/Hill.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2017
- Messages
- 17,811
- Reaction score
- 31,518
Except that's not true.
Alex vs Hill ISN'T the main they wanted. They were hoping to get some big spectacle of a fight together that WOULDN'T have just been any other old main event, like how Conor vs Eddie was the main event over the heavier Woodley vs Wonderboy.
No one was saying Alex vs Hill was shit. They were saying that Dana was talking up having a main like Kong vs Godzilla.
And even if they WERE criticizing the booking (which would be wrong and dumb of them if they did) Dana is still A: Lying about what criticism he received and B: Wrong about how an event being exciting means the booking was right.
He's on this huge anti-media agenda he pushes, and he's dishonest about it. And he doesn't even need to be, cuz MMA media doesn't need his help proving how untrustworthy they are.
They're both wrong
