While Freeman's attack was reprehensible, I found Doyel's response hardly more dignified. They've continued thier spat on the message boards, so I thought I'd send them the thoughts of a tried and true MMA/boxing fan.
http://www.sportsline.com/mcc/messag...no/2397849/0/L
'Freeman, Doyel, I'm putting you both on notice, actually. Because each of you is peddling ignorance, in spades.
Firstly, Freeman, the "barfighters" and "human cockfighting" schtick was tired 12 years ago, even when it was far more applicable. MMA fighters are trained athletes in multiple disciplines, including your beloved boxing. The fact that they engage in ground fighting or striking with more than their hands does not make them any less dignified as combatants than boxers (who, mind you, routinely clinch and hold, low blow, and occassionally bite their opponents). MMA is a far safer sport than boxing, with no casualities in the history of sanctioned MMA competition. Boxers die as a result of injuries from sanctioned fights, every year. You clearly have virtually no understanding of the sport and have no basis from which to criticise, outside of your extreme audacity. You clearly are feeling squeezed as an outsider to a growing worldwide phenomenon, and have resorted to the lowest form of backlash as a means of reconciling yourself with the situation. As a longtime fan of boxing, I'm ashamed to have your assanine rantings as representative of the boxing worlds views toward MMA.
As for you, Doyel, well you made some valid arguments as to why boxing has soured in recent decades, as well as why MMA has made it's slow ascent to nationwide recognition, but in reality, your tactics are no less slanderous than Freeman's. If in fact, MMA is the present and future, and you truly believe boxing to be a dead art, what do you have to gain from pissing on its proverbial grave? Why not do the classy thing, take the high road, and celebrate the one remaining fight you feel is relevant to American fight fans. MMA owes as much to boxing as any other combat sport..why not show some gratitude if this is boxing's last hurrah? Also, I find it a bit troubling that you're the representative of the MMA viewpoint, and yet your experience with Pride is limited to FSN re-airs of old fights? Can I be the baseball guru at SportsLine if I only follow the National league? Pride was the premier organization in MMA for a time when the UFC was a fringe sport in the US, as evidenced by the defection of many of the UFC's best fighters from the late 90's (Mark Coleman, Don Frye, Mark Kerr, Gary Goodridge etc) to it's ranks. Pride made MMA events into spectacle, skyrocketed the salaries and visibility for fighters, and hosted many of the greatest MMA bouts in the history of the sport. While Pride may be in transition after the recent purchase by the UFC, your ignorance regarding the organization and its fighters is reprehensible considering your position at a national..indeed global, website. It's akin to your soccer correspondent only having watched MLS for the past decade. So, thank you for what you've done and are doing for the sport, no thank you for your bash on boxing, and please, school yourself to the history of MMA on the world stage. The UFC, though emerging as a global leader, is far from the only place in town for elite level MMA.
As for boxing...boxing has some serious issues, to be sure, and by observable trends is on the backside of a long decline as one of the premier sports in America. All of the issues with corruption, promoters, pay-per-view, obscure belts and weight classes, mandatory fights, in addition to the general lack of recognizable star power, have all contributed to this slow degradation of a once great tradition. The rising popularity of alternative combat sports has also contributed, but to be sure, boxing has crafted its own plight and cannot lay the burden of it's failures on outside forces.
That being said, let me explain to you why boxing isn't, and never will be, "dead" as a sport. Those making MMA out to be the enemy of boxing are only partially correct, in so much as MMA incorporates boxing technique and conditioning into into the overall cocktail of fighting styles it encompasses. You also see variations on wrestling, submission grappling, and kickboxing, all incorporated to varying degrees in MMA. So the question has to be asked, since MMA incorporates kickboxing, why does K-1 continue to flourish as an organization? Why are submission grappling and jiu-jistu tournaments like Abu-Dhabi still around? Why are there still collegiate and Olympic wrestlers, both Greco-Roman and freestyle?
The fact is that while MMA may have already surpassed boxing in terms of overall popularity and recognition in America, boxing as an art form and as a sport is under no threat of "dying", any more than any other discipline of martial arts. In fact, most MMA stars would likely tell you the crucial importance of training boxing techniques into their standup skillset. Now MMA mirrors reality far more than strictly boxing in so much as it more closely mimmicks actual fighting scenarios..I can tell you personally that of the number of fights I've been in, few have remained standing the entire time, and almost none were limited strictly to blows with the hands. In this way MMA has a transcendent appeal to those who follow combat sports.
Now some people can still appreciate guys who strictly throw hands, and those people will always appreciate boxing on some level..but MMA still has guys to offer them as well (Liddell, Gomi etc). Some people prefer submission artists who can impose their will on the ground, and while they will follow Sambo tournaments and the ADCC, they can still watch MMA for their fix too (Nogueira's, Fedor). Kickboxing fans can soak up some K-1, and then tune in for Mark Hunt and Mirko "Cro Cop" Filipovic (yes he has a last name) in MMA circles.
So yes, you can be, and yes I AM a fan of both MMA and boxing. I was transfixed when Hopkins beat Tarver, and I cheered when St Pierre KO'd Hughes. I admire Ricky Hatton's panache and I marvel at Fedor Emelianenko's brilliance. I see no conflict between such feelings and experiences. I was a fan of MMA when it was an outsider sport, under threat from Congress with virtually no positive press coverage. I was a fan of boxing when it was front-page material, when the nation stood still for big fights and boxers were transcendent figures in American culture. However the tides have turned, for better or worse, I'll still be a fan of both, tomorrow and going forward. I have no need to engage in petty, childish demagoguery and name calling, as apparently do national columnists like yourselves.'