Would the UFC have more appeal if they got rid of that octagon?

Question

Everytime I watch a UFC match, I feel like I'm in a trailer park and, at any moment, someone would let loose a piglet for the audience to chase.

Why can't they just use a regular ring?

Answer 1

I agree with you on this, ring is a lot more suited and far better place for MMA competition, but for UFC I don't believe that it would work too well.

In my opinion what makes the UFC so unappealing nowdays for real and knowledgeable MMA fans out there is not so much the lack of ring as it is the all around lack of talent.
For the past few years they've been getting all their "stars" from reality shows and hyping them up with stories of how hard life or difficult childhood they had like that's supposed to turn them into world class MMA fighters. They don't pay athletes anywhere near enough and that's why they don't sign anyone big. For example last year Fedor Emelianenko, PRIDE heavyweight champion and the greatest fighter in MMA history was a free agent for some time, this year it was the same thing with Quinton "Rampage" Jackson and Wanderlei Silva, Mirko "Cro Cop" Filipovic is a free agent after every match because he only signs one fight contracts with PRIDE. And about all this UFC did absolutely nothing.
But they can do that because their marketing is perfect for United States and that's because most of the American MMA "fans" are completely ignorant of this sport (you'll find this statement proved just by their reaction any time a fight goes to the ground in UFC). All they know is what they see on Spike TV and the mentality is - if it's not there it's not worth watching. Many of them have not yet even heard of PRIDE or some other MMA organizations and not to mention seen the people I spoke about earlier and other top MMA fighters in action. So it's really not hard to predict that among "fans and MMA experts" like these, bringing in the ring instead of the octagon would be a very unpopular decision.
UFC basically gives the majority of Americans what they want to see and most importantly makes a lot of money in doing that. They know exactly who their viewers are and exploit that to the fullest.
But because of that they will also never get the fame and the global recognition that PRIDE has for instance, and for MMA fans world wide they will (with exception of 2 or 3 great fighters) basically be a joke.

Answer 2

As Eric said, in the early days there were no weight classes. There were a number of reasons for going away from that format. First and foremost, the regulating agencies in various states (most specifically Nevada) would not allow the events to take place absent weight classes. Secondly, the idea was to legitimize this as a sport rather than simple brawls. Formatting along the same lines as the more accepted boxing was a logical way to do that. Just as important is the fact that it makes for better fights. It is a simple fact that if the opponents are equally skilled, but one is bigger and stronger, the bigger guy will win. Some very skilled smaller fighters did have great success against bigger fighters under the old format, but the fights were boring. It was simply a matter of taking the big guy to the ground and wearing him down. It simply did not make good fights for the fans. So, in addition to weight classes, 5:00 rounds were added. The UFC may no longer simulate a realistic street fight or be used as a method for comparing one martial art against another (lots of homogenization), but it is much more fan friendly and is "the world's fastest growing sport." Its all good.

Answer 3

Octagon is great. I like how it can be used as a strategic part of the fight. If PRIDE is so great, how come Phil Barroni is tearing through PRIDE? Agreed, PRIDE has better heavyweights. As for other weights, I'd put Hughes, Franklin, and Lidell against any Pride fighters. Look what Tito did to Wanderlei.

Answer 4

That's their appeal. It's a cage and it's synanymous to the UFC. That's why they call it the Octagon.

Answer 5

No I think the octagon is more intense than a boxing ring with red ropes. Its more fierce and the sport isnt proper.

Answer 6

I like it more if they take out all that padded mat underneath so the submission fighters wouldn't have easy time rolling on the ground. I want to see they tried diving for opponent's legs, missed and hit their head or bruised their elbows on the hard ground. It wouldn't be Ultimate Fighting with all that protection.

Answer 7

I like the octagon, maybe they should add some spinning blades or make the fence have electrictiy going through it

Answer 8

the octagon helps alot of these fighters, but i think they should make it more visable to the fans

Answer 9

i like the octagon