Fedor Emelianenko: A victim of his own glittering legacy
Ever since Fedor “won” his fight against Maldonado at the Eurasia Fight Night 50, I’ve seen a lot of self – proclaimed MMA reporters trashing Fedor’s legacy. “He should quit”. “He should leave before he tarnishes his own legacy”.
Fedor’s contribution to the sport is undeniable and unassailable. What made it even more absurd is the fact that the same people welcomed Brock Lesnar back, or hyped CM Punk’s debut fight.
When you call yourself a reporter, it is understood that you take all the factors into consideration, and come up with a reasonable, objective argument. Those who are calling for Fedor’s head are the same people who’re getting hyped to see Lesnar taking on Mark Hunt at UFC 200.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge fan of Lesnar. He has monstrous power, and his ground and pound was impressive – 5 years ago.
Watching Hunt face Big Foot Silva at UFC 193 in person proved two things – watching a fight live gives you a whole new perspective, and impressess upon you the fact that Hunt is probably the best knockout artist in the UFC’s heavyweight division.
With Conor getting the boot, UFC needed a ‘big name’ that would bring excitement and guarantee big PPV numbers. For months, Dana kept talking about bringing that big name, and it turned out to be Lesnar.
Dana once said that while MMA is a sport, if so, UFC can be considered to be in the sports entertainment business. The fighters need to promote themselves, and what they do outside the Octagon is just as important as what they do inside it.
After all, you need big gates and merchandise sales to make any substantial amount in the UFC. So why do people have this double standard when it comes to the fighters in the UFC, and others who’ve never fought for the company?