Not being a fan of kick-ass, no holds barred UFC/MMA fighting, I had no idea that gun-related companies sponsored UFC fighters and bouts. Evidently, one of our least favorite ranges, The Gun Store in Las Vegas, is a prominent supporter. I also had no idea that Fox Sports had recently signed a deal to air UFC events. But Fox has taken a look at UFC sponsorships from gun-related business – and also knife, ammo and hunting-related firms – and banned them. . .
We go to the source for the latest on UFC and MMA, namely cagepotato.com:
Starting January 23rd, Ammo To Go and The Gun Store, among others, will no longer be able to sponsor fighters. When contacted by CagePotato in hopes to better understand the reasoning behind the less than popular decision, the UFC said only that “These are rules set in place by Fox” — who declined to comment.
We all knew that concessions were made in order to secure the FOX deal, but did we really think it would come to this?
And themmacorner.com reports:
The Gun Store, based in Las Vegas, has sponsored numerous fighters in recent years, from heavyweight Shane Carwin to lightweight Spencer Fisher. The location has also hosted prominent fighters such as light heavyweight champion Jon Jones (pictured), UFC Hall of Famer Randy Couture and MMA legend Wanderlei Silva.
The decision has left some UFC participants scrambling to replace the income lost from the ban. A call to Fox Sports for comment was not returned. It seems clear that political correctness has wheedled its way into even this obscure corner of the sports world. The Fox Sports brain trust – a group few would have suspected of being anti-gun – appears to have decided that firearms-related sponsors are beyond the pale, amidst all that uber-macho, smashmouth action.
Daniel Defense is a sponsor of cage fighting too
This reminds me of NASCAR trying to undo the image of being a blue collar white mans sport. In this case fox is pre-empting that forgone conclusion by removing those sponsors to clean up ufc’s image. I guess condomdepot.com is still good to go though.
We can’t view the image of a gun on the shirt of a man who is walking towards a cage to pummel another man? Why not? Because a the image of a gun suggests violence? No more so than the dude who is wearing it, I think. Oh well …
One of the only things I liked about Unnaturaly Fierce Cuddling was that they let anyone sponsor anything in the “sport”. This is a stupid move for Fox.
I don’t understand this at all. If you made a Venn Diagram of “UFC/MMA fans” and “gun owners/enthusiasts” the circles would probably overlap about 85%, at least that’s been my experience. It seems political correctness is overwhelming common (and business) sense, yet again.
That’s probably the issue. They want to expand their viewership, but suburban mommies won’t let their impressionable young ones watch something that involves guns. Seems hard to imagine they would be ok with guys beating the living snot out of each other, but I’m guessing that’s why this ban came about.
First they show their support for SOPA, and now this. The UFC is starting to really rub me the wrong way.
I’m a big MMA fan, a big Fox fan and a big gun fan.
I’m not sure that this had anything to do with political correctness. I can state with certainty that, with their tattoos, their logo baseball caps and t-shirts and condom ads emblazoned on the seats of their trunks, MMA fighters are human billboards. They walk into the octagon looking like the guys who used to carry sandwich boards back in the ’30s.
I read this piece and the first thing that popped into my head was: Zuffa, What a doofus.
Why do you call everything you can a “ban.” Wouldn’t the proper word to describe the turning down of advertisers be “decline” rather than ban?
Not exactly. The advertisers are sponsoring the fighters, not the UFC fight itself. Thus, the UFC is barring the fighters from accepting sponsorships from the gun companies. This is a ban, no?
Comments are closed.