||02-08-2013 11:17 AM
Dana White ≠ UFC
I see it often on these boards - it's Dana's fault that people are talking their way into title shots. It's Dana's fault that fighters are cutting in line en route to fighting the champion. It's Dana's fault that a card is weak. It's Dana's fault that there are too many shows each year. It's Dana's fault that _____ gets more air time on a Countdown or Prime Time show than his or her opponent. It's Dana's fault that fighters are using TRT. It's Dana's fault that judging is poor. It's Dana's fault that judges make improper calls. It's Dana's fault that Fighter A makes more money than Fighter B. It's Dana's fault that undercard fighters are making peanuts. It's Dana's fault this, and it's Dana's fault that.
Are people really so naive? I understand that Dana's face is the one that's often out there, but you would think that he has free reign over the UFC and rules the organization with an iron fist. Why is no one calling out the Financial and Accounting departments? Why is no one calling out match-maker Joe Silva (who, by the way, gets your praise when a great match is made, yet it's Dana's fault when a 'meh' match is made)? Why is no one calling out the Fertitas, owners of the UFC?
I understand that being in the public eye makes you a target, but the types of things Dana White gets blamed for can be asinine at times. We're talking areas he likely has next to no say in (i.e. judging, refereeing, and commission decisions). Is 'Dana White' just a catch-all term these days, or are people honestly so clueless that they fail to comprehend that the UFC is actually a global enterprise with more than just one man pulling the strings?