Originally Posted by Stonewall44
I think the original question is valid though because there are some super, gung-ho, die hard fans of the UFC who express extreme negativity towards Pride. All I can say is i think it would speak for itself if a lot of the belts were siezed by fighters who have spent the majority of their career fighting in Pride. We're just going to have to wait & see but it is going to be a blast to watch......
I agree with you in insofar as there are UFC fans here who are hard on PRIDE, but the majority of posts I've read seem to fly in the opposite direction - PRIDE diehards who turn their noses up at the UFC. Frankly, this smells like elitism to me - as in, "if you don't prefer PRIDE, it's because you don't know any better." Kinda like saying, "if you don't think James Joyce is the greatest novelist in the English language, it's because you didn't understand Ulysses
I'm not posting this to start a flame, just trying to point out that you can like the UFC without being a rube. I like the UFC, and probably know more about MMA then your average fan, both by watching MMA from many different organizations and researching it. But I like the UFC primarily because my favourite fighters are a part of it.
I can understand why you'd get hung up on associations in pro wrestling - remember the good old WWE vs. WCW vs. ECW days? But MMA is such a personal sport, it seems better to take interest in fighters themselves over their promotions. If Georges St. Pierre left the UFC, I'd probably still watch it, but you can be damn sure I'd be following Rush to PRIDE, King of the Cage, TKO, Cage Rage, or whereever he ended up.
In reference to the the last part of the quote - do you believe that the promotion makes fighters better? Is a fighter more accomplished for having fought in PRIDE, as opposed to UFC? It seems inaccurate to credit the promotion with the success of a fighter - it would be more accurate to credit the quality of a fighter's opponents then the promotion itself.