AS CONOR McGREGOR’S supporters streamed out of the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas after UFC 189, it was difficult to envisage how any other mixed martial arts personality could be having a more substantial worldwide impact than the newly-crowned UFC interim featherweight champion.
Five thousand miles separate Vegas and McGregor’s hometown of Dublin, yet the majority of the 16,000-plus fans who witnessed him defeat Chad Mendes in the flesh were Irish; albeit a significant proportion — J1 students, for example — were already in the US.
Nevertheless, it was almost impossible to avoid McGregor in the build-up to, and aftermath of, what was one of the biggest events in MMA history. The 27-year-old Dubliner transcends the sport and has single-handedly dragged it into the public consciousness in his own country.
And therein lies the primary reason for the belief that McGregor is MMA’s biggest star. McGregormania is global but Ireland is its nucleus. When you’re positioned in such a bubble, it’s not easy to take a step back and analyse a situation from a reasonable distance. We were guilty of doing the same after his 11 July win.
But if we were searching for proof that there was someone in the MMA world who McGregor has yet to overtake, the wait only lasted three weeks. Headlined by the women’s bantamweight title bout between Bethe Correia and undefeated champion Ronda Rousey, UFC 190 took place last Saturday night in Rio de Janeiro.
In a discussion about who MMA’s biggest stars are today, there are two main protagonists. It’s undisputed. And while McGregor may be the king, the reaction to Rousey’s latest win shows that it’s the queen who’s still in power.
What defines an MMA star is something which is open to individual interpretation. Being a star doesn’t necessarily require you to be the most talented fighter, either pound-for-pound or in your respective division — something Chael Sonnen can attest to.
Of course, having sufficient skills to compete regularly in big fights is an essential component of star quality, but that also has to be accompanied by an ability to garner the interest of the public when you’re not in the octagon.
Essentially, it boils down to the extent to which you can convince the audience to watch your fights, read your interviews and part with their cash. McGregor has that in abundance. Rousey, however, is still out in front. And in spite of McGregor’s rapid rise, some of the figures which have emerged in recent days suggest that the gap between the pair may even be increasing for now.
McGregor and UFC 189 came up 0.003% short of setting a new traffic record for leading website MMAjunkie.com, the mixed martial arts arm of USA TODAY. Rousey and UFC 190 smashed it by 76.8%. The previous record was set by UFC 184 back in February. No prizes for guessing who featured in the main event that night.
“We have a steadily growing number of unique users who come to MMAjunkie each month,” Dann Stupp, MMAjunkie’s co-founder and editor-in-chief, told The42.
“However, the day after UFC 190, we got our usual monthly total of unique users in just one 24-hour period. That means Rousey was pulling in both MMA and non-MMA fans in droves for UFC 190.
“I’ve covered MMA for about a decade now, and Rousey and McGregor are as popular and ‘clicky’ as any fighter I’ve covered during that time. Chuck Liddell, BJ Penn, Anderson Silva, Georges St Pierre, Brock Lesnar and others all had their time, but other than perhaps Liddell, no one has pulled in non-MMA fans like Rousey and McGregor do.
“I think part of it is that they have more exposure through social media and savvier PR/marketing folks than fighters had just a few years ago. But again, they’re rare personalities.
“Liddell was a badass with a fun fighting style, but he couldn’t do what Rousey and McGregor do on the mic or in interviews. And that’s the key to getting someone to tune in to an MMA event for the first time.”
McGregor seems to be doing everything right in terms of promotion, so what’s been the key to Rousey staying a step ahead? Her status as an Olympic medallist and — since last year — an actress has been a major factor. Being the sport’s most dominant athlete hasn’t hurt either.
Stupp said: “Right now, I think Rousey is better situated for mainstream exposure thanks to the Olympic credentials, her thoroughly dominant skills, her acting roles and the fact that women’s MMA is still relatively new and peculiar to general sports fans here in the US. If he keeps winning, I think McGregor could have the same effect.
“Rousey, though, has a few more headlining gigs, and those pay-per-view fights are what really get the mainstream outlets looking at MMA. Like McGregor, Rousey talks a good game and gives a good interview. I think those things are key to gaining such popularity. McGregor just needs a few more opportunities to headline big PPV cards.”
The UFC reported a figure of one million PPV buys for UFC 189, but UFC president Dana White told Ariel Helwani on FOX Sports on Saturday night that UFC 190 looked set to exceed that number.
Rousey’s promotional nous is often under-estimated. She generated enormous interest in a contest against an inferior opponent by reacting to Bethe Correia’s pre-fight taunts. In the post-event press conference, the champion immediately turned her attentions to selling her next bout — against Miesha Tate, a fighter she has already disposed of twice before.
“I think one advantage I do have against a lot of my opponents is they don’t really know what they’re getting into when they come in there,” Rousey said. “They can watch as much footage as they want, but they don’t know what it’s actually like to be in there with me.
“That’s why I think Miesha’s one of my greatest challenges because she already has an idea of what she’s getting in there with. I know I’ve improved a lot since the last time we fought but I don’t have that element of surprise. And I know she’ll bring in something different every single time, so I’m eager to see what she comes up with this time.”
As for Rousey’s duel with McGregor for superstar superiority, the US market is the most vital and there she reigns supreme. McGregor has become a big name west of the Atlantic, no doubt about it, but despite his association with the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger, his reach hasn’t extended quite as far into the American mainstream as Rousey’s.
Rousey was the main social media talking point on Saturday for Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Aaron Rodgers and a host of other big-name celebrities. Even Rex Ryan, head coach of NFL side Buffalo Bills, brought Rousey up in a press conference this week.
MMA has never experienced being a hot topic like that before. Ever. Both Rousey and McGregor have been responsible; the impact has just been more widespread in the case of the former Olympian.
“USA TODAY owns MMAjunkie so a lot of our MMA coverage ends up in the newspaper and on USATODAY.com,” Stupp explained. “Since USA TODAY really tries to cater to a general sports audience, they want needle-movers, and Rousey and McGregor — and guys like Jon Jones, Anderson Silva, Brock Lesnar and even ‘CM Punk’ — move the needle better than anyone.
“In other words, those are the guys who are proven to appeal to a general sports fan who may not really watch MMA much.
“MMA will never be as big as the NFL or other major sports in the US, and a number one versus number two fight isn’t guaranteed to strike a chord just because they’re the best two fighters in a division. It takes big personalities. Right now, Rousey and McGregor are as big as they get.”
One wonders how long such a level of interest in Ronda Rousey can sustain itself while she faces little, if any, threat to her UFC title. It’s widely accepted that Cris ‘Cyborg’ Justino is Rousey’s most likely conqueror, but the Brazilian featherweight has never cut down to the 135lbs division before so there’s no guarantee that the contest will ever take place.
In Dann Stupp’s estimation, however, for the time being at least, Rousey isn’t counting on that eagerly-anticipated fight to keep her at the top.
He said: “Honestly, I think this will be the case for her next few fights, regardless of whom she fights. Rousey is still new to a lot of fans and they’re going to tune in, regardless of which fighters she’s matched up against. She could be a 1/15 or 1/20 favourite for her next few fights and I think general sports fans are still going to be interested.
“Eventually, if she keeps those fans and maintains the interest from the mainstream media, they’re going to want to see a legitimate challenger like ‘Cyborg’. But for better or worse, I think we’re still a year or so away from that.
“So I don’t think the UFC is risking much if they keep booking squash matches for the immediate future. Part of Rousey’s appeal, at least to the general sports fan, is that dominance. It can be the selling point for at least a few more fights.”
Pointing out that Conor McGregor is currently behind Rousey in the pecking order of stars is in no way a criticism of ‘The Notorious’. In fact, in many respects he’s been even more of a phenomenon thus far, having gone from being an unknown debutant to a pay-per-view headliner in the space of just two years.
Nobody has managed to topple him yet in the octagon, but displacing Ronda Rousey as MMA’s number one superstar may ultimately represent his biggest UFC challenge.
kilcoyne is in great form he needs to start this game to show joe that he’s better than mcgrath. jack has become really complacent
@Eoin Murphy: has Jack become complacent? I think he’s been fighting really hard for a starting slot if anything. Cian is still better, but I wouldn’t call Jack complacent.
@Paddington C.: I wouldn’t call him complacent but his form had been poor since the lions. McGrath was excellent last weekend but kilcoyne deserved a run against Argentina and didn’t get it. Killer could be a better bench option than McGrath, especially if you’re chasing a game and he deserves his shot. Unfortunately we won’t learn much against the USA.
@Jim Demps: yeah, I’m not passing comment one way or the other on Kilcoyne, just wondering if it’s fair to say McGrath is complacent.
@Jim Demps: Jack has been in good form since returning from his injury and was v good off the bench against Argentina too, his scrummaging, tackle and ruck stats back that up and he was again very good last week.
Ireland are very rarely chasing games these days (thank god) and I think Jack offers what Joe wants from a sub prop a seamless transition from the starter to finisher.
I agree tho that Killer needed more game time and maybe he could’ve started or been a bench option vs Argentina considering they were down to their 3rd and 4th choice Tightheads
It’s great for Cian and Jack that the likes of Killer, Cronin and Buckley are playing great rugby it keeps them on their twos. We have great depth at Lh imo. But I still think only 2 will go to the wc. Can see Cian and Jack being the 2.
@Ian Verdon: yeah I’d say you’re right there. It’s unlikely killer or Cronin will break into any match day squad. Schmidt clearly doesn’t rate them which is fair enough.
@Jim Demps: He rates Killer over Cronin thats for sure, I prefer Cronin tbh but my opinion matters not. I think Killer should’ve been given more opportunities last year for sure but in the summer tour and since coming back from injury I think Jack’s form has been as good as anyone’s. Cian is just on another level when he’s on top form.
Jack gives that dependability that Joe loves, he gives away very few pens and his work load when coming off the bench is exceptional( not saying Killers isn’t) he must be proving to Joe tho in training that he deserves to be the 2nd choice Lh so that’s more than enough for me.
I know being a Munster man you want to see Killer there and so you should. There’s not a lot between the two it Jack overall is the more all rounded prop.
@Paddington C.: i understand what you’re saying but if he was good enough to be a lion then he should be pushing harder behind healy. I know that healy is a very good player but the gap between them is a country mile and jack doesn’t look like he’s going to do anything about it anytime soon
@Jim Demps: I think it’s harsh on Kilcoyne to say Scmidt clearly doesn’t rate him. Just because he rates McGrath more doesn’t mean he doesn’t rate Kilcoyne at all. Schmidt clearly rates Sexton the most and Carbery the second most, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t rate Ross. He rates eveyone in line, I’m sure he rates Carty even if Carty is too far down the pecking order to get called into the squad. There is a pecking order for Scmidt if the people he thinks best capable of executing his game plan and I’d say it’s 10 deep in every position, he doesn’t rate or not rate guys in the way that an Eddie O’Sullivan type coach used to.
@Eoin Murphy: When Healy is on top form there’s very few if any looseheads than can match him in the world, he’s on another level to any other Irish looseheads.
Every player goes through dips in form(Healy did a couple of years ago) and Jacks form last year was poor by his very high standards he has set over the 4-5 years previous to that but it’s improving again. There is a gap between Healy and Jack but I still see there being a slight gap between Jack and killer/Cronin. Again Joe wouldn’t be picking him if he wasn’t ticking all the required boxes in training so he must be doing most of what Joe requires right.
@Paddington C.: totally agree
@Eoin Murphy: yeah, just to add to what Ian said, you have to remember that when McGrath was #1 and Healy was #17 it was because Healy was playing way below his best (and was suffering from nerve damage), not because McGrath was playing way above what he is now. McGrath is probably slightly below his best, but Healy is right back on top form and for as long as he is playing on top for he’ll be #1.
@Paddington C.: I’m talking in terms of selection. While I’d agree that McGrath has a higher ceiling I’d say that kilcoyne has been playing the better rugby this season and last. His form certainly warranted a look in at either the Argentinian or NZ games off the bench but he got neither. A cameo, albeit an impressive one, against Italy and a more than likely start against the US won’t tell us anything about whether or not he can hack it against the big teams.
@Jim Demps: not getting into The Who’s better but McGrath’s form has not been poor it’s just not as good as Healy’s or the form he’s shown before the lions.
@Chris Mc: I’m not getting into that either. All being fit id go with Healy and McGrath. Just saying that Killer deserved an opportunity given his form. A bench place against the argies would have been fair reward.
@Jim Demps: picking a sub on the basis that he’s better if we are chasing a game is irrelevant for most all of Ireland’s games. We very rarely are in positions that we are chasing games. The vast vast majority of the time we need our bench to continue what’s already happening on the pitch and not give away anything silly.
@Jim Demps: The could be said about Rhys, Conan, Beirne, Bealham, Scannell to name a few. Again we don’t have the opportunity to see which players are impressing Joe in training and obviously Jack is otherwise he wouldn’t be selected. I think if he came back from his injury this season and was poor then he would’ve been dropped but he’s been in good form and he proved that against Argentina and New Zealand.
Form isn’t the only factor that decides ones place if it was there would be considerable changes to the match day 23. It’s all about which players are best in putting Joe’s systems and tactics for each specific game in training onto the playing field. Joe must think Jack is the best 17 option atm and his performances and the teams results are backing up Joe’s selection process.
@Jim Demps: Jim did you ever consider even for a second that Healy and Mc Grath are simply better.
Saturday proved it.
The last 2 lions tours provide rich evidence as well.
@Paddington C.: fair point
@Oran Burns: i think you’re missing my point. My last post clearly says that I think they are better. I’m simply saying that killer never got an opportunity to show what he can do
@Ian Verdon: my point isn’t about who’s better. It’s about someone who’s playing well and not getting an opportunity against someone who’s maybe not playing to their best ability. The same could be said for Beirne and cooney certainly.
@Chris Mc: if giving away silly penalties was the criteria then Healy wouldn’t be near the team. We both know there are a lot of factors at play here. I would have picked McGrath against NZ but killer should have had a run against Argentina. If you don’t think so then fair enough but he’s putting up his hand for selection and isn’t getting the chance in my book.
@Jim Demps: I get you but I think over his last 4-5 appearances Jack has proved he is playing as well as or (in Joe’s opinion) better than Killer so I don’t see it as a battle of who’s in form as they both are(wasn’t the case last season I accept). Beirne can feel a little aggrieved but Toner has proved how essential he is in deploying Joe’s game plan and Hendy was v good off the bench but as I said before his time will come. Cooney for me is the only one who can feel genuinely hard done by but again Lukey must be adapting to Joe’s systems better also another big benefit for him is that he has a personal and professional relationship with all 3 Irish tens and that is a big factor in choosing a 9.
@Jim Demps: Has Kilcoyne not had 22 Irish caps to show what he can do?
@Jim Demps: I never said it was. Just that our subs are more likely asked to do more of the same than change things up.
Some players are just behind players who can’t be shifted.
Ruddock is a bit like kilcoyne and deserves to be first choice apart from the fact POM is just the perfect 6 and is not for moving. He may just have to bide his time and take his chance when it comes along and it will come.
@Andrew Hurley: I’d say he’s done very well this last year. 23 caps sure but the majority of them were against much weaker sides.
@Chris Mc: it certainly looks like Schmidt has no intention of making changes at loosehead anyway.
@Jim Demps: 15 of his 22 caps have been against Tier 1 nations.
He talks about changing his diet and then says “This is the hungriest I’ve ever been in my career,”. Someone give the man a burger
A lot of honesty in this interview but to me it reads as a guy who’s only just copped on to his true potential ( at 29 !) . And yes you can overtrain ! It also confirms my thoughts that while he’s a good ball carrier he was lacking in the scrum . If he had been around 15 years ago he’d be an automatic pick but guys like Healy , McGrath etc are better still and he took an age to realise that to get the jersey he has to do MORE than them . If he gets it he’ll have earned it.
@Limón Madrugada: Whilst I do agree everyone is different (and hence why S&C coaches adapt training for different players) for him to say that you can’t overtrain is an expression from someone who doesn’t sound very clever.
@Andrew Hurley: Very shrewd observation.
Overtraining can leave a lasting negative legacy when what is basically a short career is over.
Anyone with an iota of sports fitness knowledge will tell you that.
Jeez the country is awash with strength and conditioning coaches in all sports.
I don’t what players did in past eras without these lads and ladies !!
Aboy killer
@Anthony Palmer: good thing you didn’t accidentally place a space between the A and the B there