It's Good to Be "Bad for the Sport..."

Something to share with folks, that will likely garner some great attention for the Network, hence it's shows as well, is an article hitting ESPN Magazine next week, that features Ultimate Fighter Championship (UFC) President, Dana White (the man in charge of the largest fighting organization on the planet) calling the online magazine I write regularly for - SavageScience.Com, "bad for the sport."

A bit of background - Dana apparently doesn't care for the fact that we talk about ALL aspects and organizations of the sport, rather than just smootching big ole' white UFC butt. The fact is, is that the sport and it's footprint continues to grow, and while the UFC has a lion's share, there ARE other promotions out there, with great fighters, super promotions and bright futures.

My goal here - in general - is to help remind everyone ELSE about another company that was once called "Bad for the Sport" and has not only taken on that moniker as it's trademark calling card, but become a $500mil company as of last year - TapouT (www.tapout.com).

Not only have them become wildly successful, but the organization that was "bad for the sport" now also has its logos on the board shorts and jerseys of EACH of the UFC fighters on the weekly UFC-based reality show I review each week (The Ultimate Fighter).

I guess "being bad for the sport" is kind of relative, isn't it?

Here's to the future of being "bad for the sport" - http://www.thesavagescience.com/boxing-author-13