I'm glad to see some main stream USA Todaycoverage of the UFC in a major newspaper, its a step forward (Even if its on the second to last page behind horse racing). But the quality of the article and the information in it is anemic and most of it is old news to most MMA fans.
On the eve of UFC 97 the main story should be about Anderson Silva, he's the main event and superstar of the UFC, then Liddell, then Kongo etc. etc. Chuck peaked already to most fans, nothing against him but even if he wins against RUA, so what?!
Cover Silva instead and forget about trying to attract readers to MMA through minor celebrity cachet. I don't care if Liddell was on 'MTV cribs', who gives a SH#T?
I'm not sure who the author is, one, "Beau Dure", probably a rookie writer looking to move up to baseball at the first chance. And is 'Beau' a girl or guy name. If its a girl have her cover women's MMA and let a guy cover his own damn sport.
He/she should write more about his training and the blood, sweat, and tears. How badly does he want to win and why? Does he have a chance, will it make a difference? Why exactly has he been getting his ass kicked lately (age, technique, bad luck)?
The 'devestating punch' by Evans, what kind of punch was it and how did the fight play out for Chucks future?
Anyway, I think the article is disappointing because its passe high-school level journalism and weak on everything accept celebrity nonsense. USA Todayshould get someone who knows the sport and cover it everyday of the week prior to a UFC event.
You can appeal to the mass audience and MMA fans at the same time with quality writing. I'll be watching for Mondays paper to see how they covered UFC 97 hopefully it's not more of 'Beau's lame BS.