# Strikeforce Commentary



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

*Gus Johnson Defends Strikeforce Commentary*

Some genius 'journalist' decided he should try to talk Scott Coker into refusing to let CBS use Gus Johnson to cover future Strikeforce events (although he seemed to think, and continue to think even after Johnson explained that he's independent of the promotion, unlike Mike Goldberg or Joe Rogan, Strikeforce hires Johson directly).

As much as I dislike Johnson, I do like his response:



Gus Johnson said:


> Do you even train? If you’re as credible of a journalist as you say you are, you can’t take the opinions of people on the Internet to heart, without talking to somebody who knows what they’re talking about — me included. I take jiu-jitsu three times a week. I know the difference between a kimura, an armbar, a reverse armbar and an Americana from side control, because I study it," he asserted. "As far as people saying that I damaged the image of the sport because of what I said about the shit that went down Saturday night, if anything, it was me trying to make an excuse for these idiots going out on national television and pulling what they did after the card was over. It’s obvious that it happens. People don't need to hear it from me to know that it happens. We've all seen it. I state the obvious, and that’s obvious."
> 
> Informing me that his own credentials include a blue belt under Renzo Gracie that he earned over two-and-a-half years of BJJ training (which coincides with the time he was hired as a commentator for EliteXC's CBS broadcasts), four years of kung fu and 10 years of "Western boxing" training, Johnson, also made the lofty claim that he does more to further mixed martial arts than the majority of URL owners who cover the sport.
> 
> "I take a lot of criticism, but I try my best to try to help promote this ******* sport, when nobody else, including television executives could give two shits because they think it’s barbaric and it’s filled with a bunch of hoodlums, which is exactly how it looked to everyone watching the show Saturday night. I don’t really care about the 'growing opinion', because there’s another side that isn’t going to feel that way [about me]," Johnson explained. "There are certain messageboards and websites where people don’t feel that way at all. The problem with MMA is that these Internet guys ruin the sport because they’re negative 90 percent of the time. I’ve looked at them. if we give everyone a voice, we wouldn’t get anything accomplished. I try to say as many good things about these athletes in this sport on a network level — not on an underground level or a Spike TV cable level or a pay-per-view level. This is actual television and nobody knows if they’re going to pull the plug on this thing. If that happens, then everyone will lose money.


Gus Johnson Defends Strikeforce Commentary in Angry Late-Night Phone Call


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

"Promote this ********* sport"

Ouch... that wont go well.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

Gus Johnson vs Joe Rogan @ catchweight 160. SFOBV!!


----------



## thrshr01 (Dec 30, 2007)

SideWays222 said:


> "Promote this ********* sport"
> 
> Ouch... that wont go well.


Yeah, he's really passionate about the sport using an explitive to describe it :sarcastic12:


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

SideWays222 said:


> "Promote this ********* sport"
> 
> Ouch... that wont go well.


 Unless you're Dana White. So you wanna be a fuckin announcer?


----------



## thrshr01 (Dec 30, 2007)

A nice response by eveezy from mmaforreal.com

http://www.mmaforreal.com/2010/4/21/1434494/gus-johnson-these-internet-guys



> That was a quote taken from a telephone conversation between Cagepotato's new editor Mike Russell and Strikeforce commentator Gus Johnson. Gus Johnson apparently was enraged over the e-mail Mr. Russell sent to Scott Coker, Gus Johnson's boss.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

Leave Gus alone you twat!


----------



## thrshr01 (Dec 30, 2007)

vilify said:


> Leave Gus alone you twat!


and you are saying this to?...


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

I have been following Mike Russell's thread on the UG since day 1, it has been epic drama. FWIW he did post an apology and explanation there today.



> Now that everyone has had the opportunity to critique my article on Gus Johnson, I felt it was the right time to attempt to explain myself.
> 
> I know that whatever I write is going to be looked upon as an excuse, but I make no excuse for my lapse in judgment. I'm an adult. I rolled the dice and in an attempt to live up to the edgy, satirical benchmark set for CagePotato's brand of humor by Ben Goldstein and Ben Fowlkes, I flopped, damaging my reputation and credibility as a journalist and doing exactly what I accused Johnson of doing: representing MMA in a bad light.
> 
> ...


Personally I think the guy is right about a couple of things but as a lot of maturing to do as a journalist.

Not that MMA journalism today is setting a high bar but this guy is editor over at Cagepotato now and he needs to be thinking before he types.


----------



## KillerShark1985 (Jan 6, 2010)

I for one really enjoyed the SF event the other day, but have to say the commentary there does suck, Shamrock is the only guy on the team I find interesting do listen to and he does not get to speak nearly enough


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

thrshr01 said:


> and you are saying this to?...


whoever eveezy is


----------



## thrshr01 (Dec 30, 2007)

vilify said:


> whoever eveezy is


Oh, then go to the website and tell him that on his article :thumb02:


EDIT:


vilify said:


> youre a twat!


LOL! Thanks for the neg rep twatmeister. Next time have enough balls to put your name at the end. F8cking moron!


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

thrshr01 said:


> Oh, then go to the website and tell him that on his article :thumb02:
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> ...


I'm not the one who negged you genius.:confused05:


----------



## thrshr01 (Dec 30, 2007)

vilify said:


> I'm not the one who negged you genius.:confused05:


:confused02:I got negged again. LMAO! :thumb02::thumb02:


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

What seems weird to me is the email that Mike Russell sent to Scott Coker isn't actually surprising and isn't out of line.



> Hi Scott,
> 
> I hope this email finds you well. It was disappointing to see the otherwise great show marred by the incident Saturday night. I hope it doesn't affect the CBS deal.
> 
> ...


All of these questions are legitimate, and many have been circulating the MMA community, especially among the journalists. Everyone was shocked that Gus Johnson would say something as stupid as "This kind of stuff happens all the time in MMA." He doesn't seem to be that big an idiot, but I think that this response actually demonstrates that he's stupider than that comment indicated.

Firstly, when a member of the press sends an email asking questions, the reason they're asking questions is because they want to know what the person they're asking thinks, not because they want to influence the person's opinion. I know Mike Russell well enough to know that this is what he was doing. If you get pissed an issue an angry response to a question, especially a question that wasn't directed at you, then you're going to give guys like Russell a lot of fodder. You're also going to look even stupider for not knowing the difference between a legitimate question (because some people, myself included, think Gus Johnson absolutely should be fired) and a comment.

Also, all of Gus Johnson's bullsh*t about training for two years and getting a bluebelt under Renzo and how that makes him an expert is pathetic. If his expertise comes from training with Renzo, then they should hire Marcus Mera (who's been around a helluva lot longer) or somebody with more experience, because (again) Mike wasn't the only guy wondering whether or not Gus knew the difference between an armbar and a kimura.

Anyway, I'm unimpressed with Gus Johnson on a number of levels. I think his commentary was brash and stupid, and I think his response to this email was poorly considered and juvenile. The real problem, though, is that he's going to get into a scrap in the media with a guy who works there, and who scraps with people all the time. If Johnson decides he wants to do that, he's going to lose, and that's going to seriously hurt him.


----------



## Bonnar426 (Jul 18, 2006)

KillerShark1985 said:


> I for one really enjoyed the SF event the other day, but have to say the commentary there does suck, Shamrock is the only guy on the team I find interesting do listen to and he does not get to speak nearly enough


Problem is whenever he did speak he was completely biased! Especially during the Hendo/shields fight.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

IronMan said:


> What seems weird to me is the email that Mike Russell sent to Scott Coker isn't actually surprising and isn't out of line.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't know how I'm ending up defending Johnson, but come on, the 'journalist' was clearly leading Coker in an effort to create a story that wasn't, then published Johnson's private reaction to the world. That's out of line in real life, not just journalism.


----------



## Mirage445 (Dec 20, 2006)

jasvll said:


> I don't know how I'm ending up defending Johnson, but come on, the 'journalist' was clearly leading Coker in an effort to create a story that wasn't, then published Johnson's private reaction to the world. That's out of line in real life, not just journalism.


C'mon now, those sorts of things happen all the time in journalism! :thumb02:


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

jasvll said:


> I don't know how I'm ending up defending Johnson, but come on, the 'journalist' was clearly leading Coker in an effort to create a story that wasn't, then published Johnson's private reaction to the world. That's out of line in real life, not just journalism.


It was a loaded question, I'm not going to argue that.

But how do you ask a _not_ loaded question when asking for a comment about that event?

A lot of people were wondering about Johnson's commentary (which many felt was aggravating an already terrible situation) and about penalties for the Cesar Gracie camp members involved in the incident (which I wish he'd asked about).

EDIT: And, just to be clear, he wasn't "creating a story that wasn't." This is a huge story, and whether or not Strikeforce regards Johnson's comments about the event as inappropriate, and whether they regard him as competent or not, is a relevant part of the story.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

IronMan said:


> It was a loaded question, I'm not going to argue that.
> 
> But how do you ask a _not_ loaded question when asking for a comment about that event?
> 
> A lot of people were wondering about Johnson's commentary (which many felt was aggravating an already terrible situation) and about penalties for the Cesar Gracie camp members involved in the incident (which I wish he'd asked about).


Dear Scott Coker,

How do you feel about the comments Gus Johnson made in the aftermath of the brawl at the recent Strikeforce event in Nashville? Do you agree with his assessment that 'these things happen in MMA'? Either way, do you feel it was something that he should have said into a live microphone broadcasting nationally?

Second, does the independence of the CBS and Showtime broadcasters covering your events concern you? I hate to single out good ole Gus again, but at the same event, he agreed with many in the MMA community when he opined that Henderson was brought in to end Shields reign as champion as well as his tenure in the company. He pointed to the reigning champion being noticeably absent from promotional materials, whereas the challenger was heavily featured, to support this claim. Do you agree with his assessment? 

To follow up, if the UFC didn't like what an announcer had to say, that announcer would probably be gone before the event was over. Strikeforce, on the other hand, faces an NFL like situation, where the announcers work for the broadcasting station, not the promotion, directly. Is there anything you can do about an announcer who criticizes you or your company's actions? Is there anything you would like to do about either of Johnson's comments from this past weekend?

Love,
jasvll

P.S. Please do not forward this email to Gus Johnson. Dude is batshit crazy and completely unprofessional. You should fire his ass with the quickness.


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

jasvll said:


> Dear Scott Coker,
> 
> How do you feel about the comments Gus Johnson made in the aftermath of the brawl at the recent Strikeforce event in Nashville? Do you agree with his assessment that 'these things happen in MMA'? Either way, do you feel it was something that he should have said into a live microphone broadcasting nationally?
> 
> ...


Haha, yeah, because "is there anything you would like to do about either of Johnson's comments from this past weekend?" isn't a loaded question at all.

Any question which asks a promoter to comment on the quality of broadcasting is, by nature, loaded, especially when the general consensus is that the broadcasting was bad. But that's another point altogether.

This is, obviously, more diplomatic than Mike's email, but Mike's email wasn't intended to be read by Johnson.

Anyway, I hope this does open up a conversation about the conduct of Gus Johnson. Frankly, I'd rather someone more experienced in his place. That's my opinion on the matter.

That said, we'll see what Coker can do. I'm reasonably sure that CBS is going to have some words with him, too, given the horrible ratings of the event, so we'll see how this clusterf*ck pans out.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

IronMan said:


> Haha, yeah, because "is there anything you would like to do about either of Johnson's comments from this past weekend?" isn't a loaded question at all.
> 
> Any question which asks a promoter to comment on the quality of broadcasting is, by nature, loaded, especially when the general consensus is that the broadcasting was bad. But that's another point altogether.


 The issue isn't that Coker was asked for his opinion, it's that the guy declared that Johnson was unprofessional and keeping him would be a mistake for Strikeforce and MMA:


> Will he be working future Strikeforce events on CBS after badmouthing you and your company, or can we expect to see someone more familiar with MMA and who behaves more professionally?


That's not how journalism works, and going to someone's boss to get them fired just because you don't like how they do their job isn't how humans are supposed to work, either.




> This is, obviously, more diplomatic than Mike's email, but Mike's email wasn't intended to be read by Johnson.


 It would have been shoddy journalism, whether Coker shared it or not. The decision to post Johnson's response was a mistake all its own.



> Anyway, I hope this does open up a conversation about the conduct of Gus Johnson. Frankly, I'd rather someone more experienced in his place. That's my opinion on the matter.
> 
> That said, we'll see what Coker can do. I'm reasonably sure that CBS is going to have some words with him, too, given the horrible ratings of the event, so we'll see how this clusterf*ck pans out.


 I've disliked Johnson's MMA announcing since I first heard it, but I think this incident will actually help him, in terms of job security.


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

jasvll said:


> The issue isn't that Coker was asked for his opinion, it's that the guy declared that Johnson was unprofessional and keeping him would be a mistake for Strikeforce and MMA:


He does that in the last comment, about not knowing the difference between an armbar and a kimura. Though I was a little confused by some of Johnson's statements on that, too. I would have left that out, as the other parts are important.

He implied that Johnson was incompetent. I'll agree with that. And that was out of line, given the context of the email. Though journalists mention all the time that we think certain figures are incompetent, I agree that it's unprofessional to do when you're on the record.

Asking for a comment on what Johnson said about Jake Shields is totally reasonable.

Asking for a comment on what Johnson said during the scuffle is totally reasonable.

In fact, asking if actions can or are going to be taken against Johnson is totally reasonable. It's something that, if it's going to happen, we want to know about.



> That's not how journalism works, and going to someone's boss to get them fired just because you don't like how they do their job isn't how humans are supposed to work, either.


Actually, people do that all the time. If you think someone's completely incompetent, you go to the manager.

I actually really dislike that methodology personally. I'd rather just publish a piece addressing why I think what Johnson said was out of line, and why Strikeforce should consider trying to keep him from commentating on their events. I'd rather not mention it to Coker, though on the record, it's definitely worth asking about.



> It would have been shoddy journalism, whether Coker shared it or not. The decision to post Johnson's response was a mistake all its own.


I don't think so. Just like I don't think that people publishing Doug Crosby's stupidity was a mistake.

Let Johnson have his two cents. He knew that Mike was asking the question with the intention of publishing a response. The email was clearly on the record.

Also, there's no way in which this hurts Mike. As I've said already, fighting a member of the press, in the press, just never works out well.

Was it a low blow to Johnson? Maybe. Would I have done it, if I were Mike? No, I wouldn't have.



> I've disliked Johnson's MMA announcing since I first heard it, but I think this incident will actually help him, in terms of job security.


I don't know. Anytime people are going to talk openly about why he's incompetent it doesn't work out well. I don't think it will result in his being fired. However, I think that if Johnson does this again, there will be some serious pressure on him.

I also think that Strikeforce should be pissed, though (and this is the reason I wouldn't have published Mike's response) Mike's put Strikeforce in the position of having to defend a commentator, because they were a facilitator for his comments, both on the broadcast (though they may not have been the ones who hired him) and in the email (since Coker forwarded the email to him) and so they have to defend Johnson by proxy.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

IronMan said:


> He does that in the last comment, about not knowing the difference between an armbar and a kimura. Though I was a little confused by some of Johnson's statements on that, too. I would have left that out, as the other parts are important.
> 
> He implied that Johnson was incompetent. I'll agree with that. And that was out of line, given the context of the email. Though journalists mention all the time that we think certain figures are incompetent, I agree that it's unprofessional to do when you're on the record.
> 
> ...


 Yep, that's why my version of the email included those questions.



> Actually, people do that all the time. If you think someone's completely incompetent, you go to the manager.


 Yes, if it affects your livelihood directly. Even then, it's a well known taboo, similar to discussing the problems you had with your last boss when interviewing with a potential new one. If you go to your boss, you make sure no one finds out.



> I actually really dislike that methodology personally. I'd rather just publish a piece addressing why I think what Johnson said was out of line, and why Strikeforce should consider trying to keep him from commentating on their events. I'd rather not mention it to Coker, though on the record, it's definitely worth asking about.


 Agreed.





> I don't think so. Just like I don't think that people publishing Doug Crosby's stupidity was a mistake.


 Crosby published his own stupidity.



> Let Johnson have his two cents. He knew that Mike was asking the question with the intention of publishing a response. The email was clearly on the record.


 If Johnson had joined in an email thread between the two, sure. As it stands, he made a personal call to make a personal complaint about this man's behavior. The man then used his position to make their personal issue public (complete with Photoshop mocking). Completely different situation.



> Also, there's no way in which this hurts Mike. As I've said already, fighting a member of the press, in the press, just never works out well.


 I didn't say it would, but Mike did.



> Was it a low blow to Johnson? Maybe. Would I have done it, if I were Mike? No, I wouldn't have.
> 
> 
> I don't know. Anytime people are going to talk openly about why he's incompetent it doesn't work out well. I don't think it will result in his being fired. However, I think that if Johnson does this again, there will be some serious pressure on him.


 Yes, but in the mean time, he's been pushed into the 'us' in the 'us' (CBS/Strikeforce) and 'them' (reactive media/fans) fallout over the brawl.



> I also think that Strikeforce should be pissed, though (and this is the reason I wouldn't have published Mike's response) Mike's put Strikeforce in the position of having to defend a commentator, because they were a facilitator for his comments, both on the broadcast (though they may not have been the ones who hired him) and in the email (since Coker forwarded the email to him) and so they have to defend Johnson by proxy.


Exactly.


----------



## WhiteWolf (Mar 8, 2010)

*An analysis on STRIKEFORCE commentary*

*Gus*: -Ignorant statement-

*Mauro*: -Fake radio voice response!-

*Frank*: -Contrary statement just to get attention-

*Gus*: -Hypes match with ignorant statement-

*Mauro*: -Hypes match with fake radio voice!-

*Frank*: -Talks about his fights instead of the fight at hand-

Rinse + repeat.


----------



## osmium (Mar 6, 2007)

Yeah, I'm thinking about muting the television but I really don't want to because I like hearing the crowd, the ref, and the strikes landing. Gus is just absolutely horrendous.


----------



## Rusko (Feb 4, 2010)

WhiteWolf said:


> *Frank*: -Talks about his fights instead of the fight at hand-
> 
> Rinse + repeat.


LOL hahhahahaha


----------



## LiteGladiator (Jun 22, 2010)

Same thing I was thinking. Haha, his speech is killing me. He does not have any place in strikeforce commentary, and that is bad when it is strikeforce commentary we are talking about.


----------



## Blitzz (Apr 13, 2009)

Its pathetic that Gus is seemingly the best of all three of them.

Now a tribute to Frank...

Just show a damn prelim fight.


----------



## osmium (Mar 6, 2007)

Blitzz said:


> Its pathetic that Gus is seemingly the best of all three of them.
> 
> Now a tribute to Frank...
> 
> Just show a damn prelim fight.


Do they even have prelim's for this card? They usually don't aside from like two fights with local guys.


----------



## Blitzz (Apr 13, 2009)

4 prelims for this card.


----------



## Terror Kovenant (Nov 16, 2008)

These guys make Mike Goldberg look like a genius with tons of insightful and fresh comments to make


----------



## Can.Opener (Apr 8, 2009)

they are really, really bad at commentary.

uninformed and just generally boring.


----------



## 614mike (Oct 15, 2006)

It's pathetic. Frank finds a way to turn every question into a comparison to something he did, and Mauro might be the most annoying person on the planet.


----------



## The Lone Wolf (Sep 23, 2008)

I dont know who any of the guys are except Frank Shamrock. But i *do* know they annoy the shit out of me. You think the main guy speaks like that to his wife over dinner?


----------



## drawblood (Jun 27, 2010)

I though tthe worst was Gus and the best was Shamrock even though he can be VERY biased during fights.

Not horrible though and I think you are all being overly critical.


----------



## vilify (Mar 23, 2010)

Is this really a topic? I mean on the night where Fedor loses, are we really discussing this?

common guys, man up! MMA is not about the commentary or the announcers wardrobe

ITS ABOUT THE DAMN FIGHTS.


----------



## Calibretto9 (Oct 15, 2006)

Yeah, their commentating is very bad. I really dislike Frank commentating. His ego oozes out of my TV speakers.


----------



## xgarrettxvx (Jan 2, 2010)

Gus is so ignorant it's embarrasing. Everything Shamrock says through his adult braces pisses me off. Mauro has one of the funnest names to say in the business, and while his announcer voice is annoying, he has enough experience to know what he's talking about. Over all terrible, but i can handle Mauro.


----------



## 38495 (Jun 24, 2010)

If Strikeforce wants to be taken seriously it has got to get its all round product spot on. I personally enjoy the fight bulid ups that they produce, in different settings with the dramatic voice over. 
However one aspect of Strikeforce i cant stand is their presenters/commentary. Gus Johnson and Renallo are just awful and Shamrock isn't much better. The Main Event should really sell itsself and people will watch but with undercard fights between lesser/unknown guys the commentators need to fill us in on their past/future etc and make us like the fighters and want to watch. I believe they need 2 guys along the lines of Goldberg and Rogan. A guy who simply says what he see and someone who breaks the fight down technically. I must admit i enjoy listening to Pat Miletich but they need someone to partner him.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

Just a reminder, it's Showtime/CBS commentary, not Strikeforce commentary. It's the same set up as the NFL, where the announcing team works for the network, not the promotion/league. With the UFC, the announcers work for the promotion.


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

jasvll said:


> Just a reminder, it's Showtime/CBS commentary, not Strikeforce commentary. It's the same set up as the NFL, where the announcing team works for the network, not the promotion/league. With the UFC, the announcers work for the promotion.


And the stupidity of Showtime/CBS has to be the only reason that Johnson still has a job there.

If it were Coker, the massive pressure to fire Johnson would have gotten to him by now, or at least led him to move Johnson off of the bigger cards.

It frustrates me to no end that Stephen Quadros and Pat Miletich are doing the Challenger's Series cards while Johnson, Ranallo and Frank are getting the primetime slots. The latter team is just plain bad. I don't have a serious problem with Ranallo and Frank, but compared to Quadros and Miletich, they just seem impotent to me, and (frankly) I think that Johnson's performance on all of the events thus far has been so bad that he ought to be fired just for not being very good at his job.

Obviously, I was hoping that someone would seriously look at the fundamental mistakes he makes during his commentary and do a serious review of his performance after his idiotic statements during the Nashville card.

Also, I couldn't give less of a shit about his two years of training under Renzo. I know plenty of bluebelts in BJJ, and all of them have a better knowledge of grappling than Johnson has displayed during his time on the air. He may be a good grappler (though I really, really doubt it) but that doesn't make up for his inability to either (a) see what's going on in the cage or (b) get the right words out of his mouth, which are really the only two requirements of a commentator.


----------



## 38495 (Jun 24, 2010)

somebody should get a petiton going. i'd be happy to see gus johnson get his ass fired


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Gus's comments during a show aside..

He just annoys me. Everyone who announces a fight in SF is annoying. They are all dorks and sound like dorky 16 year olds. SF's broadcast reminds me of a tuff man competition or a mild WWE event.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

*Gus*

He clearly is not the commentator he was during PRIDE!


----------

