So continues our marathon coverage of one of the biggest fights of 2010, Manny Pacquiao-Antonio Margarito on Nov. 13. Before: the debate over purchasing the pay-per-view; the stakes of the bout; and keys to the fight, part I. Next: the final preview and prediction.

Mind. Matter. How do Manny Pacquiao and Antonio Margarito stack up in those categories? In the second of two parts, we compare their more mental attributes. [queensberryrules]

(The Francis Scott Keys to the fight)

Offense. After years of evolving and improving his game, Pacquiao has things pretty finely honed at this juncture. It began with the 1-2, then the double jab/straight left. Then he added in the right hook. Then, improved body punching. Then he started sharpening his uppercut. Then came the unbelievable left hook that finished Hatton. All of this offense occurs in rapid fire combination.

If you were going to complain about anything, you might note that his jab is not much of a weapon by itself, and that his punches sometimes are a bit wide. But the unconventional nature of his offense is the thing -- aside from his speed -- that people have been complaining about when facing Pacquiao. He'll hit you with a fast punch then a change-up then fast again. And the arcs of those punches are weird and varied, plus come from a southpaw stance that everyone hates to face. The punch you can't see, the old saw goes, is the one that knocks you out. It's hard to predict what Pacquiao is going to do, what angle it's going to come from.

Margarito's body attack and his uppercuts stand out, more than anything. He's a giant fighter with an inside fighter's game. His long jab has never been much to write home about, although it's shown flashes, and it's clear from the Garcia fight he's been working on it and that it will be a point of emphasis against the smaller man. His main offensive quality is volume with both hands. But as awkward as Pacquiao's offense is sometimes, Margarito's has been, for the bulk of his career, more awkward, and not in a good way. His wide punches, combined with his subpar (to be generous) hand speed, make it easy to counter him or beat him to the punch, although Margarito has been working on shrinking the distance between throw and land.

Margarito's a pretty good offensive fighter despite his limitations. Pacquiao's just much better, maybe the premier offensive fighter in the game. Edge: Pacquiao.

Defense. Pacquiao has some. Margarito has none.

Pacquiao used to be bad on defense, but he's much better, even actively good. He keeps his gloves up better than he used to, and, most importantly, he darts in and out before anyone can do anything about it. He got marked up against Miguel Cotto and Joshua Clottey, but part of that was by choice. Pacquiao decided he wanted to test Cotto's power for some macho reason. Against Clottey, the idea was to stay in the pocket, get Clottey to open up his offense then counter.

Margarito displayed at least some attention to defense against Garcia, trying to use his height to manage distance. It was the first time I'd even seen him try. His defense is his offense combined with the fact that, in every case but one -- two fights ago against Shane Mosley -- his chin could take it. He doesn't move his head, he squares up and he doesn't block anything.

Maybe his defense will be a bit better against Pacquiao because of Margarito's new trainer as of the Garcia bout, but it's a bigger reclamation project than Mel Gibson's reputation. Even improved, it should be a good deal less than passible. Edge: Pacquiao.

Intelligence. Pacquiao has shown greater capacity to learn and adapt over his career than has Margarito, although the majority of the credit for what he has learned has to go to Freddie Roach, one of the best trainers of all time. Offensively and defensively, Pacquiao has been a sponge.

Tactically, Roach has often pinpointed the precise flaws in Pacquiao's opponent and Pacquiao has executed to perfection. For this fight, Roach is talking about Pacquiao's uppercut, right hand and speed, although surely he sees something Margarito does that Pacquiao will exploit but that Roach is keeping up his sleeve for now. There's a great deal of versatility available to Pacquiao: The version that beat Clottey did it with sheer volume, the best method against the conservative Clottey; the version that beat the taller Oscar De La Hoya did it from the outside, not usually the best method for a smaller fighter to win. Pacquiao, however, still has never shown much capacity to innovate or adapt within a fight; if somebody is doing something to him and it works, it probably will keep working.

It's not fair to say Margarito isn't a smart fighter because intelligence has never figured into it. It would be like trying to assess the intelligence of a rock -- but a rock can cause some real harm. Margarito clubs and clubs and clubs until it does the trick. That said, having new trainer Robert Garcia in his corner adds some intelligence to the approach. Previous trainer Javier Capetillo is better-known for getting his fighters into ridiculously good shape than as a tactical thinker. Garcia said he sees flaws in Pacquiao's style that Margarito will expose.

Roach and Garcia squared off in Margarito's last fight, but whatever Margarito does or doesn't have left, Garcia still had the better, more accomplished horse than the journeyman Roach was training. Garcia -- who's building a rep as a good trainer -- gives Margarito a boost, but Margarito isn't going to become a thinking man's boxer overnight and the Pacquiao-Roach combination has approached genius. Edge: Pacquiao.

Willpower. There's no quit in either of these men that I've ever seen. If anything, they both have a bit too much heart for their own good, as with Pacquiao's needlessly, foolishly fearless early stand against Cotto and the very nature of Margarito's style, a kind that leads to shortened careers and lives.

Margarito appeared discouraged against Mosley, but in the 8th round that began his troubles, he came out harder than in any previous round. That aggressiveness played into Mosley's hand, but it's pretty brave stuff. There was a blip in Margarito's career in the Paul Williams fight where he didn't start fast enough, but he corrected that, starting fast against, say, Miguel Cotto, and keeping the pressure up throughout. (There's also a theory that Margarito fought tentatively in his last fight because he lacked the confidence that comes with the loaded gloves he got busted with before the Mosley fight and might have used elsewhere, too. But that's only a theory.)

The same year of Margarito-Cotto, in 2008, Pacquiao showed his last taste of a willpower lapse, as he was bothered by a bad cut against Juan Manuel Marquez and disappeared for a round until it was fixed. It's a blip, too. Two tangible blips in two careers of indomitable willpower? That's... Edge: Even.

The Rest. Who will have the home court advantage in Cowboys Stadium? Of the 35,000 people or so who paid to see Pacquiao-Clottey, probably only Clottey's family came out to see him. It was a pro-Pacquiao crowd. But Texas is home to a lot of Mexican-Americans, and the majority of them can be expected to root for Margarito. If the fight is close, the judges might be swayed a bit by the Margarito fans. One of those judges is Gale Van Hoy, who has earned a reputation as a "homer," and Margarito's more the hometown fighter than Pacquiao.

Both fighters are experienced, on the big and small stage and against top-notch opponents, but Pacquiao's stage has been bigger, his opponents better. That prepares him for this moment more than Margarito.

If anyone's likely to roughhouse, it's Margarito, since at points in his career Pacquiao has shown it troubles him. But it's not clear to me whether having referee Laurence Cole helps Pacquiao or Margarito on this count. Cole is terrible and you can't predict which way he might blow a call. Will he be overprotective, or not notice any foul play?

So, then... Edge: Even. [queensberryrules2]

So continues our marathon coverage of one of the biggest fights of 2010, Manny Pacquiao-Antonio Margarito on Nov. 13. Before: the debate over purchasing the pay-per-view. Next: the keys to the fight.

This fight Saturday is not the fight anyone asked for from the pound-for-pound best boxer alive. Manny Pacquiao tried, and his promoter Top Rank tried, and network titan HBO tried, to give us that fight Saturday night. Pacquiao compromised -- all but caved, really -- on the drug testing regime Floyd Mayweather sought but had no rational basis for demanding during the first round of negotiations in the winter. But Mayweather, the next-best fighter of his generation, still said "no." It's never been clear why the greedy Mayweather was so disinterested in what would assuredly be the richest boxing match of all time, but cowardice, legal troubles for his uncle-trainer and a rising apathy toward the sport that made him a star are theories, each unflattering in their own ways.

So instead, we get this fight: Pacquiao-Antonio Margarito. It is a poor substitute. Margarito is best known within boxing circles for his role in one of the more prominent scandals in recent years when, one night in 2008, he went from a fan-favorite top-5 pound-for-pound fighter to a man busted with plaster-loaded gloves and knocked out by Shane Mosley. He hasn't recovered since, as a competitive fighter or as a popular one, although he has his backers and remains popular in his homeland of Mexico.

That alone, though, does not tell the tale of Pacquiao-Margarito. There are other storylines that make this fight what it is.

Pacquiao's Stardom

Since the last time Pacquiao fought, his star has risen still. He has become one of the two boxers, along with Mayweather, to truly transcend the sport. In the past week, he has been featured on 60 Minutes (the only two segments for the program this Sunday were President Obama and Pacquiao), Jimmy Kimmel Live (where he sang a duet with movie star Will Ferrell) and HBO 24/7 (the popular, critically acclaimed documentary/marketing series). Since Pacquiao fought in the spring, he ran for an won election to Congress in the Philippines. A couple weeks ago, he campaigned for the Senate Majority Leader in the United States, Democrat Harry Reid, at Reid's request. Before the week is over, we will no doubt see features on Pacquiao in the New York Times and other publications [queensberryrules].

Although Margarito's troubles have been featured prominently on HBO 24/7 -- to the program's credit -- Pacquiao's tale has outshone them in every way. Pacquiao is at a level right now where he could fight anyone and it wouldn't matter: So long as he keeps winning, so long as he's a boxer and a congressman, he will be the center of attention. In that sense, any Pacquiao fight is a story merely because Pacquiao's in it.

But if Pacquiao falls short, per friend-of-the-site severuck below, the stakes are also high. Trainer Freddie Roach has told Pacquiao that if he loses in the ring, he suffers politically back home.

Margarito's Redemption?

No matter what Margarito does the rest of his career, the night in 2008 where Margarito was busted with those bad hand wraps will follow him around. The only issue is how MUCH it will follow him around.

There are many who suspect that Margarito probably cheated in other fights, besides the attempt to cheat against Mosley. There is a volume of anecdotal evidence to that effect. But because he wasn't caught red-handed (OK, well, he sorta was), nobody really knows for sure.

Were Margarito to defeat the greatest fighter in the world -- even an allegedly poorly-prepared, too-small greatest fighter in the world -- it would increase the chances that almost his entire career wasn't fraudulent. After all, it's no easy feat to beat the best fighter in the world. It's not the kind of thing a fraud is likely to do.

Top Rank, HBO and Margarito have been pushing the redemption that awaits Margarito if he wins. The tar of scandal won't ever be scrubbed clean from Margarito, but beating Pacquiao would go some measure toward his redemption.

Eighth Weight Class

Pacquiao will be shooting for a title in his eighth weight class, junior middleweight, a marketing angle mentioned in the omnipresent commercials for Pacquiao-Margarito. Those commercials are trying to sell you on a historic achievement that would require several asterisks.

First, when it comes to historic accumulation of belts, Pacquiao already has topped everyone who has ever laced up gloves. The only championship belts that reflect anything like the era when there was but one champion per division is the lineal championship, aka the belt won from the man who beat the man who beat the man who first held it (with vacancies that can be filled only by the two best fighters in the division squaring off). Pacquiao has four of those belts in a career that began at junior flyweight. No one else has ever won four. This is a closed question. Pacquiao is the king here.

In order to arrive at eight belts, you have to include those belts and those proliferated by sanctioning organizations like the WBC, WBO, WBA and IBF. That gave Pacquiao five chances per division to obtain a title, as opposed to just one. To his credit, he usually beat very good fighters to obtain the belts, but some of them were obtained against lesser men. For instance, the lightweight belt David Diaz ceded to Pacquiao was a belt he obtained because the sanctioning organization decided to strip the belt from one fighter and give it to Diaz instead. Diaz never won the title; he inherited it. Likewise, Miguel Cotto won his welterweight title by defeating Michael Jennings, as terrible a challenger for a vacant belt as any in years who might not have even been a top 50 welterweight.

The chicanery of the sanctioning organizations really knows no bounds. Such is the case with Pacquiao fighting for a junior middleweight belt. The WBC installed Margarito as its #1-ranked fighter despite the fact that he has a total of one win in the division, against Roberto Garcia, who might not have even been a top 50 junior middleweight, and before that bout Margarito hadn't fought as a junior middleweight since 2004, and he lost. No rational person would consider Margarito the #1 junior middleweight.

Furthermore, Pacquiao's achievement is watered down more by a catchweight of 150 (or 151, depending on what you read) lbs. This is a junior middleweight fight, technically, because it's over 147 lbs. and under 155 lbs. But fighting at a contracted weight below the maximum at least modestly diminished the achievement.

That Pacquiao is fighting at all in an eighth division is impressive (although it is not an unprecedented climb in weight). If anything, that's the achievement of this fight, not winning a belt that would have been given him by some sanctioning organization virtually no matter who he took on.

Good Fight, Maybe

Given that Pacquiao is one of the most exciting performers in boxing, if not THE most exciting, and given that Margarito was in any number of Fight of the Year contenders prior to his troubles, some expect this fight to be a tremendous brawl.

That perspective depends somewhat on assuming that Margarito's knockout loss to Mosley, and his subsequent boring performance against Garcia,  were anomalies. For a fight to be truly excellent, it must be competitive. Currently, Margarito is somewhere between a 6-1 and 5-1 underdog. The numbers have been moving in Margarito's direction a bit more, no doubt in part because HBO 24/7 does a tremendous job of hyping fights as competitive whether they are or not.

But even if he's not competitive, should Margarito fights more like his old self (coming forward relentlessly, throwing a ridiculous volume of punches) and less like the Margarito who beat Garcia (jabbing from the outside, throwing only a moderate number of punches) then the fight will at least guarantee a sizzling offensive performance from Pacquiao. Pacquiao's last opponent, Joshua Clottey, largely refused to engage, apparently fearful of being knocked out. It was why Pacquiao was in a rare, somewhat boring bout.

Big Fight

Top Rank's Bob Arum predicts that more than 1.3 million people will buy the fight and 70,000 will attend in person at Cowboys Stadium. Arum has a knack for overly optimistic assessments. Pacquiao-Clottey did significantly worse than he predicted on pay-per-view, although it still did well, and while the announced attendance of that fight was 50,000, many of those were giveaways; the real number was closer to 35,000, still an impressive number.

Any fight that features Pacquiao is going to do big business. Margarito retains a sizable fan base among Mexicans and Mexican-Americans. The fight should do pretty well. Its numbers will suffer at least somewhat from a sizable contingent of hardcore fans that have vowed not to purchase the bout because of their opposition to Margarito, and maybe from a hangover related to the failed attempts to make a bout with Mayweather. But Margarito is a bigger attraction than Clottey, Pacquiao is a bigger attraction now than he was earlier this year and I'd be surprised if the fight didn't do 1 million buys.

It is commonly argued that Margarito was the opponent who stood to make Pacquiao the most money, which is why he was chosen as a replacement for Pacquiao. That's not entirely clear, either. A third bout with Juan Manuel Marquez would, I expect, do better. The two men have produced two classic bouts in the past, so hardcore fans would be rabid in anticipation. Marquez carries none of the taint of scandal Margarito carries, so there wouldn't be any boycotts. Marquez is a bigger name because he fought Mayweather in a bout that tallied 1 million pay-per-view buys and was featured on HBO 24/7. And Marquez has also engendered the loyalty of Mexicans and Mexican-American fans.

This fight with Margarito makes TOP RANK more money. Marquez is promoted by rival Golden Boy. Top Rank hates Golden Boy, and would have to split money with them in a way that it doesn't when it puts two of its own fighters in against each other.

Long-Term Harm?

Even if the bout does well, it stands a chance of hurting the image of boxing. The image of boxing outside the sport is very important -- in order to expand its fan base or do truly big bouts, it needs to attract new viewers. When people think of boxing as "corrupt" or "shady" or what have you, they are less likely to support it. So far, Pacquiao-Margarito hasn't done the damage I anticipated in its contribution to the bad image of the sport, because of how Pacquiao's story has overshadowed the sordid Margarito tale.

We'll see how much the sordid Margarito story becomes a focus this week, since many of the big mainstream news organizations still haven't weighed in on the fight as they almost certainly will.

Then there's what comes afterward. Although contributor Corey Erdman has made the case that a Margarito win would be good for boxing, I'm only convinced that it wouldn't be as bad as it feared. It still would be potentially negative for Pacquiao, one of boxing's only two transcendent stars, to suffer a loss. And then Margarito would step into the spotlight more than he currently inhabits it, which could lead to a lot of people saying, "Wait, the guy who beat Pacquiao was a cheater?"

Boxing as a sport is not bad at cashing in, making decent money, in the short-term. It's the long-term planning, the long-term ramifications, that it sucks at. We'll see if this fight falls under a long-term knock on boxing.

What's Next

A high-profile win often leads to an even bigger fight. But there is no obvious bigger fight for whoever wins Pacquiao-Margarito.

Margarito would have options for fights that could sell among hardcore fans, but unless a vast swath of Pacquiao's stardom was conveyed upon Margarito with a win, no fight of his would be likely to do major, transcendent numbers -- except a rematch with Pacquiao. There is no rematch clause, but because Pacquiao would still figure as Margarito's biggest money-making opponent, it would have to be likely should Pacquiao continue his boxing career.

It is not a given that Pacquiao continues his boxing career, win or lose. His mother has insisted he retire, and in his culture, elders' demands are supposed to be respected. Pacquiao has openly talked about politics as his "job," and speaks of boxing in the past tense.

Arum has mentioned Marquez as a potential future Pacquiao opponent, but Top Rank and Golden Boy are still likely to hate one another. A Miguel Cotto rematch is another option, but that was a one-sided fight that few want to see again, so it wouldn't sell very well. Maybe by the middle of next year one of the good young junior welterweights will have materialized as an option, people like Timothy Bradley and Devon Alexander, but it's unlikely to be a bigger fight than Pacquiao-Margarito.

The only fight Pacquiao would almost certainly stick around for is Mayweather. But Mayweather, besides all his other issues with avoiding Pacquiao, now faces a potential jail sentence on charges of domestic violence. The best chance of that fight happening -- if Mayweather even can overcome all his problems -- is Pacquiao looking lackluster against Margarito, since Mayweather has a tendency of going after opponents who aren't at their peak.

On the other side of Pacquiao-Margarito is an empty room. And to misappropriate a metaphor from HBO's Jim Lampley from last weekend, it might be a darkened one. [queensberryrules2]

So begins our marathon coverage of one of the biggest fights of 2010, Manny Pacquiao-Antonio Margarito on Nov. 13. Now: the debate over purchasing the fight. Next: the stakes of Pacquiao-Margarito.

Among hardcore boxing fans, it seems there are two major camps as it pertains to the junior middleweight fight between Manny Pacquiao and Antonio Margarito: those who are offended by the fight because Margarito very recently was exiled for being caught with loaded gloves, and those who look down on those who are offended by the fight. [queensberryrules]

As someone offended by the fight, I am nearly as ticked off about those who question the sincerity and reasonable-ness of my kind as I am about the fight itself. As such, before this site considers the nitty-gritty of the match-up -- why it matters, how the two men stack up physically and strategically, et cetera -- I'd like to address the underlying question of whether one should pay for the bout at all.

It is no small question. We are talking about Pacquiao, the biggest attraction and best boxer in the sport, facing the most disgraced boxer in the sport. It's unlike any fight I can recall in that regard; there is no obvious historical parallel. It's one of the reasons there have been such extremes of opinion against the bout. But I fear that sometimes, neither side has fully understood the other. And at the end, I'll explain what I, myself, intend to do.

Boxing Is Immoral

You'll hear the view among those supporting this bout that boxing is the red-light district of sports, that anything goes and that's fine by them. Except no one REALLY believes that.

You can throw any number of scenarios at people that they would find hard to embrace, unless they were being disingenuous. Would they support fixed fights, where one fighter was paid to fake a defeat? Would they support someone punching an opponent on the back of the head deliberately until they got brain damage? Would they support a fight between a 105-pound man and a 250-pound man?

Every rule in boxing is about one of two things, or both: 1. enhancing competitiveness; 2. safety. Safety is, at its foundation, a moral question. Is there any other reason for safety than that? I can't imagine it, if there is.

If someone wants a sport where anything goes, they don't want a "sport," per se. They want uninhibited violence. If someone wants to watch combat where two people are allowed to hit each other with bricks, or punch each other on the back of the head until someone gets brain damage, they can find underground videos of this on the Internet. If they want to enjoy boxing, they have to accept that there are rules that are based on a moral foundation and that some are going to support those rules because of it.

Sincerity Of Opponents

I hear the term "selective morality" thrown around all the time in reference to those who take offense to Pacquiao-Margarito. It might be the most ridiculous claim of them all.

As someone who is offended by this bout, my view has nothing to do with anything I "selected," as though I sat around deciding what to get all snooty about for some reason related to... well, I don't know what. A decision to feel morally superior to someone else? I've heard that one, but I'm not sure where it comes from.

There are too many mind-readers among boxing fans. So many of them know claim to know who's faking an injury and who's really injured, whether any evidence exists or not. If you think I've decided to do something so diabolical as gin up my phony outrage so I can look down upon you, what's your evidence? And if you don't have any (you don't), aren't you on thin ice making such an evidence-free claim? Isn't that a good enough reason to back down?

The very act of looking down on people offended by this bout -- and make no mistake, accusing people of not truly being offended by this bout is looking down on them -- implies a deeply-held sense of superiority in and of itself.

I live in Washington, D.C. There are marches here all the time on political issues. Among the most passionate are debates about abortion. Yet I never hear anyone on the abortion rights side accusing those on the anti-abortion rights side the other of not meaning it, nor vice versa.

Only in boxing is such a preposterous projection of false motives so frequently thrown around as though it is a legitimate argument. I can assure you of this much: I have no evidence whether those who aren't offended by Pacquiao-Margarito are secretly offended and lying about it. So I won't pretend to doubt the sincerity of those who say they have no qualms about Pacquiao-Margarito.

Margarito's Offense Vs. Those Of Others

This is somewhat related to the first two points. The thinking of those who have no issue with Pacquiao-Margarito and take issue with those who do is that somehow, opponents of Pacquiao-Margarito are holding Pacquiao-Margarito to some standard they don't hold other offensive activities to.

There's some truth to that. But it's related to simple concepts that have parallels in our society's understanding of crime and punishment.

To those of us who find Margarito's actions particularly offensive, there is a systematic reasoning about it. I won't go into great detail here, but here's a simplified version: Margarito's illegal actions have as their closest historical equal the Resto-Collins scandal. You would be hard-pressed to find a more disgusting case in boxing history. A boxer's career was ended by someone cheating with loaded gloves. Margarito's actions had similar potential, had he not been caught prior to the Shane Mosley bout, and even Margarito's defenders allow for the possibility that he successfully cheated in previous fights. Intent, plus outcome or potential outcome, plus violation of standards meant to reduce unnecessary harm, hit squarely in the zone of any discussion of morality.

Those who criticize Pacquiao-Margarito opponents say, "Why aren't you complaining about other immoral or illegal things in boxing?" This is the straw man to end all straw men. There is no one I know who is offended by Pacquiao-Margarito who hasn't also criticized, say, the steroid use of Shane Mosley. The question is: What offends you most? And where do you devote most of your energy?

You don't have to believe that Margarito's form of cheating is worse than steroid use. I'd say it is; there is no demonstrated record of steroid use ending a boxer's career the way Resto-Collins ended a boxer's career. But to allege that there's not at least a reasonable argument that someone who's more offended by Margarito's actions than, say, low blows is in and of itself unreasonable.

And if you accept the possibility that someone can find something more offensive about Margarito's actions than other examples of cheating, you have to accept that there is no contradiction in believing that Margarito's actions deserve greater punishment. Greater offense. Greater punishment. Simple -- like different jail sentences for pot ownership compared to rape (not that what Margarito did was rape; it is merely an example of two different kinds of crimes). Some, such as myself, believe Margarito deserved a longer suspension than he received, rather than being rewarded with his biggest-ever purse. We support James Toney's steroid suspension, too, but think Margarito's offense was worse and therefore deserves a greater punishment. This is as simple a concept as exists in our system of law and regulation, and Margarito's actions fall under the regulations of authorities.

What Margarito Knew

Some argue that there's no proof that Margarito knew of his loaded gloves. From the standpoint of rules and the punishment for breaking them, this is completely irrelevant. Under those rules, a boxer is responsible for what goes into the ring with him. Margarito, whether he knew or not -- and some of us believe, because of any amount of evidence, that he did -- was responsible for his loaded gloves.

If that seems far afield of any question of morality or boycotting, keep in mind that rules prohibiting loaded gloves were implemented for the safety of fighters, and safety is a moral question. The rules furthermore are created to prevent themselves from being circumvented. You don't have to agree with the rule that a boxer is responsible for what goes into the ring with him if you don't want, but de facto, you have now opened the door to boxers using steroids in every fight without fear of reprisal. That's why Margarito is responsible for what goes into the ring with him -- because if he wasn't, he could go into the ring cheating every single time and enter the ring two weeks later cheating in the exact same way, so long as he could blame it on some outside party.

Why And When To Boycott

The concept of a boycott is for consumers to exert what pressure they can to enact change, or, failing that, to avoid culpability in something they disagree with.

Someone who boycotts Pacquiao-Margarito has those things in mind. If a consumer refuses to pay the $50 to $60 for Pacquiao-Margarito, and enough consumers join in this, perhaps those responsible for Pacquiao-Margarito will get the hint that Margarito won't make money and he'll be denied future big-money bouts. By doing this, the consumer is attempting to do what he or she thinks the Texas state commission should have done, which is to honor California's refusal to license Margarito.

On a lesser level, perhaps the consumer simply doesn't want to be directly responsible for enriching Margarito, a boxer they don't think should be rewarded for his actions.

Again, someone who doesn't share these objectives needn't boycott the bout. But I've known people who boycotted the most recent bouts of Pacquiao or Floyd Mayweather after the two were unable to agree to fight one another, or who refuse to support pay-per-view cards that feature mismatches. These people are doing the same thing as those who are opposing Pacquiao-Margarito. There is nothing original about boycotting a match in boxing, as some claim -- it happens all the time.

How Much To Boycott

Some have suggested that if someone is boycotting Pacquiao-Margarito, one must also boycott all responsible parties or otherwise refuse to provide any attention to the bout. This isn't a very realistic view of the world.

If someone wants to boycott HBO or Top Rank -- which have lent its support to the bout -- that is their right. It's at the highest level of boycotting and has impact beyond boycotting Pacquiao-Margarito alone. But it is not a requirement. One can boycott Pacquiao-Margarito without boycotting HBO or Top Rank and send a similar, if not identical, message.

Boycotting Pacquiao-Margarito (or any bout involving Margarito) is the most direct way to protest bouts involving Margarito. He is the most responsible party, and the one whom opponents would most like to see deprived of reward.

Moral perfection is not a prerequisite of any action whatsoever taken in the name of morality. There is no one who is perfect morally. Even the most radical environmentalists are still consuming food or acquiring shelter from the land, which can damage the Earth in some way. Someone who buys a hybrid is doing less damage than someone who buys a Hummer. The question in morality is, figuratively: How much blood is on your hands? Less is always better. Absolute blood-free hands cannot be achieved. You do what you can.

If someone wants to boycott HBO over Pacquiao-Margarito, they will have effectively ended their opportunity to be a boxing fan. HBO airs the biggest bouts in the sport. It is possible to make a point about Pacquiao-Margarito without ending one's boxing fandom entirely.

Right To Boycott

Anyone who wants to enjoy Pacquiao-Margarito is well within their rights. Anyone who wants to boycott it -- or encourage others to boycott it -- is likewise within their rights. I've heard those who plan to enjoy Pacquiao-Margarito talking as though a boycott is beyond the pale of acceptability, somehow.

I'd refer again to my experience living in Washington and watching marches of every kind. In all those marches, no matter how passionate the crowd, I've never heard anyone suggest the other side doesn't have the right to express their opposition by boycotting any behavior they want to boycott. I've heard people mock or disagree with the reasons for the other side's protest. I've never hard anyone say the other side was ginning up false reasons to boycott something and that their very act of protest was wrong or worthy of contempt.

My Decision

Many writers I respect, and who share my disagreement with Pacquiao-Margarito happening, have decided to boycott the fight. They include The Boxing Tribune's Paul Magno, TQBR's Scott Krauss and 411 Mania's Joe Roche, and many more fans echo them. Their decisions -- Kraus has gone as far as to step away from boxing almost entirely, and Roche has gone as far as refusing to cover the bout -- are commendable expressions of protest that make powerful individual statements of belief. Perhaps, together, they will have some impact. Perhaps not. But it's a good thing that they want to influence things in what way they can. In the end, it's all we can do in this world, no matter how significant or insignificant we all are.

Already, I think the backlash against Pacquiao-Margarito has worried Top Rank. Some thought Top Rank would play up the controversy angle to generate sales. They've done quite the opposite. Top Rank sends out news constantly hailing Margarito as an innocent humanitarian, and forwards any article suggesting that Margarito might not have been responsible for his loaded gloves. They know, I suspect, that the fight's sales suffer from the controversy more than they benefit.

Upon months of contemplating whether to purchase Pacquiao-Margarito, I decided that, as powerful as the statements of those other writers were, that I would purchase and cover the fight. This site is not a news outlet, exactly, but some readers are interested in the fight and others are not. I weighed my personal beliefs and my obligation to readers of this site and decided to err on the side of my obligation to readers of this site. It is a noteworthy event when the biggest fighter in the world is in the ring. It is a big story when he fights the most disgraced fighter in the world. I'm not saying the other writers have no regard for their readers -- they do. But they won't be covering this fight live for them, and I've decided I should.

One option would be to steal it via illegal stream and still cover it without paying money to Margarito, but I have never supported illegal streams when paying for a fight is an option.

My position means I can only encourage those who oppose this fight to act on their impulses to boycott it. Were I not a boxing blogger with an audience of respectable size to whom I felt some obligation, I assuredly would not purchase the bout. It's not a match-up that thrills me for any variety of reasons, and the moral objections I hold would be foremost amongst them.

There is no contradiction there. If I were the chairman of my local city council, I would probably vote against smoking prohibitions in bars. But as a non-smoker who frequents bars, I can't say I am unhappy with a smoking prohibition. The action I take might be one thing, but it doesn't mean I can't support the outcome favored by those who would do another thing.

If any of this sounds self-important, I can't control that. I've argued before that there's nothing self-important about having moral views about a thing, and talking about them. I suppose that to some, having strong moral beliefs makes me, and those in my camp, uncool. But it's how my momma raised me, and once I grew up and began thinking about it and challenging it, I came to it honestly.

To those who find no moral objection to Pacquiao-Margarito, I don't agree with you or find your reasoning compelling. But I don't begrudge you your right to your beliefs, or think you some evil or phony person. You don't have to join the boycott or any such thing. But for another week, maybe you can recognize why someone might have a different view than you yet not be a hypocrite -- and stop casting aspersions on their motives, sincerity, supposedly contradictory beliefs and right to protest. [queensberryrules2]

What an action packed weekend around the world of sports including racing horses and racing cars, fighting jockeys and fighting drivers, and all of the other headlines that you need to get caught up on from the non-football world.  Here now is 7 Things...

1) The Chase Heats Up
-For the first time in recent memory, the NACAR Sprint/Chase/Whatever you want to call their playoffs is coming down to the wire and Jimmie Johnson isn't in the lead!  Denny Hamlin won at Texas and is now the new points leader with only 2 races remaining at Phoenix and Homestead.  He leads JJ by 33 points and Kevin Harvick by 59.  In the NASCAR world though, that might as well be a one point lead without the ball.  Yes, Hamlin has the advantage, but anything short of 2 Top 5s to end the year won't be good enough with the 4 time champ in tow. [randallsimonssauges]

2) Zenyatta Falls Short
-I'll admit, horse racing is not my cup of tea.  Yes, I'll sit down and watch a Triple Crown race, but that's about it.  The sport falls somewhere between curling and poker on my list of favorite sports.  But, the story of Zenyatta really captured me this week.  Especially when I learned that the philly was on her 19 for 19 winning streak and raced this weekend as a 6 year old!  Imagine Tiger Woods blossoming as a golfer once he reached the age of 65!  It's really an incredible feat and story in horse racing.  However, Zenyatta's quest to be a perfect 20 for 20 ended in defeat as she finished 2nd in the Breeders Cup Classic to Blame (what a perfect name) in a legendary finish.  Even in defeat, Zenyatta will go down as one of the greats in the history of her sport.... ok wait a second, before we see the video I have to say something.  I love animals and everything, but can we please stop this idiocy of listing horses as athletes?  They're not athletes... they're f&#*ing horses!!  People are athletes!  Secretariat was not an athlete, he's a horse.  King Kong wasn't an athlete, he was a giant gorilla.  And Godzilla sure as heck wasn't an athlete, but a giant lizard.  Ok, I'm done ranting, here's the tape...

3) Iverson Arrives... in Turkey?
-Allen Iverson has certainly had one of the most unique sporting careers in recent memory.  He made tattoos and cornrows mainstream.  He played with the heart of a champion although he never won one.  He was always controversial.  Oh, and he didn't want to talk about practice.  But, after leaving Philly, Iverson's Hall of Fame career has gone into a tailspin.  It began with a so-so tenure in Denver, to a mediocre run in Detroit, to a disgraceful stop-over in Memphis before returning to Philly and making Randy Moss' Vikings comeback look like a success.  Now, Iverson's career looks like it will end up in... Turkey.  Yes.  Turkey.  Iverson will soon suit up for Besiktas (we think) in the Turkish league.  In a way, this was always how it was going to end, right?

4) El Nino is Back
-The big news in the soccer world came from Anfield where Liverpool's revitalization continued under new owner John Henry and the Reds stunned Chelsea 2-0 on the back of 2 Fernando Torres goals.  El Nino has been one of the most scrutinized athletes in the sports world because of his lack of form and fitness which has coincided with Liverpool's dreadful recent record.  Now, they're finally in the top half of an ever-tightening EPL table.  Chelsea and Man Utd look set to battle it out for the top but the race for 3-7 could be the best we've seen in recent memory with Liverpool rebounding and Spurs, Man City, Arsenal, and even Newcastle fighting for European spots.

5) Cliff Lee Gets a Phone Call
-In what may be the least surprising sports story of the century, the Yankees are getting ready to pay Cliff Lee a crap ton of money.  The Yanks contacted Lee's agent on the first day of free agency.  It wouldn't surprise me one bit if this is how it plays out - 1) Yankees talk to Cliff Lee and give him a blank check.  2) Lee gets an offer from the Rangers.  3) New York doubles it.  4) Lee wears pinstripes.  Book it.

6) Hornets' Nest
-Quick - who are the NBA's 2 unbeaten teams?  Ok, I'll give you the Lakers, that's not too hard.  But who's the other one?  Surely Miami, right?  Nope.  Hmm... Boston?  Oklahoma City?  Orlando?  How about the New Orleans Hornets!  (jaws dropping)  Yes, somehow the Hornets are 6-0!  You know, the Hornets that I picked to miss the playoffs.  And it's not the product of an easy schedule - they've already defeated Denver, San Antonio, Houston... and the Heat!   Maybe, just maybe... Chris Paul was right to stay.

7) Weekend at the Rac... err... Fights?
-Finally, we have to go back to our Top 2 stories from the weekend and show you jockeys and drivers fighting!  Woo!!  First up is Jeff Gordon of all people going at Jeff Burton after a wreck at Texas.  I give the fight only 3 Cale Yarboroughs out of 10 because I don't even see an actual punch thrown!  Gordon confirms what NASCAR fans have suspected for years, he fights like a girl.

Secondly, we go back to the Breeders Cup where on Friday, Calvin Borel went at Javier Castellano.  I'll give this fight a 5 only for the homicidal look on Borel's face.  He gives Chucky a run for his money for one of the scariest little people of all time.  I know what you're thinking, come on now, isn't that too easy to bring out the little people joke?  Yes, yes it is.

[randallsimonssauges2]

Which UFC fighter is most responsible for making Zuffa a billion dollar company?  We've got the answer.  More precisely, we've crunched all the numbers and have come up with the ten fighters who have sold the most pay-per-views in the company's history.  What you end up with is, not surprisingly, a list that skews heavily to fighters still currently competiting in the organization.  Considering that in the dark days of the sport (about 1997-2001) when the UFC was getting banned left and right, the average UFC PPV was only getting 25000 buys, it is not surprising at all the current batch of gladiators, who not uncommonly will push a PPV over the 1 million buy mark, come out on top of the list.  The top selling fighter not currently in the UFC is former heavyweight champ Tim Sylvia, who ranks 15th overall. [mmamanifesto]

Six million career pay-per-view buys seems to be the magical, elite level that few fighters are able to reach, as only three men have broken that barrier: Georges St-Pierre, Chuck Liddell and Brock Lesnar.  While it took GSP and The Iceman 10 and 17 headlining fights, respectively, to top 6 million buys, Lesnar incredibly did it in his sixth PPV.  It will be interesting to see if he is still such a great moneymaker now that the gold is off his waist.  And when you estimate most PPVs cost around $50, that means each of these three guys have earned, at the very least, $300 million in PPV buys for the company.

So next time Dana White is tooling around Vegas in one of his Ferarris, he should be counting his blessings for these 10 men.

Top Ten UFC Draws of All-Time

(career PPV buyrate totals as one of the headliners of a card - all buyrates are estimates)

No real surprises on the list, as all of the above men have held UFC gold at one time in their careers and all, except for Lesnar, have already had long careers.  However, when you look at the fighters who average the most buys per headlining event, you get some surprise names.  But you'll have to patiently wait for that - that will be in our next column!

[mmamanifesto2]

My childhood would not be the same without these movies. Though their plots were extremely predictable, and the actors were pretty terrible (see: Michael Jordan), these movies collectively have had a positive impact on my life.

There were two requirements to be on the list. One was that they had to made for kids, which throws out Rudy, Hoosiers, and Love and Basketball (though those are all great sports movies). Secondly, these movies had to have come out on VHS. Because VHS is trendy and old-school, and I want to make this feel like an "I Love the 90's" episode on VH1. [seatownsports]

Here are my five favorite kids sports movies from the 90's (in no particular order):

The Sandlot (1993)

[youtube]bc7t_ET6SNQ[/youtube]

"Heroes get remembered, but legends never die"

Told through the voice of Scott Smalls, better known as "Smalls," we witness the narrator's transformation from being clueless to falling in love with America's past times. This is one of those movies that you'll never get sick of. It's witty down-to-earth plot and memorable one-liners help make this movie an instant classic. There are certain scenes in this film that we can all vividly remember from it. Mine happens to be when the group is trying to retrieve the ball through intricate and complicated ways; each ending up in complete failure. This is one film that I'll appreciate FOREVER, FOR-EVER, FOR-EVER.

Space Jam (1996)

[youtube]sCqyQjJGU8M[/youtube]

"You ever heard of the Dream Team? Well, we're the Mean Team, wussy man."

As the Looney Tunes are threatened to be captured for a theme park, they resort to challenging the "Nerdlucks" to a game of basketball to save themselves. Who would actually think that combining Looney Toons and Michael Jordan could produce a decent movie? It may seem a little bizzare. But for whatever reasons, it works. It is funny, it is real, and you end up buying into the whole thing. Count this as a sort of a redemption for M.J., especially because he is willing to recount his failures in the Minor Leagues for the film.

D2 The Mighty Ducks (1994)

[youtube]t0RiiIRe4ig[/youtube]

"And when the wind blows hard and the sky is black - Ducks fly together! "

Coach Bombay is on a mission to lead Team USA to a title in the Junior Olympics goodwill games. But the fame and fortune tempt him into caring more about other things. On top of that, half of the team is made up of new faces. Can the Ducks still Quack? Though, this is a sequel, I think most people my age would agree that this film stands out the most to them among the the three Might yDuck films. The knuckle puck, the evil european hockey team, and Coach Bombay's rise, fall, and comeback are all reasons why this movie so memorable.

The Little Giants (1994)

[youtube]khauvdb_f8A[/youtube]

"What a hunk. Wait a minute? What am I saying? I'm the Icebox. Icebox doesn't like boys. Except for that one... "

This movie is about Danny and Kevin O'Shea, two brothers that are coaches of pee-wee football teams in a small town. Kevin is a local football hero and has a pee-wee team with the best players. Danny on the other hand, has always been second place to his brother, as a result, he puts together a team to challenge his brother. Maybe I like this film because it reminds me a little of my freshman football experience. Either way, this is a great movie, because for a change a girl plays a central role in it. The main character is Becky O'Shea, better known as "Icebox," she is the daughter of Danny O'Shea. Icebox is a nice representation of all tomboys around the world. It's okay to like sports if you're a girl, even if its a football.

Rookie of the Year (1993)

[youtube]fsw1xWRhxac[/youtube]

"You're the best thing to happen to baseball since Cracker Jack!"

Not to be confused with Dennis Quaid's inspirational "Rookie", this movie is a fictional depiction of every kid's dream, playing baseball in the major leagues. As a result of a freakish injury to his arm, Henry Rowengartner is blessed with an ability to throw a wicked fast ball and soon finds himself putting on a uniform for his hometown Chicago Cub at the ripe age of 12. We get a human look at what it takes to be in the Major Leagues, with the main character battling between his childhood and his responsibilities as a professional baseball player. Oddly enough, the main character has an interesting resemblance to Tim Lincecum. One of my favorite scenes is when one of the coaches for the Cubs ends up locking himself in between the two doors that separate neighboring hotel rooms.

Others in the running: Air Bud, Angels in the Outfield, Big Green

[seatownsports2]

It's time for our semi-weekly look back at all the non-football headlines of the weekend with 7 Things We Missed This Weekend.  Today, we'll look to playoffs in NASCAR, MLS, and oh yeah, MLB.  Also, we'll check in on the early goings of the NBA season and bounce around the major European soccer leagues.  Oh, and Tiger Woods' fall is complete.  Let's roll! [randallsimonssausages]

1) A New #1 (Golf)

-What seemed unthinkable until El Tigre was a gray haired overweight golfer on the Senior Tour has happened 15 years too soon - he has lost his #1 World Ranking.  The fall of Tiger Woods is complete.  I've always said that it hasn't been the off-course issues that have affected Woods' game as much as his first loss from the lead in a major to YE Yang at the PGA Championship.  Woods was #1 for 281 weeks... over 5 years!  He held the #1 ranking for all but 32 weeks since 2000!  It seems to be the seminal moment proving that golf is in a different place right now with Woods battling the likes of Westwood, German sensation Martin Kaymer, old dog Steve Stricker, and even Lefty for the #1 spot.  In truth, this is what golf has always asked for - someone to challenge Woods.  Now there are several golfers fighting for the label of best in the world.  Unfortunately, the moment only came after the most precipitous drop of a global megastar in sports history and not the sudden rise of the next Watson or Trevino.

2) The Final 2 (MLB)
-Game 4 came and went and I'm sure someone out there watched.  Madison Bumgarner was the hero for the Giants as they shut out the Rangers for the 2nd time in the series winning 4-0.  Aubrey Huff and Buster Posey provided home runs for the Giants.  Now, it looks like an almost impossible task for Texas to win 3 games in a row against Lincecum, Cain, and Sanchez.  It will be the first title for the Giants in San Francisco believe it or not and it will be a cool moment when they do win it all (let's face it, Texas is done)... the only question is will anyone be watching?

3) 3 Horse Race (NASCAR)
-That's what the NASCAR season has come down to 3 drivers.  Jimmie Johnson, looking for his 5th straight title, leads Denny Hamlin by 14 points and Kevin Harvick by 38 points with 3 races left.  Jeff Gordon in 4th is more than 200 points back.  Harvick finished 2nd to Clint Bowyer yesterday at Talledega with a beat up racecar and somehow survived at the superspeedway with a beat up, taped up car.  Watching the end of the race yesterday I was disappointed with NASCAR's decision to throw the caution on the last lap and end the race.  Yes, it is a safety issue with cars flipping down the track, but it's called racing for a reason, and if you can't race to the line for a win then what are we doing here?  Fans shouldn't have to wait around for minutes for word from above who was leading at the last scoring loop - they should see the checkered flag in the air.

4) Predicting the Final 4 (MLS)
-MLS is in their conference semifinals.  Each series is halfway through the home and home total goals format.  The East top seed New York Red Bulls should finish off San Jose taking a 1-0 lead home.  I think both defending champ RSL and Columbus should overturn 1-0 deficits going home against FC Dallas and Colorado respectively.  The LA Galaxy also take a 1-0 lead to the HDC against Seattle.  Check out the awesome goal from Edson Buddle below.  But, take a moment and salute one of the best crowds in sports with the 35,000+ that turned out at Qwest Field.  David Beckham even said it was the first time he experienced a European atmosphere playing in the states.  Anyone still doubt soccer is making it?

5) Europe's Big 5 (Soccer)
- In 1) England, the big story is Liverpool's huge road win against Bolton.  Fernando Torres wasn't at his best, but his amazing backheel to Maxi Rodriguez saw Liverpool get a win to climb out of the relegation zone.  Barcelona ran past Sevilla 5-0 in 2) Spain's big game of the weekend to leave them a point behind Real Madrid looking ahead to their Nov. 28th showdown.  3) Germany's top of the table clash saw Borussia Dortmund beat the surprise of the European season Mainz 2-0.  Perennial favorites Bayern Munich are 10 points back in 7th.  When will we recognize the Bundesliga as Europe's most competitive league?  Which Milan team leads in 4) Italy?  The answer is neither - it's Lazio.  The Rome side will face their first true test against AS Roma next week and they'll face Inter Dec. 3rd.  Finally say au revoir to the reign of Lyon in 5) France.  After ending their 7 straight titles last season, Lyon is clinging to the top half of the table with unknown Brest leading the way.

6) Heat Check - 3 Hot & 3 Cold (NBA)
-Cold: The 1) LA Clippers are off to a freezing start in spite of Blake Griffin's outstanding play thanks in large part to the ineffectiveness of Baron Davis.  They average a league low 87 points through 3 games.  The Heat have won 3 straight, but 2) Chris Bosh might lose his 3 Kings status.  He looked lost against Boston and is averaging 13.0 PPG - behind rookie DeMarcus Cousins.  These don't look like your father's Spurs.  3) San Antonio's defense is allowing 104 PPG, 23rd in the league against also rans Indiana and New Orleans.

-Hot: 1) Derrick Rose has taken a quantum leap.  He's averaged 33.5 PPG and 6.5 APG to open the season.  If he scores anywhere close to that throughout the year, the Bulls will be the East 4 seed.  I might have undersold the Warriors this season, especially if 2) Monta Ellis and Steph Curry can keep up their scoring rate.  They're combining for 47 PPG and lit up Houston in a home win to open the year with 71 combined points!  If Golden State keeps running, they'll keep winning.  Finally, how about some love for the 3) Hornets as the league's surprise unbeaten.  It's unlikely they'll keep it up, but at least Chris Paul has started the season well after a tumultuous offseason.

7) And finally...
-We always like to end with a funny or viral Youtube clip.  With this being the Halloween season, we were flipping through Netflix looking for a good Halloween movie to watch.  We came across something called Thankskilling.  Yup, not making that up.  It looked like the worst piece of crap ever made.  Did we watch it?  Absolutely.  Thanks.  Killing.  I would try to explain the plot to you, but just know that it was the most awesomely bad indy movie that I have ever seen.  We're talking about unknown levels of ridiculous awfulness.  Oh, and did I mention there's a foul-mouthed homicidal turkey involved?  Enjoy the violent swear-fliled trailer......

[randallsimonssausages2]

The UFC's heavyweight division, which was fairly stable at the top for the past couple of years, is now in a state of flux.  Reigning champion Brock Lesnar got upset by Cain Velasquez.  Top contender Shane Carwin had to pull out of his match at UFC 125 versus Roy Nelson due to a back injury and is now going to go under the knife.  Former top contender and champion Frank Mir hasn't looked good in his past few fights.  The only thing we do know currently is that Velasquez's first title defense will be against Junior dos Santos, who is 6-0 in the UFC.  Here are four other fights the UFC should make in their topsy-turvy heavyweight division. [mmamanifesto]

Brock Lesnar vs Frank Mir III

This was the fight the UFC was hoping to have happen at UFC 116 but Carwin had other ideas, pummelling Mir at UFC 111 and getting the title shot instead.  As mentioned above, Mir just hasn't looked good since losing to Brock Lesnar in the summer of 2009, so the UFC needs to get this fight set up before Mir becomes completely irrelevant.  The main reason to make this fight happen is money - Lesnar-Mir II helped make UFC 100 the most-bought pay-per-view in the company's history, garnering 1.6 million buys.  Plus, the animosity between the two combatants makes this the greatest feud in the sport, helped along by Mir saying he wants Lesnar to die in the Octagon.  Additionally, this is a good bounce-back fight for Lesnar, as he more than likely will be able to overpower Mir once again and get himself back on the winning track and in line for another title shot.

Roy Nelson vs Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira

Most fans are pushing for a Big Country-Brock Lesnar showdown, but we've already got Lesnar locking horns with Mir.  That leaves two men coming off knee surgeries, Roy Nelson and Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira, to go up against one another.  Big Country vs Big Nog would be a main event or co-main event worthy match for the UFC, and would be a good test for each man.  A win over Nogueira would be the biggest win in Nelson's career, while a victory over Nelson would prove that Nogueira isn't all washed up and has some gas left in his tank.  Plus, the winner of this fight could go up against the winner of Lesnar-Mir, with a title shot hanging in the balance.

Shane Carwin vs Beth Rothwell

Ben Rothwell won't be back until next spring at the earliest as he continue to recover from ACL surgery.  Timing-wise that could work  out well for a Carwin-Rothwell tilt, since Carwin will be convalescing from surgery himself.  Plus, the fact that both men are hard hitters and they have vastly different body types would make this a fun match to watch.  The winner of it would put themselves firmly in the title race.

Matt Mitrione vs Brendan Schaub

Both newcomers are on three-fight win streaks in the UFC.  Both were cast members on The Ultimate Fighter 10.  Both are former NFL players.  Both have big mouths and aren't above trash-talking.  Do you need any more reasons to make this fight happen? [mmamanifesto2]

The old expression "you can't win for losing" apparently doesn't apply to former UFC Heavyweight Champion Brock Lesnar.  Lesnar very clearly did lose at UFC 121, but he also won, at least in a financial sense.  Rightfully so, since he is the UFC's pay-per-view golden goose, Lesnar took home the highest reported salary from the event, pocketing a cool $400000 for having Cain Velasquez turn his left cheek into a replica of the Grand Canyon. [mmamanifesto]

Tito Ortiz also does a good job at winning despite losing.  The former light heavyweight titan hasn't won a match in over four years (and that was against an over-the-hill Ken Shamrock), yet he still pulls in $250000 every time he steps into the Octagon.  No wonder he said at the post-UFC 121 press conference that he has no plans ofretiring any time soon.  All in all, Zuffa made UFC 121 the richest UFC event of the year in terms of reported salaries, shelling out $1793000 to its 22 combatants.  Here is how the pieces of the pie were distributed.

Brock Lesnar: $400000
Cain Velasquez: $270000 ($100000 to show, $100000 win bonus, $70000 Knockout of the Night bonus)
Tito Ortiz: $250000
Diego Sanchez: $170000 ($50000 to show, $50000 win bonus, $70000 Fight of the Night bonus)
Jake Shields: $150000 ($75000 to show, $75000 win bonus)
Paulo Thiago: $88000 ($18000 to show, $70000 Fight of the Night bonus)
Daniel Roberts: $86000 ($8000 to show, $8000 to win, $70000 Submission of the Night bonus)
Gabriel Gonzaga: $67000
Matt Hamill: $58000 ($29000 to show, $29000 win bonus)
Sam Stout: $32000 ($16000 to show, $16000 win bonus)
Court McGee: $30000 ($15000 to show, $15000 win bonus)
Gilbert Yvel: $30000
Martin Kampmann: $27000
Patrick Cote: $21000
Brendan Schaub: $20000 ($10000 to show, $10000 win bonus)
Tom Lawlor: $20000 ($10000 to show, $10000 win bonus)
Chris Camozzi: $16000 ($8000 to show, $8000 win bonus)
Jon Madsen: $16000 ($8000 to show, $8000 win bonus)
Paul Taylor: $16000
Ryan Jensen: $10000
Dong Yi Yang: $8000
Mike Guymon: $8000

And with UFC 120 and 121 in the books, our 2010 UFC Fighter Salary Database has been updated, with a new top earner for the year.  And, no, it isn't who you think - the name of the top earning UFC fighter for 2010 so far will come as a suprise to most. [mmamanifesto2]