Trading Shots: As Super Bowl participants face political backlash, UFC included on boycott lists

The UFC has hit some boycott lists for the same reason that some of this year’s Super Bowl participants are being quizzed on their political affiliations. Should we let sports be sports, or is the political too personal to be cordoned off in American life? MMAjunkie columnist Ben Fowlkes and retired UFC and WEC fighter Danny Downes discuss.

Fowlkes: Well Danny, it’s Super Bowl Sunday, that holiest of American holidays. It’s the day when we stuff our face with snacks, pretend that advertisements are entertainment, and sure, maybe watch a little football if that’s what’s on the tube.

But this year there’s an added wrinkle. Perhaps you’ve noticed that the New England Patriots are in the big game again. Perhaps you’ve also noticed that quarterback Tom Brady and team owner Robert Kraft are buddies with President Trump. If you haven’t noticed, then you haven’t been paying attention, because the stories are everywhere this week.

It used to be that a pro athlete being bros with Donald Trump was just a weird, quirky sidenote. Now that Trump is beginning his term as the most unpopular U.S. President in at least four decades, his friendships take on a different flavor.

But you know who else is friends with Trump? UFC President Dana White. He even shouted his support at the Republican National Convention. That was apparently enough to land the UFC on some Trump-related boycott lists.

My questions to you: 1) Is the UFC uniquely positioned to ignore/easily survive such a boycott, seeing as how its audience is already mostly a niche one, not to mention one that has put up with so much worse crap already? 2) Is it fair to drag the political world into the sports world to this extent, especially surrounding events like the Super Bowl, which have in the past served as a point for temporary reconciliation via mass distraction, since don’t we all want to gather around some cheese dip and forget our worries for one afternoon?

Downes: At least you decided to keep things light this week, Ben. Hopefully next time we can discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I have this interesting theory on the commonalities between West Bank settlements and 12-to-6 elbows.

I’ll answer your second question first because it addresses the sports/politics conflict in a broader sense. When it comes to the intermixing of sports and politics, I think it depends on the issue. A person’s politics or values determine how they would like to see organizations run. A direct example would be labor law.

Your feelings on the SEIU and other unions directly impact your opinions on sports unions and the treatment of athletes. If you’re a Teamster, you probably want other workers to have the ability to collectively bargain, even if they’re millionaire quarterbacks. There are political issues, however, that don’t have anything to do with sports. My opinion of coal industry regulations has little to do with how I enjoy the NFL or the UFC.

As for your first question, I think it shows that the UFC isn’t really “big league,” to borrow the phrase.

White spoke at the Republican National Convention and endorsed Trump, with little reaction. Brady had a Make America Great Again hat in his locker, and everyone lost their minds.

Yes, White’s speech was basically, “Donald Trump was nice to me, so I’m speaking here,” but it was a far more public endorsement than anything Brady has done. If you look at mainstream media reports of the RNC, White barely registered. Scott Baio received more coverage than White. As much as the UFC has grown in popularity over the last couple years, it’s still a cage fighting sideshow to a lot of people.

Perhaps we should have a détente over a pile of nachos and armchair quarterbacking. After all, people are even getting mad at Budweiser now. The country’s emotions are frayed on both sides of the aisle, and we run the risk of entrenching ourselves in our echo chambers even further.

Maybe we should “just stick to sports.” Or is that the last way out? When Brady says that he “wants to stay out of it,” is that because it’s going to hurt his brand, or is it cowardice? If you believe in something, shouldn’t you be an advocate for it?

Fowlkes: Except what if you don’t actually believe in that something? What if you’re just friends with the guy and now a bunch of people hate him and they won’t rest until you either disavow him or explain your support for a bunch of political positions you don’t hold or care about or maybe even understand?

It’s not so different with White. Whenever he’s asked about politics you get the sense that the UFC President might have let his subscription to The Economist lapse. He’s just not very interested if it doesn’t directly concern him.

White’s support for Trump seems more personal than political. Trump was nice to him, supported him back when few others did, and so if he wants to be the president leader guy, then sure, White will show up and lend his support. (And if UFC fans don’t mind being told to shut up and go away when they express dissatisfaction with White’s product on Twitter, I doubt this will be the thing that finally pushes them away.)

That’s one of the privileges that come with being a rich white dude in America: You have the luxury of not really caring about politics. Because what is Trump really going to do that will affect you? As long as we can avoid nuclear war (fingers crossed on that one) you’ll just go on being rich and powerful, no matter who’s Secretary of Education or which foreign nationals are denied entry to our country. You probably just wish people would stop asking you about it.

At the same time, a part of me is glad that people won’t. Because others have a lot on the line here. Just ask Gegard Mousasi, who this week had to wonder whether his birthplace was going to keep him from fighting in the U.S.

We can tell sports people to “stick to sports,” but the thing about politics is that it doesn’t stick to politics. It gets all up in everybody’s business. It affects people’s lives. That is its nature. I’m all for drowning my sorrows in hot wings, but I don’t think we have to pretend that we’re all equally insulated from the concerns of the world beyond our TVs.

Downes: Well if we’re going to start merging politics and sports even further, it seems appropriate that we discuss the first amendment. Specifically, what “freedom of speech” actually means. I think that this comic from xkcd sums it up perfectly.

If athletes, promoters, and members of the so-called media want to express their political opinion, I encourage it. If you feel strongly about something, you should try to advocate for it. And how many people have a platform that allows them to reach millions of people? Freedom of speech, however, does not mean freedom from consequences.

While politics can come off as juvenile at times, it is serious business. Whether it’s immigration policy or more intricate rules regulating small businesses, politics affect people’s lives. Sports, by comparison, are much less important. Some people treat them like matters of life and death, but they’re not. Sometimes they’re a much needed escape. If we take that away, how many refuges do we have left?

Ben Fowlkes is MMAjunkie and USA TODAY’s MMA columnist. Danny Downes, a retired UFC and WEC fighter, is an MMAjunkie contributor who also writes for UFC.com and UFC 360. Follow them on twitter at @benfowlkesMMA and @dannyboydownes.