Franklin "Smart Brother" McNeil's recent article on Chael Sonnen epitomizes hypocrisy of some MMA fans and media

Let us rewind back one year to a HYPOTHETICAL situation. It's after UFC 100 before the post-fight press conference is about to begin. The room is filled with electricity; not only because of the exciting night of fights witnessed on this historical night, but because of the in-cage interview of the UFC Heavyweight Champion Brock Lesnar. Lesnar, OD'ing on a cocktail of testosterone, adrenaline and downright rage, went on a verbal tirade against his opponent, a UFC sponsor and even made a comment about "getting on top of his wife". The members of the press were split into two camps; some enjoyed the performance for what it was; entertainment, others seemed to harbor more vitriol and, in one prominent African-American ESPN writer's case, looked as if he wanted to cry while arguing with another person it about the crassness of it all.

Fast forward back to today and an interesting column on ESPN.com written by Smart Brother Franklin McNeil. The article is a basic summary of the buildup to the Middleweight Title fight. In it, McNeil portrays an almost endorsing tenor. Now, I'm not saying that McNeil was that writer described as having a fit in the preceding anecdote because it has not been 100% confirmed...but I hear it was Franklin McNeil. Back during a UFC 100 recap article for ESPN.com, McNeil writes:

That type of respect wasn't exhibited by heavyweight champion Brock Lesnar, who overpowered interim titleholder Frank Mir in the main event. The 265-pound Lesnar bullied Mir en route to a second-round TKO.

Afterward, Lesnar put a blight on what had been a flawless evening. He refused to shake Mir's hand, made a derogatory gesture toward the fans, took a jab at one the event's major sponsors and made a off-the-cuff sexual reference.

If Lesnar had wanted to cement his status as the most disliked fighter in UFC, he accomplished that goal. He is officially the man everyone wants to see beaten to a pulp.

Notice the tone McNeil writes in; McNeil is clearly looking at this with an air of contempt, editorializing and condemning Lesnar for his verbal attacks and physical gestures. Juxtapose that with almost giddy amusement that Franklin McNeil had during the UFC 117 phone conference while listening and referring to Sonnen's comments. Sonnen waxed comically about Anderson Silva's ignorance of business and other general attacks on his character as well as his agitation (and attempts to provoke an emotional reaction from the champion) over Anderson's refusal to engage in a back and forth or give more than simple answers. McNeil continued his hypocrisy in today's article:

What Sonnen has done repeatedly is attack the champ's character. Yet this too has not generated the slightest rebuttal from Silva (26-4-0). Instead, Silva has found humor in Sonnen's comments.

...

While it can be argued that Silva should offer an oral response to the constant attacks on his character, and manhood, his silence is having a deafening effect.

Despite the nonstop verbal assaults directed at him, Silva has maintained his poise, opting instead to focus on silencing Sonnen inside the cage. Besides, getting into a verbal confrontation with Sonnen is a battle Silva will most likely lose.

Sonnen is one of the best trash-talkers in mixed martial arts. Still, it would be nice to see the champion show some emotion for a change. But Silva insists that's not his style.
....
If Sonnen's words fail to light a fire under Silva, maybe the possibility of being released from UFC will. Sonnen has had his say; it's time for Silva to provide a definitive answer.

The emphasis in some of the above sentences is mine. Compare the tone of the two articles; one is a condemnation of Lesnar, while the other read as a fatherly approval of Sonnen. McNeil, in his efforts to paint Sonnen as some sort of anti-hero representing the fans who are angered at Anderson's performance at UFC 112, has left out some of Sonnen's most egregious offenses. There is no need to go into detail into some of the more ridiculous, xenophobic and downright ignorant comments, but I would like to point out that Sonnen at first denied the Twitter account that was the source of many of the original comments. However, Sonnen later confirmed the account in an interview with Ariel Helwani as well as using some of the lines from the Twitter and claiming them as original.

The exclusion of these comments as well as the lack of scorn, as shown in the Lesnar article, is puzzling. Why is one set of "trash-talking" fine while another is not? Especially when you consider that the talk McNeil passively approved of was more debasing to Anderson Silva as Lesnar's was to Mir. Additionally, Silva has not thrown any barbs Sonnen's way, in fact, McNeil seems almost despondent that Silva refuses to trade and even speculates that doing so would ensure defeat. Lesnar too, like Silva, had thrown minimal insults towards his opponent Mir while being on the receiving end of taunts.

This article is not to focus only on the Lesnar/Mir and Silva/Sonnen combination, but they were the most glaring of his inconsistency. McNeil's columns serve as an embodiment of the same hypocrisy among MMA fans in regards to this upcoming fight and others in the past. A reasonable man would expect a fighter making comments to the effect that Sonnen has would be condemned by the fans and MMA media alike as the sport struggles of mainstream acceptance. Instead, his prejudice and jingoism is championed by a high percentage of MMA fans and his antics are flaccidly cosigned, not criticized, by a portion of the media (which I somewhat covered before). And yet in other cases, this behavior is labeled reprehensible and these fighters are marginalized by the media and fans alike.

Why? Why was Rashad Evans painted as the "cocky", "arrogant" fighter for talking talk to Rampage while Rampage was "funny" and "down to Earth"? Why was Chris Leben urinating on someone's bed taken better than Josh Koscheck and Bobby Southworth spraying Leben with a hose? The answer is a simple factor than many MMA fans (and the media) aren't willing to accept. They are, by and large, hypocrites. If Fighter A is someone they enjoy, then their actions will face less scrutiny. If Fighter B is someone they dislike, then their actions will face more scrutiny. The media are hypocrites as well. If criticizing Fighter A's actions and words will make for a good story, then that's the angle they take. If forced to choose between a good narrative and condemning Fighter B's actions and words, they will choose the good narrative 10 times out of 10.

Fans have also long railed against "WWE antics" in "their MMA". When Lesnar joined the UFC, he was immediately painted with the WWE brush because of his potential for trash-talking despite the UFC already having Tito Ortiz, BJ Penn and Rampage Jackson at their disposals. Chael Sonnen, however, is embraced by a good percent of the MMA online fanbase. The ironic thing is Sonnen is cutting white meat 1980's American hero babyface promos with a late 90's "Attitude Era" edge. Sonnen, while championing himself as a modern-day "Real American", talks down upon the cold foreign heel in Anderson Silva. This is classic Hulk Hogan cutting a promo about sending the Iron Sheik back to Iran or Dusty Rhodes' quest to send communist Nikita Koloff back to "mother Russia".

Hypocrisy, while normally disparaged by society, is a natural human emotion, just as much as anger and happiness. The problem with hypocrisy comes when a hypocrite refuses to acknowledge that he is a hypocrite and/or is being hypocritical. Someone without that sense of self-actualization won't be able to objectively engage in thoughtful and meaningful discussion of the sport. So embrace your inner hypocrite. Love him. Treat him well.

Follow me on Twitter at Twitter.com/MMAFightClub

SBN coverage of UFC 117: Silva vs. Sonnen