The UFC’s future on television has been in the news lately with the collapse of negotiations with HBO, reports of a $100 million Spike extension in the works, and Dana White’s statement that the company is “going to make another big announcement about (TV) that is going to blow people away.” Speculation is widespread that the company is close to announcing a deal with ESPN in addition to a potential renewal with Spike. Dana White also publicly stated that he still expects to get a deal done with HBO.

There are three key goals of UFC television programming at this point: build brand awareness, create stars, which are really all about number three, sell pay-per-views. At some point advertising revenues and television rights fees will become more significant considerations, but there are no indications that we are close to that becoming a reality with pay-per-view accounting for 75% of revenues. In light of these goals each potential television partner brings different strengths and weaknesses to the table.

A deal with the ESPN, the Worldwide Leader in Sports, would put the UFC squarely into the mainstream of the sports world. Going mainstream is key to the UFC’s continued growth because reaching the casual sports fan is the difference between a wildly successful show (500,000-750,000 buys) and a blockbuster (750,000-1,000,000 buys). The network has already proven its power through its promotion of Liddell-Ortiz II and Liddell-Jackson II. Both of those fights received significant coverage on ESPN and not coincidentally are believed to be the two top grossing UFC pay-per-views of all time.

The network’s addition of NASCAR this year provides a blueprint for what ESPN could do for the UFC. The network has done a terrific job of embracing NASCAR as a new television property, devoting the entire year to enhancing the brand through saturation marketing and programming across its family of networks. A similar push for the UFC might include the return of Inside UFC, regular features on Sports Center, and promotional appearances across the rest of the network’s programming (such as Pardon the Interruption, The Jim Rome Show, etc.) in addition to any potential live events.

However, there are risks to an exclusive partnership with the network. While the UFC enjoys the advantages of being Spike’s number one property, the brand would rank significantly lower in the ESPN hierarchy. The NFL, NBA, MLB, NASCAR, College Football & Basketball, would all rank above the UFC in terms of network priorities. As a result there is a real possibility that the UFC could get lost in the shuffle.

On the other hand Spike is heavily invested in the UFC’s success since the network’s success is largely tied to the brand’s success. Spike builds its television schedule around its UFC programming including extensive marketing blitzs for live events. When the UFC needs television time all it has to do is ask. UFC events on Spike are given the top priority while on ESPN at best they would receive equal billing with the week’s biggest traditional sporting events.

While a deal with ESPN would bring tremendous mainstream exposure, a deal with HBO would bring prestige and legitimacy to the sport and the brand. HBO Sports is one of the most respected entities in the sports world, the gold standard as White has called it. The UFC on HBO would signal the sport’s arrival and clearly establish the UFC as its premier brand. The price to pay for this legitimacy however appears to be relinquishing production control, something the UFC has been steadfastly unwilling to do.

Other professional sports broadcasts feature independent announcers and producers hired by the network who televises the event. In contrast the UFC’s broadcasts are produced in house. White other sports sell television rights, the UFC essentially sells a complete ready-to-air product, featuring company employees as announcers pushing the product in a manner closely resembling professional wrestling.

I think the production of the UFC has played a huge part in not only the brand’s identity but it’s success. The format provides continuity and allows the company to seamless promote its live events. The use of in house announcers is particularly effective at promoting the business and also allows the company to maintain complete control over how the brand is presented. Furthermore, without the UFC’s signature production the broadcasts risk becoming more bland and generic, losing what Mark Cuban calls the “spectacle” atmosphere that has been so successful. The gladiator opening sequence with its Optimus Bellum Domitor theme, Joe Rogan, and Mike Goldberg in many ways are the UFC.

It appears that White hopes to have the best of both worlds by reaching deals with Spike and ESPN, as well as eventually HBO. How these deals would fit together is pure speculation, but we can safely assume that each deal would involve exclusive content thus increasing the amount of UFC television. That realization raises a key concern that has emerged over the last year: oversaturation.

White is on the record that oversaturation is not a problem. He likes to point the NFL as an example that as long as you produce a quality product, you can never have enough. The decline in the ratings of the Ultimate Fighter seems to tell a different tale, however, it should be noted that this has not yet impacted the pay-per-view business. The effect of more live events on television could be a different story.

It would seem that, at least in the short term, it is in the company’s best interest to keep live fights on television rare in order to preserve the significance of the pay-per-view events. It seems logical to conclude that the more common place live fights become on free television, the more selective viewers will become in their pay-per-view purchases. However, there is a counter view that the more exposure you give the product on free television, so long as its a quality product, the more pay-per-views you can sell.

The company will run 19 live events this year and an increase in the number of live events next year seems inevitable. If an agreement with ESPN materializes it will almost certainly include live fight cards and its hard to imagine Spike renewing without live content. The question becomes how many more events is the company capable of producing per year without a sacrifice in quality? Some would argue that the company has already been stretched thin by this year’s slate of events, not merely in the talent department but also in the Zuffa organization.

One plan that doesn’t seem to be in the offering: weekly live events. Tuesday night fights was the original concept pitched by White to Spike. However, earlier this year White stated that he didn’t think the talent was available to produce such a show.