Official Conor McGregor thread (part 4) *Updated Warning in 1st Post Re:Boxing match

Zero-Cool

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I was joking [that smiley face at the end should have been the tip off]

I was myself man *poo emoji*

buzzinfly83

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Cage Warriors is willing to let anyone out of their contracts if UFC wants them so Conor not defending his CW titles is on them. Its also on UFC for not demanding he defend his title/s in their organization. They created the proverbial monster that we now see and they can't control it or contain it.

Fair point about the UFC letting it get out of control but does Conor as a fighter not want to defend his belt?

buzzinfly83

buzzinfly83 wrote: »

Fair point about the UFC letting it get out of control but does Conor as a fighter not want to defend his belt?

not if he can more money somewhere else. he's about money, not "legacy".

buzzinfly83

glasso wrote: »

not if he can more money somewhere else. he's about money, not "legacy".

I agree.

ASOT

glasso wrote: »

not if he can more money somewhere else. he's about money, not "legacy".

But money is legacy? Taking mendes on short notice, beating aldo, taking the diaz fight, the rematch, two weight world champion, the maymac fight. The next paycheck bigger than the last and all adding to his legacy.

DuffleBag

After watching the movie doc thing there. Who was it that scissor kicked his knee slow rolling before the Chad Mendes fight?

JohnMc1

buzzinfly83 wrote: »

Fair point about the UFC letting it get out of control but does Conor as a fighter not want to defend his belt?

Clearly not. He's all about "the Money Fights". Again I have the blame on the UFC. They should have never given him a shot at the LW title when he refused to defend his FW title.

hewhoscares

DuffleBag wrote: »

After watching the movie doc thing there. Who was it that scissor kicked his knee slow rolling before the Chad Mendes fight?

I don't know if anyone from SBG has said it explicitly but I've seen a few places online saying Rory MacDonald

Mellor

Joe Musashi wrote: »

Only a grotesque capitalist would ignore terrible human conduct on account of money.

Only somebody with no knowledge of MMA would call that terrible human conduct. You're not a very good troll.
You're namesake would be embarrassed tbh.

dulux99

It was Rory Macdonald, John Kavanagh confirmed that in his book

JohnMc1

ASOT wrote: »

But money is legacy? Taking mendes on short notice, beating aldo, taking the diaz fight, the rematch, two weight world champion, the maymac fight. The next paycheck bigger than the last and all adding to his legacy.

His refusal to defend his titles will hurt his legacy once he's retired and we can look back on his career with objectivity. He'll never be seen in the same light as Fedor or GSP.

JohnMc1

JohnMc1 wrote: »

His refusal to defend his titles will hurt his legacy once he's retired and we can look back on his career with objectivity. He'll never be seen in the same light as Fedor or GSP.

It's all the eye of the beholder.

Fedor fought a lot of cans and fought a lot in Japan where fixes and mismatches were extremely common.

GSP discussions on most sites are full of jokes about greasegate and suspicions of PED use. Plus while he did defend his belt a lot, some of those were against opponents who didn't deserve a title shot.

MMA is not a real sport, legacy is whatever you want it to be.

JohnMc1

Deleted User wrote: »

It's all the eye of the beholder.

Fedor fought a lot of cans and fought a lot in Japan where fixes and mismatches were extremely common.

PRIDE matched alot of their stars against in between fights with each other 1) To keep them active and 2) It helped build them up into the stars that they became.

RINGS had already moved into full shoot mode by the time Fedor got there.

GSP discussions on most sites are full of jokes about greasegate and suspicions of PED use. Plus while he did defend his belt a lot, some of those were against opponents who didn't deserve a title shot.

The only people who bring that up are a still bitter BJ Penn [grease had nothing to do with you quitting on your stool after claiming that you were ready to fight to the death BJ] and his delusional fanboys that cling to the "This time BJ will be motivated and dominate".

MMA is not a real sport, legacy is whatever you want it to be.

Correction. MMA is a real sport. UFC is a pro wrestling company.

darced

This post has been deleted.

weldoninhio

Not about CMcG per say, but i'm sure most posters here would be interested in it and didn't want to set up a thread about it. But the new 30 for 30 podcasts have a new one up from yesterday about the very first UFC event. Very interesting. Sorry about the off topic post Mods.

Mean Laqueefa

weldoninhio wrote: »

Not about CMcG per say, but i'm sure most posters here would be interested in it and didn't want to set up a thread about it. But the new 30 for 30 podcasts have a new one up from yesterday about the very first UFC event. Very interesting. Sorry about the off topic post Mods.

prob better in the general thread, unless they are slating Conor/What UFC has become etc.... then its a weldoninhio auto thanks

JohnMc1

JohnMc1 wrote: »

PRIDE matched alot of their stars against in between fights with each other 1) To keep them active and 2) It helped build them up into the stars that they became.

Pride had lots of fixed fights, that's just a fact. Even if you assert that Fedor himself had no fixed fights, what if the people he beat had fixed fights? Knowing that some of their wins were not legit would lower the prestige of beating them imo.

I'm not ****ting on Fedor, just making the point that legacies are relative and objective due to the fact that professional MMA is not a real sport.

Correction. MMA is a real sport. UFC is a pro wrestling company.

If you want to be pedantic, MMA can be lots of things - a hobby, a job, an art, a calling etc.

I was talking about professional MMA. Be it televised or ticketed, it is not a real sport. It's sports entertainment as long as matchups, rankings, progression, title shots etc are in the hands of each promoter. And talking about legacies in these circumstances is pointless.

UFC in particular is a **** show.

Mellor

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Never realised that's how it happened.

Deleted User wrote: »

If you want to be pedantic, MMA can be lots of things - a hobby, a job, an art, a calling etc.

None those exclude it from being a sport. Soccer can be all of those things, Soccer is still a sport.

I was talking about professional MMA. Be it televised or ticketed, it is not a real sport. It's sports entertainment as long as matchups, rankings, progression, title shots etc are in the hands of each promoter.

You are entitled to your opinion. But your opinion is wrong.

Competitive MMA requires matchmaking. So doesn't boxing and other sports.
I would be great is athletes could instantly recover and have Wimbledon style grand slam events. But it's just not possible. Saying this means it's not a real sport is trollop.

Asus X540L

He's right in a way.

The UFC has made fights lately that have nothing to do with merit or rankings - just how much dollars they can generate.

McNuggets getting a LW title fight without defending the FW or having one fight in LW - check
GSP coming back after 4 years and not having a MW fight in his life challenges for the title - check
Old man Hendo getting a title shot against Bisping after being a punching bag for the last 3 years - check
McNuggets not being stripped after 18 months as LW without showing any intention to defend - check
Ronda getting the living **** kicked out of her against holm and comes back for an instant title show versus Nunes - check
Also, Back in the day Lesnar gets a shot after going 1-1 in the UFC with his only win against a journeyman like Heath Herring

Mellor

Asus X540L wrote: »

He's right in a way.

The UFC has made fights lately that have nothing to do with merit or rankings - just how much dollars they can generate

There's a difference between the "UFC" and "MMA".

wonderfullife

Asus X540L wrote: »

He's right in a way.

The UFC has made fights lately that have nothing to do with merit or rankings - just how much dollars they can generate.

1. McNuggets getting a LW title fight without defending the FW or having one fight in LW - check
2. GSP coming back after 4 years and not having a MW fight in his life challenges for the title - check
3. Old man Hendo getting a title shot against Bisping after being a punching bag for the last 3 years - check
4. McNuggets not being stripped after 18 months as LW without showing any intention to defend - check
5. Ronda getting the living **** kicked out of her against holm and comes back for an instant title show versus Nunes - check
6. Also, Back in the day Lesnar gets a shot after going 1-1 in the UFC with his only win against a journeyman like Heath Herring

Not a real sport because of the above?

1. November 18th, 1964. Bob Foster, the light-heavyweight champion of the world, makes his debut at heavyweight with an instant title shot against the undisputed heavyweight world champion Smokin' Joe Frazier.

2. April 6th, 1987. Sugar Ray Leonard returns after 3 years of retirement to move up to a weight class he has never fought at before to challenge the lineal middleweight world champion Marvin Hagler.

3. December 18th, 2010. 41-year-old Bernard Hopkins gets a title shot against Antonio Tarver despite back-to-back defeats in his previous 2 contests and not being ranked as the top contender.

4. Despite repeated calls to be stripped, Jack Depmsey was allowed 3 years and 9 days in between the defence of his heavyweight world title on September 23rd, 1923. It's said by boxing historians that he spent the 3 years "partying, drinking, womanizing, traveling and spending money". It was alleged by the public of the era that he was ducking the number 1 challenger Harry Wills but Dempsey denied he was afraid of anyone.

Sounds familiar...

5. September 18th, 1999 - Oscar de la Hoya loses his title to Felix Trinidad.
February 26th, 2000 - Oscar given an immediate title shot in a different weight class upon his return.

September 13th, 2003 - Oscar loses his title to Shane Mosley.
June 5th, 2004 - Immediate title shot on return.

September 8th, 2004 - Oscar loses his title to Bernard Hopkins.
May 6th, 2006 - Title shot on return.

6. October 12th, 2013 - Vasyl Lomachenko gets immediate title shot with a pro record of 0-0. (Vasyl's amateur record was 399-1 with 2 Olympic Golds compared to Brock's amateur wrestling record of 106-5 with 1 NCAA Division 1 title).


Looks like boxing isn't a real sport either... :rolleyes:

Anyway, the point of all of the above is that exceptions are made in all combat sports for stars. (Yes, they're both sports). It's been that way since day 1 in boxing and since day 1 in MMA. If your name is Sugar Ray Leonard in the 1980's you get to stroll back in from the wilderness for title shots, just like if your name is Ronda Rousey in the 2010's you get to do it if you fancy it.

Should Conor defend or be stripped? Absolutely and hurry up with it (defend!).

He won't be though, for the same reasons they didn't strip Jack Dempsey all the way back in the 1920's:

Conor is the face of the sport, just like Jack was - and some things never change.

((Incidentally, Conor would NOT be stripped under WBC, WBO, WBA, IBF title defence rules. A champion must face the mandatory number one contender within 12 months unless a) injured or b) has the approval of sanctioning body for a contest outside the weight class. e.g. Bellew v Haye. Conor had UFC approval for the Floyd fight and the weight class was 154lb's. If it was boxing rules, he'd be given until August 25th, 2018 to face the mandatory challenger. i.e. Ferguson))

The Ayatolla

This thread is literally groundhog day.

Mellor

Mellor wrote: »

You are entitled to your opinion. But your opinion is wrong.

:rolleyes: Very clever

Competitive MMA requires matchmaking. So doesn't boxing and other sports.
I would be great is athletes could instantly recover and have Wimbledon style grand slam events. But it's just not possible. Saying this means it's not a real sport is trollop.

Your posts are rambling incoherent nonsense. "So doesn't boxing" ? "I would be great is athletes" ?

Take a look at your own posts before calling other posts trollop.

Tazzimus

Deleted User wrote: »

:rolleyes: Very clever



Your posts are rambling incoherent nonsense. "So doesn't boxing" ? "I would be great is athletes" ?

Take a look at your own posts before calling other posts trollop.

I believe Mellor posts off his phone a lot and so is a victim of autocorrect.

Not that hard to understand if you actually look at them, mind

"So doesn't boxing" - So does boxing
"I would be great is athletes" - It would be great if athletes

Asus X540L

Asus X540L wrote: »

He's right in a way.

The UFC has made fights lately that have nothing to do with merit or rankings - just how much dollars they can generate.

McNuggets getting a LW title fight without defending the FW or having one fight in LW - check
GSP coming back after 4 years and not having a MW fight in his life challenges for the title - check
Old man Hendo getting a title shot against Bisping after being a punching bag for the last 3 years - check
McNuggets not being stripped after 18 months as LW without showing any intention to defend - check
Ronda getting the living **** kicked out of her against holm and comes back for an instant title show versus Nunes - check
Also, Back in the day Lesnar gets a shot after going 1-1 in the UFC with his only win against a journeyman like Heath Herring

To add to that :
- People with very good records getting cut because they are 'boring'
- People with poor records staying around because they are popular/attractive
- People signed or even headlining cards because they are mates with a moneymaker
- People promised title shots if they win a fight, they win the fight and someone more marketable (often totally random) gets the title shot
- Champions fighting guys outside the top 10 because UFC wants to keep them champion as long as possible
- Celebrities with zero experience fighting in the biggest promotion

I could go on for ages. None of these things happen in a real sport.

Usain Bolt can't get his drinking mates a spot in the Olympics. If he comes last in a heat he doesn't magically reappear in the final due to marketability. (I am aware he is retired, just the first example that popped into my head).

Before you say UFC =/= MMA, name an organisation where this crap doesn't happen? Most of them are actually worse than the UFC. There's rampant match fixing in Russia, most of the Japanese orgs didn't even hide the fact that they were basically pro wrestling.

Mellor

Deleted User wrote: »

Your posts are rambling incoherent nonsense. "So doesn't boxing" ? "I would be great is athletes" ?

Take a look at your own posts before calling other posts trollop.

I was posting on my phone in the gym. Autocorrect's a bitch.shrug
Other posters managed to get my meaning, if it was incoherent to you maybe the comprehension is lacking...Of course we both know that's not true. It just easier to side step my actual point and highlight something trivial.

Nobody is defending the UFC's marketing tactics. The examples you gave might happen, they do happen, but they don't exclude MMA from being a sport. Your whole point is contradictory. One minute the UFC is sports entertainment, the next you are equating it to the Olympics. Which is it?

Regardless the entire point is moot. The validity of a champion or a title shot has nothing to with it being a sport - or not being a sport. If two absolute nobodies fight under unified rules it's a sport.
If I play a round of gold with my dad, it's a sport - the fact that I'm terrible and I'm only there because I'm his son doesn't change golf into a non-sport. Same if I pay Rory McIroy for his time on a course.

The MMA vrs UFC part is hugely relevant. Saying "the UFC is no longer a sport" is hyperbole, but I appreciate the point. Saying all MMA is not sport is, frankly, hugely disrespectful. By the same logic, professional boxing, jiu jitsu, muay thai, etc, aren't sports either. The fact that's incorrect is hardly up for debate.

dulux99

Combat sports have always, and will always have an additional sense of pageantry and sports entertainment-like tendencies that most other sports do not have. It's disingenuous to compare them to Olympic heats. There's a reason Usain Bolt doesn't square off face to face with Tyson Gay at a press conference before a big race. Of course the UFC completely take the piss with things like CM Punk, but 99% of the time they're putting on top class fights between extremely well matched opponents.

Useful.Idiot

dulux99 wrote: »

Combat sports have always, and will always have an additional sense of pageantry and sports entertainment-like tendencies that most other sports do not have. It's disingenuous to compare them to Olympic heats. There's a reason Usain Bolt doesn't square off face to face with Tyson Gay at a press conference before a big race. Of course the UFC completely take the piss with things like CM Punk, but 99% of the time they're putting on top class fights between extremely well matched opponents.

yeah its ridiculous the amount of whinging about match-ups that defy the rankings when there's probably like 3-4 a year on top of the 100s of the other fights that are well matched.

eddie73

There is life to the UFC without Conor McGregor or Nate Diaz for that mater. Just look at uff 217 2 weeks ago. It was an amazing card.

Mellor

Mellor wrote: »

I was posting on my phone in the gym. Autocorrect's a bitch.shrug
Other posters managed to get my meaning, if it was incoherent to you maybe the comprehension is lacking...

Other posters got the meaning of my 'MMA is not a sport' claim and we managed to disagree and have a proper back and forth debate. But you just posted smartass nonsense ... "your opinion is wrong" "trollop"etc.

Have you ever seen a reply like that enrich a thread and make for better discussion? I doubt it very much.

Nobody is defending the UFC's marketing tactics. The examples you gave might happen, they do happen, but they don't exclude MMA from being a sport.

It's not a real sport if progression, matchmaking, rankings - basically entire careers are arbitrary and popularity-based.

I'm not taking away from what guys are doing inside the cage. They're exerting themselves physically, in most cases they are genuinely trying to win and if that's your criteria for sport then you have a different criteria than me, I accept that and we'll have to agree to differ.

You need to go back to the original post to understand the context of my point. We were talking about sporting legacies and whether Conor's will stand up to Fedor, GSP etc. I don't believe you can talk about sporting legacies in a serious and objective way when it's not a true sport.

Here's an example: If Artem Lobov was to retire tomorrow, what is his sporting legacy? He made it to the UFC, he had 6 fights in the UFC, headlined a card against a top 10 opponent. There are hundreds of fighters worldwide who will never get a sniff of the UFC let alone headline a card. On paper Artem has a tremendous legacy. In reality everybody here knows he got into the UFC, he was kept on despite losses, he headlined a card etc because he is mates with Conor. In a real sport you simply can't do that.

That's the point i'm making. How can you objectively talk and compare sporting legacies with this kind of carry on?

Your whole point is contradictory. One minute the UFC is sports entertainment, the next you are equating it to the Olympics. Which is it?

I didn't equate it to the olympics. I contrasted it. One being a real sport, one being sports entertainment. Your comprehension is very poor if you don't understand that. Conor can get his mates into the UFC and headline cards. Usain Bolt can't get his mates into the Olympics.

Regardless the entire point is moot. The validity of a champion or a title shot has nothing to with it being a sport - or not being a sport.

It absolutely does because in my opinion fair competition is a requirement for true sport.