Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

2017 Non-Event General MMA Talk Thread


Elsalvajeloco

Recommended Posts

A mini update is that Joanna said he isn't fighting in Dallas but that's what the promotion is working towards. It would probably make sense to have it in Rio the month after since Andrade is Brazilian. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this fight, I'm pretty high on Tarzan and if he can rise to the occasion, he jumps into the top twenty IMO. Usman is pretty formidable, but I'm liking Sean's chances here a whole lot, he's only 25, so if he gets it done, we may see a new star on the rise. 

I have also learned to not bet against Jouban, it doesn't end well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2017 at 3:53 PM, Elsalvajeloco said:

A mini update is that Joanna said he isn't fighting in Dallas but that's what the promotion is working towards. It would probably make sense to have it in Rio the month after since Andrade is Brazilian. 

On the other hand, why would you want your champion facing a hostile crowd? Nothing against Brazilians, but they do take their  sports way seriously, imagine a crowd of Philly fans at a WWE event and then dial it up to 11. Granted, Joanna doesn't seem to mind playing heel, but I wouldn't wish that sort of crowd on anyone, there could well be a riot after she beats Andrade (as she certainly should unless we were to have local judging shenanigans). I see it as a close fight, but Joanna's standing game should and I emphasize should put her far enough ahead on points for the win.

I'd much rather see this in Dallas, as that takes away any possible judging crap. On the other hand, Joanna is quite capable of KTFO of Jessica if she can get her shots in. I just don't like the idea of the fight in Brazil where Joanna will be under pressure to score a KO to be sure of getting the win. Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean I'm not right. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OSJ said:

On the other hand, why would you want your champion facing a hostile crowd? Nothing against Brazilians, but they do take their  sports way seriously, imagine a crowd of Philly fans at a WWE event and then dial it up to 11. Granted, Joanna doesn't seem to mind playing heel, but I wouldn't wish that sort of crowd on anyone, there could well be a riot after she beats Andrade (as she certainly should unless we were to have local judging shenanigans). I see it as a close fight, but Joanna's standing game should and I emphasize should put her far enough ahead on points for the win.

I'd much rather see this in Dallas, as that takes away any possible judging crap. On the other hand, Joanna is quite capable of KTFO of Jessica if she can get her shots in. I just don't like the idea of the fight in Brazil where Joanna will be under pressure to score a KO to be sure of getting the win. Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean I'm not right. ;-)

As far as I know....Dallas is still in Texas and Texas has had a longer history of judging shenanigans than Brazil in MMA. It's still the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations

Moreover, the crowds for non Rousey (or Tate) women's MMA fights at the top of the cards in UFC has been a mixed bag. I expect it to be an entertaining bout but it makes more sense to put it on the card in Brazil which is going to need more starpower (plus serving as insurance in case Aldo gets hurt) than to sandwich it in between two HW fights that are more likely to have quick finishes. Plus, Brazil really needs to have actual stars or potential stars on the card. Anderson might be on the card, but they need to focus on newer blood rather than recycling common faces they see all the time who won't be champions in the near future like Glover, Vitor, Shogun, etc. Unless Nunes chooses to fight Shevchenko on this card, it makes more sense to put the strawweight title fight on this card. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Valid points all, in a perfect world we get Joanna vs. Jessica in Texas and Amanda in a showcase fight against Shevchenko in Brazil (as I think Amanda Nunes is a perfectly marketable star, particularly to a couple of demographics that MMA as a whole could stand to reach out to.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if GSP gets a title shot in Canada, one or other of my 2017 predictions comes true (either a title changes hands outside the USA, or a former Champion who hasn't held the belt for a year gets a title shot and loses). Also, I predicted they'd use 10 different commentary combinations this year. We're a month and a half in, and they've used 4 already (Rogan/ Goldberg, Anik/Cormier, Anik/Stann, and Anik/Cormier/ Rogan). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They cut a ton of fighters and let many contracts just run out last week. Plus, I believe they finally scrubbed the roster listing on the website because some of those guys haven't fought for the UFC in years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

They cut a ton of fighters and let many contracts just run out last week. Plus, I believe they finally scrubbed the roster listing on the website because some of those guys haven't fought for the UFC in years.

Look, I'm not begrudging UFC doing some house cleaning.  I saw the list of fighters who were cut, and I don't really disagree with many of them.  What I do disagree with is the gutting of their light heavyweight division when it's currently a division that's growing painfully thin and is very short on top level talent and good prospects.  

You don't have to agree with me.  But ever since you became in charge here, it seems like you have to defend and justify every little decision UFC makes.  And playing devil's advocate is fine and all, but I just don't see the logic in gutting their 205 pound division of several top 10 competitors.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheVileOne said:

Look, I'm not begrudging UFC doing some house cleaning.  I saw the list of fighters who were cut, and I don't really disagree with many of them.  What I do disagree with is the gutting of their light heavyweight division when it's currently a division that's growing painfully thin and is very short on top level talent and good prospects.  

You don't have to agree with me.  But ever since you became in charge here, it seems like you have to defend and justify every little decision UFC makes.  And playing devil's advocate is fine and all, but I just don't see the logic in gutting their 205 pound division of several top 10 competitors.  

Dude, I have been in charge for like four years now almost. I have disagreed with plenty of things that UFC has done.

By the way, that last reply was a statement of fact. That's what they did last week for those who didn't follow. There are going to be plenty of fighters who people thought were still on the roster who are no longer on the roster for various reasons. For example, Kyoji Horiguchi's deal did expire as well and it's looking he maybe on his way to another org.

At the same time, if the point is they need more live bodies, then that's something I don't know if I necessarily agree with. Zuffa had more live bodies at 205 for five or six years and we legitimately only got 3 or 4 top tier light heavyweights out of that. Two of them came from other divisions. The guys outside of that select group were guys always on the cusp who never broke in that mix.

Something I said at the outset of the sale was they were going to prune the roster. At the time, people were talking about potential front office changes and whether or not Joe Silva was going to stay. However, at that time, I felt this was going to a clear next step because the sheer size of the roster didn't make sense for the actual talent they were turning out. Meaning the stars at the box office and the fighters who were legitimately talented were finite compared the roster size. Moreover, the former was going to be more important to them because they have no pre existing relationship whatsoever with the talent (and of course having to maximize profits). Their pre-existing relationship with the talent is Dana White, and Dana isn't Lorenzo who many people had their loyalty with. Dana's job now is basically on par with what Jim Ross and Johnny Ace did with WWE. So many of the folks who only stayed on roster pre sale because of certain factors are way, way, way more expendable now. They're just about as expendable as the folks who got let go in the office. It is very much the new reality with the UFC. Is it something I agree with fully? No because you're going to get some real casualities along the way whether it be in the office, on the roster, or whereever else. However, based on the motivations, I can connect the dots pretty goddamn easily.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, twiztor said:

everybody is fine with ufc trimming its roster. 

When you're up over 600 fighters, it's going to be more than a trim especially when so few fighters contribute to the bottom line.

14 minutes ago, twiztor said:

especially with two of them being prospects that have shown some potential.

Potential don't mean shit when you got new people in charge. It didn't even mean that much when Zuffa was in power. The amount of arguments and whatnot about who was getting preferential treatment, and who was getting fed to the wolves (that I read just from being in the board the last 8 or 9 years) was plenty enough to say that everything wasn't dandelions pre sale. Plus, people were pissed at Zuffa for getting rid of so many top fighters then as well. If they survived then when people had it with Dana (and Lorenzo), I think they will survive Krylov vs. Cirkunov II in like ACB or Rizin. I think the UFC will go on when people forget about this just like a whole host things people got mad at for a split second and didn't care about the next second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, a lot of people are probably looking at it from the WWE mindset of when they cut guys, they're giving up on them for life. Wheres the UFC is (or at least has been) far more willing to bring people back having previously let them go. And even when they had the swollen roster, you'd still see a lot of people making UFC debuts (or comebacks) as a short notice replacement to someone injured, so it's not as if there's no opportunities for fighters outside of the big money company. It's just there's more of an onus on them to market themselves now. The 'lose three in a row and you're out' rule lasted a long time, but now they're being cutthroat about it. Which isn't nice, but is to be expected.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AxB said:

Well, a lot of people are probably looking at it from the WWE mindset of when they cut guys, they're giving up on them for life. Wheres the UFC is (or at least has been) far more willing to bring people back having previously let them go. And even when they had the swollen roster, you'd still see a lot of people making UFC debuts (or comebacks) as a short notice replacement to someone injured, so it's not as if there's no opportunities for fighters outside of the big money company. It's just there's more of an onus on them to market themselves now. The 'lose three in a row and you're out' rule lasted a long time, but now they're being cutthroat about it. Which isn't nice, but is to be expected.

Exactly. They're no longer UFC fighters, but they're not banned for life. I think the balance of the problem at 205 is you're going to have rush everyone who is sorta decent right to the top. Once a dude like a Cirkunov gets a half decent victory over a fringe contender, he's gonna have to face a Rumble or Daniel Cormier. Cutting him (or letting his deal run out) ain't the best move, but I doubt letting him eat a giant Anthony Johnson punch is the best move either. The problem with having three or four guys worth a damn is anyone resembling that is going get thrown in there whether he is ready or not. Someone like a Yair Rodriguez is going to have time to mature just because there are guys who might help him improve on the basis of there being some diverse players at 145.

I think the analogy I would make about 205 and my whole point about this is American football or any traditional sport this might apply to. It's like a winning team that use to be known for it's sensational offense. Now, they win games based on their defense. Now, the offense isn't that good but there are some offensive assistant coaches who show promise and potential. Say a new owner or GM comes to town. One of the first things they're probably going to look at is why the offense is so shitty now compared to past years. If one of the key reasons is they lost a major offensive player due to like free agency or trade who was the sole reason they had a great offense in the first place (comparable to a Jon Jones), everyone else left on that offense (team or personnel) doesn't have that much job safety except those that are close to being cornerstones. Even then, those dudes can be moved if they ask for too much money or lose some significant value. Potential is great but these are people who want to win NOW, and they're going to do everything in their power to do that. If you have an assistant coach who shows potential and has been there for 2-4 years but the offense is still shitty, that coach might be one of the people who get held responsible for that whether it's right or not. It happens all the time because someone has to be held accountable. 

The light heavyweight division has been bad for a long time, but I don't think people started realizing it until Jon Jones was out for so long. You can't lose a Barry Sanders, an Adrian Peterson, or a LeBron James during his first run with the Cavs when they ARE the entire lynchpin and the reason for that success. That's why I was never that vehemently anti-Jon Jones because the division isn't shit without him. Just that simple. So if the next level talent isn't there and the centerpiece isn't, what in the entire fuck are you trying to turn around? Without those factors, it's just a bunch of dudes. It's basically the MMA equivalent of the Philadelphia 76ers. You're just hoarding talent and praying for someone out of that group be a long term franchise player who might never ever be that. If we know Jon Jones is still the guy at 205, how many folks are really going to be galvanized behind Ryan Bader, Misha Cirkunov, and Nikita Krylov to be the guy? Those three dudes are good fighters but that ain't a superstar or champion based on what we know now. There are teams in the NBA who put 5 good players (hell, maybe a sixth man off the bench too) on the court but who are still shitty. We've been waiting for several months for it to turn around, but it hasn't. So can anyone give me a proper ETA for the turnaround? If they don't know, I doubt we're going to know either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...