supremebve Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 1 hour ago, Elsalvajeloco said: People were crying and complaining about how the UFC let dudes like Fitch, Shields, and Okami. What do those three have in common with Bader? Guys who you can't build a division around, but may mentally destroy the younger guys who you can build a division around. All of those guys are too good for their role. None of those dudes were going to win the championship, all they could do is break an up and comer who may be on his way to becoming championship level. If you are going to be a guy at that level you have to be a Rich Franklin, a Kenny Florian, or a Jim Miller. A young fighter can test all of their skills against them in a way that isn't demoralizing if they lose. You can't have guys who specialize in breaking their opponent's will filling that role. Those guys are division killers. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxB Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 You could, if one of them was marketable for other reasons. Like being a big talker, or having a celebrity girlfriend, or being an openly gay male fighter. Some sort of unique selling point that makes gatekeeper level guys into the 'great draw who won't win the title ever' spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVileOne Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 On 2/7/2017 at 10:58 PM, Elsalvajeloco said: Does he have a win over Jon Jones? Does he have a win over Daniel Cormier? Does he have a win over Glover Teixeira? Does he have a win over Anthony Johnson? No? Well...how about Alexander Gustafsson? Well, shit. He hasn't beaten anyone who has fought in a legitimate LHW title fight in the last 3 or 4 years. So what. Michael Bisping didn't beat anyone who fought in a legitimate middleweight title fight in basically ever when he was finally granted a title shot. That's not a reasonable criteria. He beat Rashad Evans in 2015, when Evans had fought in a legitimate light heavyweight title fight in the last three or four years. So, that counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxB Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Bisping beat the best middleweight of all time, Anderson Silva. Also, he's a talker and a ticket seller, and a regional draw in the UK. So even though he was basically a gatekeeper for years, he wasn't disposable the way a Bader-type guy would be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted February 9, 2017 Author Share Posted February 9, 2017 12 minutes ago, AxB said: Bisping beat the best middleweight of all time, Anderson Silva. Also, he's a talker and a ticket seller, and a regional draw in the UK. So even though he was basically a gatekeeper for years, he wasn't disposable the way a Bader-type guy would be. Pretty much. Bader is still a fighter with zero wins over anyone who was in a real UFC LHW title fight from 2013 to 2016. None. He also hasn't been in a title fight, real or interim. This is when the division is much thinner than middleweight. He also has no real fanbase and isn't marketable in any way. WME-IMG is not going to keep him around when he is asking for more money. It makes no sense especially when they're tightening the purse strings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSJ Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 @Supremebve We're usually in lock-step on this stuff, but I'm going to have to question the concept of a guy like Bader being a "will-breaker, division killer". Simply stated, if you're a young fighter who can have your will to fight broken by being beaten by a much more experienced fighter, you should probably be seeking another vocation. A successful fighter isn't measured by how many times he wins as much as he is by how he overcomes adversity. If you're a fighter you're going to get beaten, that's a given. The question is do you get back up or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supremebve Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Just now, OSJ said: @Supremebve We're usually in lock-step on this stuff, but I'm going to have to question the concept of a guy like Bader being a "will-breaker, division killer". Simply stated, if you're a young fighter who can have your will to fight broken by being beaten by a much more experienced fighter, you should probably be seeking another vocation. A successful fighter isn't measured by how many times he wins as much as he is by how he overcomes adversity. If you're a fighter you're going to get beaten, that's a given. The question is do you get back up or not? I agree in principle, but everyone has a breaking point. The biggest problem with the LHW division is that they need young fighters to take the place of the older guys at the top of the division. When you are building up a fighter you want to give them difficult fights that allow them to work on their deficiencies in a way that is productive to their growth. Getting taken down, dominated, and pounded into submission is not productive to your growth as a young fighter. Bader's entire game is based on breaking his opponent's will, and he's really good at it. Learning to overcome adversity is important for a young fighter, but Bader's style doesn't really provide much of a learning experience. Bader is a big, strong, wrestler, and if he's better at wrestling than his opponent he wins in a smothering, dominating, miserable ass fashion. The crazy thing is that Jones and Cormier are better wrestlers than Bader, but there is much more to learn from fighting one of them than there is from fighting Bader. They provide multiple looks, that will allow a young fighter to try different things and try to overcome whatever challenge they are presented with. Once Bader realizes he can take his opponent down, they are going to be on the mat and staying there until the fight is over. The only thing that fighter is going to learn is whether or not he can take an ass whooping. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted February 9, 2017 Author Share Posted February 9, 2017 Paul Daley vs. Rory MacDonald is set to headline the May 19th Bellator show in London at SSE Arena, Wembley. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSJ Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 @Supremebve I think we're sort of agreeing coming from different angles... From my point of view, learning whether or not you can take an ass whooping is a pretty critical piece of being a fighter. Way back in the 1970s we'd have these "So You Think You're Tough" competitions, pretty ghastly in retrospect. They'd pretty much throw names in a hat and draw all sorts of weird mis-matches. I tried it twice, first time a win; second time this army dude from Ft. Lewis who on paper didn't appear to be much of a threat beat the fucking beejeezus out of me and I decided then and there fighting was not for me. I really, really don't like getting hit in the face multiple times, it hurts like hell. However, that said, at no time was there any question that I'd get knocked out, yes, I can take an ass whooping, it was pretty much a daily thing until my senior year in high school when I shot up four inches and fifty pounds. The bottom line is that I don't have the heart for fighting, it takes a real special mentality. Sort like my contrasting Sage and BJ, BJ is a fighter, at the end of the day, I think we see that Sage is a splendid athlete that should have gone into something else. I just don't think he posses the viciousness necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supremebve Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 15 minutes ago, OSJ said: @Supremebve I think we're sort of agreeing coming from different angles... From my point of view, learning whether or not you can take an ass whooping is a pretty critical piece of being a fighter. Way back in the 1970s we'd have these "So You Think You're Tough" competitions, pretty ghastly in retrospect. They'd pretty much throw names in a hat and draw all sorts of weird mis-matches. I tried it twice, first time a win; second time this army dude from Ft. Lewis who on paper didn't appear to be much of a threat beat the fucking beejeezus out of me and I decided then and there fighting was not for me. I really, really don't like getting hit in the face multiple times, it hurts like hell. However, that said, at no time was there any question that I'd get knocked out, yes, I can take an ass whooping, it was pretty much a daily thing until my senior year in high school when I shot up four inches and fifty pounds. The bottom line is that I don't have the heart for fighting, it takes a real special mentality. Sort like my contrasting Sage and BJ, BJ is a fighter, at the end of the day, I think we see that Sage is a splendid athlete that should have gone into something else. I just don't think he posses the viciousness necessary. Learning whether or not you can take an ass whooping is important, but I think it depends on the ass whooping. If a fighter gets knocked out they can rationalize it in their mind that they got caught with a good shot and it happens to everyone. If you get taken down, controlled, beaten to a pulp, and utterly dominated, and you can't make any excuses. Confidence is probably the most important trait a fighter can have, Bader is the type of fighter who can destroy the confidence of a young fighter. He's the exact wrong person for his position on the card. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVileOne Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 8 hours ago, AxB said: Bisping beat the best middleweight of all time, Anderson Silva. Also, he's a talker and a ticket seller, and a regional draw in the UK. So even though he was basically a gatekeeper for years, he wasn't disposable the way a Bader-type guy would be. Anderson Silva who at the time hadn't won a fight since Stephan Bonnar in 2012. I would say Bader is not disposable based on how crappy light heavyweight is right now and how lacking it is for talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail Sabin Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 5 hours ago, Elsalvajeloco said: Paul Daley vs. Rory MacDonald is set to headline the May 19th Bellator show in London at SSE Arena, Wembley. That is a very smart fight for Bellator to make. Hopefully neither get hurt in training camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted February 9, 2017 Author Share Posted February 9, 2017 1 hour ago, TheVileOne said: Anderson Silva who at the time hadn't won a fight since Stephan Bonnar in 2012. Except he is still Anderson Silva, one of the 3 or 4 best fighters in MMA history. 1 hour ago, TheVileOne said: I would say Bader is not disposable based on how crappy light heavyweight is right now and how lacking it is for talent. IIRC you said get rid of OSP in the last Fight Night thread. You wanna know what fight was the peak in the ratings for the Houston show? Ovince St. Preux vs. Volkan Oezdemir. Yup. That's right, WME-IMG has more incentive to keep OSP around (because apparently the UFC has made inroads w/ Que Dawgs that I didn't know about) more than Ryan Bader, who beat him. No one who has vehemently disagreed w/ you (which was about everyone) is saying light heavyweight is the greatest division ever. We're saying there is no incentive to keep him around. The UFC roster is 650+ fighters deep with enough additions every month to sustain that number. And again, the guys they have on roster already can serve in the same role that Bader serves. He is very much disposable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted February 9, 2017 Author Share Posted February 9, 2017 38 minutes ago, Hail Sabin said: That is a very smart fight for Bellator to make. Hopefully neither get hurt in training camp. Putting Page against Daley at this point would've been bad news for MVP. MacDonald is at the point of his career where he may be too worried about his face exploding to fight up to his ability. Fight makes way more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail Sabin Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 Oh yeah you slow burn Daley vs. Page or did it if one of them win the title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSJ Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 5 hours ago, supremebve said: Learning whether or not you can take an ass whooping is important, but I think it depends on the ass whooping. If a fighter gets knocked out they can rationalize it in their mind that they got caught with a good shot and it happens to everyone. If you get taken down, controlled, beaten to a pulp, and utterly dominated, and you can't make any excuses. Confidence is probably the most important trait a fighter can have, Bader is the type of fighter who can destroy the confidence of a young fighter. He's the exact wrong person for his position on the card. And round and round we go... Once again, I would contend that if you get taken down, controlled, beaten to a pulp, and utterly dominated you weren't ready for that level of competition. I'm all for careful development of a fighter, but what I don't want to see is the sort of crap that has ruined boxing. You get a promising fighter, protect them and let them puff up their record beating nobodies and then hope that they don't choke when they get to the big show (UFC) and there are guys like Bader waiting for them. Yeah, Bader is disposable in that you're not going to build a division or a marketing machine around a guy like that, but what else are you going to do except go the direction of "protected stars" (which in MMA history seems to never work out very well.) If being bright and personable counted for much, Rich Franklin would still be a champion. The truth is that with rare exceptions, fighters have a pretty short shelf life. On the other hand, casual fans will still get all worked up watching a basically harmless Tito Ortiz flail around with the even worse Chael Sonnen, so maybe the sport has already passed us hardcores by. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 It is worth noting that I'm sure UFC would be glad to keep Bader around at what they perceive to be a reasonable salary. The issue is less "this guy sucks, let's get rid of him" and more that the two sides just disagree over what he is actually worth. I agree they'd be better of having him around, light heavyweight is probably the thinnest division in the company. That said I wouldn't pay him like a star. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted February 10, 2017 Author Share Posted February 10, 2017 55 minutes ago, username said: It is worth noting that I'm sure UFC would be glad to keep Bader around at what they perceive to be a reasonable salary. The issue is less "this guy sucks, let's get rid of him" and more that the two sides just disagree over what he is actually worth. I agree they'd be better of having him around, light heavyweight is probably the thinnest division in the company. That said I wouldn't pay him like a star. Even though I think Zuffa wouldn't lose any sleep over Bader going to Bellator (see: Davis, Phil), I think it's still a difference in the regime and people have to consider that. Part of what was a problem with Zuffa, once they stopped doing massive cuts is they're acquiring fighters and just hoarding them until they do something relevant. I think Bader has improved massively (especially when he got with Jose Benavidez's dad briefly), but at the same time, we've seen the best of Ryan Bader. This isn't a Bader problem as it is a longstanding problem that has been building for years and now boiling over to a time with new owners. Fighters improve to a certain point and then reach an equilibrium and then just kinda seem stuck. At 205, I think Bader is fortunate because at his best he can look like a more than competent. At his worst, he will get knocked out in humiliating fashion. What helps the cons outweigh the pros is that his presence in a division (and I guess that's what supremebve is getting at) is you potentially undercut the growth of prospects and it's exact opposite of the desired outcome (what VileOne is talking about). A guy like Bader with no marketing appeal or fanbase could be the impetus of why 205 is still thin. It's not like Bader was in the UFC for only 3 years. Bader vs. Magalhaes was only four months after Gusmao vs. Jon Jones. He has been in the UFC as long as Jon Jones essentially. So if Bader is so integral for the division, why hasn't there been another truly great LHW prospect since then? You would think Bader is the guy to beat for someone to move to the next level but if there isn't a guy to beat him to get that rub, why the hell keep him around when there have been plenty of light heavyweights that were in his position that were gone years ago? Brandon Vera, Matyushenko, Tito Ortiz, Sokoudjou, Matt Hamill, Jake O' Brien, Jason Lambert, Cyrille Diabete, and Luiz Cane are all gone. I don't think the LHW division isn't worse off just because those dudes didn't stick around. The prospects who were good like Gustafsson or one of a kind like Jon Jones beat the absolute brakes off those dudes. However, besides like Tito who was and is still sort of a draw, all of those dudes were interchangeable even though they were very much roster worthy at the time. That makes you very expendable in the fight game. Boxing is proof positive of that. There were guys on HBO and Showtime back in the day who would beat the middle of the road boxers, but get the shit kicked out of them by the best of the best. However, in every case, the networks moved on to another set of guys to do that same job. With new UFC ownership, it puts even more of a target on someone like Bader's back w/ an expiring deal because they have no loyalty to him whatsoever. To them, he's just a dude who lost to Rumble, Glover, and Jon Jones. That's it. Moreover, again, looking at the current roster provides you with evidence that they can fill that Bader slot up easily. Corey Anderson is basically a Ryan Bader prototype. With a little bit more polish, Jordan Johnson can absolutely be that guy. The one thing that helps both of those guys specifically is they can probably be more than that in the future. Anderson showed some improvement in his last fight. Jordan Johnson looked pretty damn solid against Frankenstein (or Frank Waisten Jr. to the Brazilians) and his wrestling ability is going to help him win plenty of fights. So if I'm the UFC, yeah I'm going to keep the fighters with actual tangible upside over someone who has hit his peak, shown he isn't winning a title anytime soon, hasn't popped a good rating recently, and more importantly asking for more money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSJ Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 I for one am truly amazed and amused that we've spent a couple of days in intelligent discourse based on the likes of Ryan fuckin Bader, kudos to one and all. ;-) Despite pages of comments from several of us, Username pretty much hit the nail right on the head. Is Bader worth more money? Arguably fighters are underpaid, that's a given, but in the real world, the question is a simple one: "Do you put meat in the seats?" In the case of Ryan Bader the answer is demonstrably "no", he does not. No one is going to buy a PPV to watch Ryan hump a younger fighter into submission, on the other hand he has value as an opponent or gatekeeper (a phrase that I wish would go away), but username nails it, in the present state of the sport he probably is pretty disposable, he's just not worth what he thinks he is. The deeper issue that @Elsalvajeloco and I have touched on is the more general one of how to build marketable stars without resorting to the odious practice of over-protecting and building records based on demolishing tin cans. Bottom line, it comes down to careful matchmaking and the idea of rolling out "undefeated stars" has to go away. Everyone loses as they learn an art, the greatest we've ever seen in a given sport is probably Phil Taylor in darts. For twenty years he was simply unbeatable, no one will ever threaten the records he set. But you know what? His twenty-year peak was from thirty to fifty, when he was in his twenties he lost, he lost a lot. There were better players that he learned from as he perfected his game, no one is going to disparage Phil because he didn't win the Masters in his early twenties. The guys that beat him then he would demolish five years later. A major league baseball player is considered damn good if he's successful 25% of the time at hitting the ball, if he achieves 33% success he's in the discussion for the HOF. Long ago boxing was an easily trackable sport, when I was a kid, (before the alphabet soup of titles and micro-divisions) I could tell you the top twenty in every weight class in order. There wasn't nearly as much protecting as there was careful match making, I know it's a fine line to look at but it is a very critical one. There's an inherent difference between putting your twenty-something prospect in against a guy who has fought for the title and lost and matching him against a 38 year old club fighter who has never won anything. The former, win, lose or draw is going to be a valuable learning experience the latter is simply a waste of everyone's time and nothing more than artificially inflating a record. I use the darts analogy a lot, because that was my sport. At my peak I was in the top 100 in the US, I was a top-notch regional player who would lose to the really good players. I played against the best in the world (and lost), but on any given day, if you made a mistake I could (and did) win. One thing was certain, there has never been a more cerebral player in the game, it's just a gift for mathematics I guess, but in darts you often see even great players pause to think about what to shoot, I never had to, I always knew the smart percentage shot to set up a checkout. One thing was certain when you played against me, if you paid attention, you learned something. My best showing was in mixed doubles at the Desert Classic in Vegas, very few paid attention to it as that was when Taz shot his one dart shy of a perfect cricket game, but Angie Boesch and I took Stacey Bromberg (#1 woman in the world) and Paul Lim (#6 or #7 at the time) to a third game in cricket doubles. Yeah, we lost, but how many people can say that they took a leg from two world-ranked players? I've coached dozens of players, some get it, most don't. In Washington we had a really talented kid who was winning juniors from the time he was twelve and was considered a surefire regional rep for Team USA. What the kid didn't grasp was the idea of percentage shots (what do you do if you miss the desired target, what's the next best thing that leaves you a checkout). In a couple of local Friday night tournaments he got smoked by (you guessed it) Angie and myself and wound up coming in third. He ended up switching to soft-tip where the fucking machine tells you what to shoot for. Bottom line, he was talented as hell, but had been ruined by years of beating up on inferior competition to the point that he couldn't or wouldn't learn anything. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supremebve Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 17 minutes ago, OSJ said: There wasn't nearly as much protecting as there was careful match making, I know it's a fine line to look at but it is a very critical one. There's an inherent difference between putting your twenty-something prospect in against a guy who has fought for the title and lost and matching him against a 38 year old club fighter who has never won anything. The former, win, lose or draw is going to be a valuable learning experience the latter is simply a waste of everyone's time and nothing more than artificially inflating a record. This is my point. Ryan Bader is that proverbial 38-year-old club fighter. He's a guy we know, but he hasn't actually beaten anyone of note. Losing to Ryan Bader in brutal fashion, which is the only way Ryan Bader wins, is going to be detrimental to that young fighter's career. The other side is that if you beat Ryan Bader, you beat a guy who doesn't really have any signature wins. So essentially, your fighter is fighting against a guy who will either beat them into the ground or someone no one is all that impressed that he beat. He is nothing but harmful for a division where they need to build young talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSJ Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 @supremebve Ah, and here is the center of our disagreement (such as it is), you consider Bader the 38 year old club fighter who has never won anything and I look at him more as the guy who has fought the elite and lost. It's a fine line between the two, and the bottom line remains pretty much the same, he's not a draw, but I don't think that he's the liability to the division that you suggest. If a young fighter can get beaten soundly by a guy like Bader, he simply wasn't ready for the big time. The reality is that there are a lot more Baders than there are Jon Jones' in the sport. Even with all interim title bullshit, you have at most two champions in each weight class and a bunch of guys who are never going to reach that pinnacle but are still elite fighters. Sure, anyone disposable in this sport (see my comments on the extremely short shelf life of fighters), with that in mind, guys that can hang around like Bader have a lot of value. Everyone needs a quality opponent (unless we go the route of over-protected "stars"), a young fighter that can have his will broken by a guy like Bader was simply not ready for the big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supremebve Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 My opinion on Bader is based purely on how good he is at one thing. Light Heavyweight is a division where wrestling is the dominant skill, but Bader is the only fighter who has built his entire career on being a dominant wrestler. A young, well-rounded fighter who has any weakness in his defensive wrestling will struggle against Jones, Cormier, and even Anthony Johnson, but all of those guys will give him a chance to use his other skills. Bader isn't going to do that, he's going to take him down over and over again and brutalize him. I just don't think there is much to learn from a fight from Bader for a young fighter, all you can possibly learn is whether or not you have elite takedown defense. There is a reason guys like Jim Miller, Lorenz Larkin, Tim Boetsch, and others will always have a job. They are all tough, well-rounded guys, who aren't exactly dominant in any one area. Those guys give their opponents good, challenging fights, and all of them are dangerous if taken lightly. At the same time any future contender should be able to beat them. Bader is too good for that role, but based on his performance against the elite fighters in his division that is his exact role. It isn't fair to him that the rest of the division is so thin, but that is where he fits. If there was a really good young striker coming up in the division, how does a fight with Bader help him? Fighting Rashad Evans, another really good wrestler, would be much more beneficial, because Rashad isn't the type of fighter who relies wholly on takedowns. A young striker would have trouble with Evans' takedowns, but Evans is going to stand and strike enough for the young fighter to have an opportunity to use his striking. It allows him to work on his takedown defense in a fight where he also gets to work where he's comfortable. Win or lose, it is a fight that he can learn from, not just take a beating without actually learning anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted February 10, 2017 Author Share Posted February 10, 2017 Looks like Aldo vs. Holloway is official for 6/3 in Rio de Janeiro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVileOne Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 As for Cirkunov, Dana White says he flaked out on a new contract and he's done with the UFC. So...whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 Will Brooks vs. Charles Do Bronx has been added to UFC 210. Namajunas vs. Waterson has been made for the 4/15 KC card, which will be on Fox. Cub Swanson vs. Artem Lobov will headline the 4/22 Fight Night card in Nashville. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts