Jump to content

UFC 210: Cormier vs Rumble 2


wandshogun09

Who wins and how?   

19 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members

If it was about principal he would have refused to fight.

I also reckon it's Rumble's team putting him up to it. Has there been any direct quotes or interviews from him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Paid Members

Yeah there was that Instagram post Fox Piss mentioned on the last page. That's where Rumble was saying it's not about money or having DC stripped, it's about principle. 

Looking back, the thought was that we missed out on a truly great fight in Jones vs Rumble. But I'm not sure how great it'd have been when you really think it through. I mean, I'd have liked to have seen it just because it was a fresh fight. But literally all Rumble had was a punchers chance in that one. Even with the layoff and uncertainty surrounding Jones, Rumble is such a frontrunner and mental midget of a fighter that I think he'd have unravelled quick in there if he  didn't land that killer shot early. And for all Jones' faults, he's an intelligent fighter. I think he'd frustrate Rumble into mentally quitting, then he'd have went for the kill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
52 minutes ago, wandshogun09 said:

Looking back, the thought was that we missed out on a truly great fight in Jones vs Rumble. But I'm not sure how great it'd have been when you really think it through. 

I genuinely never got the appeal of it either for the reasons you listed. I think Jones would have had Rumble on his back in seconds and probably submit him quickly.

On top of that Jones appears to have an iron chin as well, as illustrated in his fight against Glover. He just ate huge shots like they were nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

John McCarthy had a very interesting interview where he reveals that Weidman gamed himself into a loss. The fight with Mousasi had been stopped based on Weidman’s responses when being checked by the ringside doctor, especially when he was asked what month it was and said that it was February.

McCarthy reveals that as soon as Weidman was told that the knee that hit him was actually legal, Weidman immediately changed his tune and said it was April. But the damage had been done. Obviously, there were other factors in the doctor stopping the fight, but you have to think that if Weidman had given the correct answer to begin with, and it certainly seems like he could have but chose not to, then the fight may well have continued.

'Big' John McCarthy explains what happened in Weidman-Mousasi debacle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

I know it's not as interesting but surely the likeliest scenario is that Weidman was all fucked up when they asked him the first time? By the time he'd learned it was legal he'd regained his senses a bit more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Yeah, that's more likely. Or when he said February the first time, Matt Serra told him "Hey Woidman...it's April dude". The whole thing was so shambolic and hard to follow just as a viewer, I can only imagine how confusing it was for the guys in the cage. I doubt Weidman was thinking clearly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If was anybody else saying this, I’d probably agree with both of you that it’s more likely that Weidman’s head cleared up. But I don’t think McCarthy is the type of person who would both have that opinion and be so open about it if he wasn’t convinced that that was what Weidman did. And I trust his judgement on such matters to where I’m going to side with him on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...