Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ColinBollocks

Who is the GOAT?

Recommended Posts

Dana hates any fighter who doesn't do things how he wants. Think of the fighters he's had the most issues with over the years...

Tyron Woodley

Tito Ortiz 

Fedor Emelianenko 

Cyborg

Jon Jones

Josh Barnett 

Demetrious Johnson 

Amanda Nunes 

Roy Nelson 

Renan Barao 

Ben Askren

Wanderlei Silva

Jon Fitch

Paul Daley

Frank Shamrock

Ken Shamrock

Pat Miletich

Dana's just a bit of a prick. These at all cases where he was at odds with certain fighters and a lot of these examples it boiled down to him being a cock about things. There was even the whole thing with McGregor around UFC 200. I don't know if there's any racism there. I don't get the impression he is racist, chances are like any big company there are some racists who work there. Probably some in positions of power. But like any fight promotion or promoter, the colour they care about is green. Even if they're the biggest closet Klan members going, they'll put it aside to fill their pockets. It's a shame because they're both really good fighters but if Woodley or DJ could generate the money a McGregor or Rousey or Lesnar or Mayweather or Tyson or whoever do/did, they'd be there. Regardless of skin colour. If they were fucking neon pink with blue polka dots, they'd be there if they generated that level of interest/money on a grand scale. They just don't connect that way with the masses. 

What happened to that GOAT discussion? :laugh: 

Edited by wandshogun09

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget Randy Couture either - one of their own legends, responsible for a big chunk of their early success and revenue, and they treated him like dirt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

First point: I agree, but now we're talking about the public, not the UFC here.

When it comes to the Woodley situation it really is a mixture of both though, isn't it? He accuses the UFC of racism, the UFC laugh at him and call him a drama Queen while not taking his concerns even slightly serious. That's kind of an open goal for dimwitted fans to jump on Woodley's case and start giving him grief and to start peddling their nonsense about how an African American from Ferguson, Missouri who's grown up in one of the most racially charged areas of America doesn't actually know what racism is. Again, Tamura is a prime example of that kind of thinking. Because he has an anti-fascist tattoo and beats up pretend skinhead Nazi's from Bolton or some other shithole he's now in a position to tell someone like Woodley what racism is? Please.

Quote

And yes, the US public is, in my opinion, racist for the most part; the response to Mayweather and the response to McGregor were completely different, and I think that's mostly down to racism, even before we take Mayweather's wife-beating into account. That said, I can't speak for anyone else, but even without the wife-beating, the reason I like McGregor more than Mayweather is because McGregor's funny. Doesn't sound like a lot, but it's actually significant - being funny makes a huge difference between being totally unlikable by everybody to being popular with at least a bigger chunk of people than before. Just look at Muhammad Ali. Mayweather just flaunts his cash and that's about it. And before you say it: you may not find McGregor funny or witty, but a lot of people do.

Look, I understand the attraction of someone like McGregor. The Scots and the Irish are very similar, and I've known my fair share of Conor-esque lads in my time. Speaking about him personally, I don't like how he treads that line between being funny and being an outright bigot. The Nazi stuff, the cholo stuff, the "dance for me" shite, that kind of nonsense doesn't sit well with me. I've known guys that I went to school with who'd come out with similar nonsense, and it would get laughed off because they were funny, had a cheeky chappie grin and were the life of the party. 

When you got right down to it though, they were uneducated fools who made remarks like that simply because no one would tell them that it wasn't on. I see a lot of that in McGregor.

Quote

Kevin Lee isn't the black Conor, though. The reason why he's getting backlash is because he's coming across painfully obviously as Poundshop Conor, and he's not even funny. And even if I were to entertain this comparison, I'd simply say: look at Derrick Lewis. A powerful but limited fighter who's had more opportunities than his skill level probably warrants, because he's cut promos, behaved like a madman, and shown a likeable personality, definitely not like Conor. 

Is Kevin Lee coming across as Poundshop Conor though? I'll be honest, I've seen more African Americans with that kind of personality and style than I have Irishmen, so I'm not sure that Lee is a Poundshop McGregor.

If Lee strings together a few wins, and he gets more cocky with it and arrogant we'll see what kind of reaction he gets.

Quote

Again, you really should use a better example than Conor, because as I've said already, he's an exceptional person regardless of race, and I think you're only choosing him because you've been dead-set against him from Day One, despite the few occasions you've backed him. You've made it clear you don't like him, you've made it clear you don't like his approach, you've made it abundantly clear that you think everything should be conducted as a pure sport, so sorry: you've queered your pitch as far as Conor is concerned.

I'm disappointed in you there mate, as that's a lazy comment to make. Never have I said that the UFC should be "conducted as a pure sport". I've long said that as a sport there has to be an element of sporting integrity involved, which is disappearing more and more by the month.

Of course the popularity of a fighter is going to matter, but there has to be some sort of centre ground where actual sporting accomplishment plays a part. For example, the very notion that Nate Diaz can sit on the sidelines for over a year and then walk right into what is increasingly looking like a lightweight title shot is insane.

My argument has always been that the belts should be treated with respect, and held up as symbols of the very best fighters in the game. Now, I'm not saying that these champions should be paid the most, or that they should headline every card they're on.

Quote

Best comparison I would draw is GSP, quite frankly. Now, would a black fighter who's displayed GSP's level of ability but similar, alternatingly interesting and uninteresting fighting style, and relatively anodyne personality have gotten the same level of opportunity, exposure, pay, popularity, etc.? I don't believe so. In this case, I do think there is racism at play, and that is definitely something worth discussing.

I agree to an extent here, although someone (can't remember who, sorry) got it right when they mentioned the fact that GSP is part of that old SpikeTV generation, which helped. Also, his Canadian nationality helped as well, as he essentially represented that country for years as the main man from Canada.

Quote

As to Jon Jones, again: Dana is an utter cock. Regardless of what I think of Jones as a person, you will hear no disagreement from me regarding Dana's treatment of fighters in general, but yet again: Dana is an utter cock, and UFC are cunts who treat fighters like cattle, but that's only an indication of cuntery towards everyone in general, and not specifically of racism. I'm not sure how much clearer I can make this point. 

I raised the Jones issue in response to you saying that McGregor wouldn't get the treatment that Woodley got from the UFC because he's earned them a lot of money. Jones, at that point, was a major draw comparative to other UFC fighters of the time, and had earned the company a whole lot of cash, but he was thrown under the bus in a frightening fashion for refusing a late replacement fight to defend his title.

This was a man who was considered the best in the world at the time, and looked at as an all-time great even then. The company immediately turned on him with a vitriolic attack that I've never seen anyone else face from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://thesportsdaily.com/mma-manifesto/ufc-fighter-salary-database-salary-main-ufc-career-fighter-earnings-html/

Interesting list. Look at all those highly paid black fighters being held down by "the man". But in all seriousness, like others have said there is little doubt there will be some racists working at the UFC. But to blame the lack of box office success of Mighty Mouse on them is laughable, and it's things like that which make it difficult to take everything Woodley says at face value without corroborating evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, David said:

When it comes to the Woodley situation it really is a mixture of both though, isn't it? He accuses the UFC of racism, the UFC laugh at him and call him a drama Queen while not taking his concerns even slightly serious. That's kind of an open goal for dimwitted fans to jump on Woodley's case and start giving him grief and to start peddling their nonsense about how an African American from Ferguson, Missouri who's grown up in one of the most racially charged areas of America doesn't actually know what racism is. Again, Tamura is a prime example of that kind of thinking. Because he has an anti-fascist tattoo and beats up pretend skinhead Nazi's from Bolton or some other shithole he's now in a position to tell someone like Woodley what racism is? Please.

Look, I understand the attraction of someone like McGregor. The Scots and the Irish are very similar, and I've known my fair share of Conor-esque lads in my time. Speaking about him personally, I don't like how he treads that line between being funny and being an outright bigot. The Nazi stuff, the cholo stuff, the "dance for me" shite, that kind of nonsense doesn't sit well with me. I've known guys that I went to school with who'd come out with similar nonsense, and it would get laughed off because they were funny, had a cheeky chappie grin and were the life of the party. 

When you got right down to it though, they were uneducated fools who made remarks like that simply because no one would tell them that it wasn't on. I see a lot of that in McGregor.

Is Kevin Lee coming across as Poundshop Conor though? I'll be honest, I've seen more African Americans with that kind of personality and style than I have Irishmen, so I'm not sure that Lee is a Poundshop McGregor.

If Lee strings together a few wins, and he gets more cocky with it and arrogant we'll see what kind of reaction he gets.

I'm disappointed in you there mate, as that's a lazy comment to make. Never have I said that the UFC should be "conducted as a pure sport". I've long said that as a sport there has to be an element of sporting integrity involved, which is disappearing more and more by the month.

Of course the popularity of a fighter is going to matter, but there has to be some sort of centre ground where actual sporting accomplishment plays a part. For example, the very notion that Nate Diaz can sit on the sidelines for over a year and then walk right into what is increasingly looking like a lightweight title shot is insane.

My argument has always been that the belts should be treated with respect, and held up as symbols of the very best fighters in the game. Now, I'm not saying that these champions should be paid the most, or that they should headline every card they're on.

I agree to an extent here, although someone (can't remember who, sorry) got it right when they mentioned the fact that GSP is part of that old SpikeTV generation, which helped. Also, his Canadian nationality helped as well, as he essentially represented that country for years as the main man from Canada.

I raised the Jones issue in response to you saying that McGregor wouldn't get the treatment that Woodley got from the UFC because he's earned them a lot of money. Jones, at that point, was a major draw comparative to other UFC fighters of the time, and had earned the company a whole lot of cash, but he was thrown under the bus in a frightening fashion for refusing a late replacement fight to defend his title.

This was a man who was considered the best in the world at the time, and looked at as an all-time great even then. The company immediately turned on him with a vitriolic attack that I've never seen anyone else face from them.

I don't know how to split up quote boxes, so please bear with me. 

First bit in bold: I don't think Woodley doesn't know what racism is. That would be a ridiculous statement to make. I can't speak for anyone else here, but when I say I'm inclined to believe he's playing the race card, it's because I think he knows what racism is and is, at best, over-stating his case, and, at worst, cynically trying to advance his own career by taking advantage of people's feelings regarding race issues.

First bit in italics: Don't misunderstand me; he lost a lot of his appeal to me with his stupid remarks, because they were ignorant and irresponsible. The primary reason why I tend to support Conor is because he's the first MMA fighter in history who can give the Management fits and give them a taste of their own fucking medicine.

First regular text: I think he is coming across as a bit Poundshop McGregor, but you know what? If he gets money and clout, all the more power to him, because, just like McGregor, it's not about liking him: it's about paying to see him at all, and if he can do that, especially as a black man, I'm all for it, all the more so if it causes problems for The Office.

Second bit in bold: I'll admit I over-egged the pudding there, but at the same time, I'm referring to the number of posts you've made regarding both this issue and Conor. I'm sorry, but it has queered your pitch. And even despite that, I think you'll agree that I also have acknowledged your points in the past and concurred with you, that there needs to be a reasonable balance struck between business and sport, because the UFC are in the business of sport. 

I think pointing to Nate Diaz detracts from your argument a little, because, bear in mind, he's Latino, from a deprived part of the US. And let's face it: neither he nor Nick have been hurt too badly by the fact that they just won't co-operate in a reasonable sense. They get money fights despite refusing to fight to earn their way there, despite refusing to get off the bong, despite deliberately trying to antagonise the people who run things, and despite generally starting shit wherever they go.

Second bit in italics: You make a good point, especially as the only other successful black Canadian fighters I can think of are Gary Goodridge and Carlos Newton, both of whom had their careers a bit earlier in the days when the UFC weren't big.

Last bit: Again, you make a good point, but at the same time, remember the recent retirement farrago with Dana and McGregor when he refused to do the extensive press tour for the second Diaz fight, despite the fact he'd made loads of money for them? One could argue they turned on both guys for not maximising the opportunity to make them maximum cash.

That said, in Jones' case, I am more inclined to believe there's an element of racism in there, even in light of Jones being an abject douchebag. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to play devil's advocate, do you reckon part of Dana's silly anger towards, say, a Jones or Woodley is down to being disappointed?

It's worth noting that Dana has, sort of, taken care of Woodley by having two of his last three title defences on big money PPVs (Conor at MSG & Jones v Cormier 2), which means Woodley gets some major PPV points and exposure. Plus, prior to his performance against Maia, Woodley was also getting GSP. If Dana truly didn't like Woodley I'm not sure he'd get those opportunities(?).

Similarly, Jones got opportunities very early in his career, but maybe Dana felt left down by someone he gave a lot too?

Edited by ColinBollocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are talking GOAT are we basing it on statistical facts like win-losses, PPV drawing ability etc or is it just our personal opinions. The ESPN ringside specials where they rated the greatest boxers are well thought out discussions but its difficult to compare fighters from different eras. Its a ton of variables you have to factor into a greatest discussion.

Where do you rate Tito, Chuck, Randy et al or a Royce Gracie, Ken and Frank Shamrock, Pat Miletich etc. I think really you have to break all this down into statistics and PPV buys etc but does it produce a negative result because say Conor McGregor is a bigger draw than a Randy Couture. Also pre the Bonnar-Griffin UFC boom there wasn't the UFC fan base there is now so any pre Zuffa discussion has to be within the realm of the time when the UFC was in smaller venues etc. Does Tito who was a pioneer in making the UFC more mainstream rate highly or is he just a footnote. Its like rating Jack Johnson where does he stand against Ali, Tyson et al or a Roberto Duran how do you rank him against Manny, Floyd et al?. With MMA there's a shorter time frame say 1993 to present but again how UFC has evolved from the Tough man type contest era to today is a massive leap forward. Really you need a pre Zuffa GOAT and a today's GOAT. Because guys like Royce, Tito, Chuck, Randy have to be in the discussion alongside GSP, Anderson, Jon Jones etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PPV numbers have no place in discussions regarding the greatest in a sport in my opinion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's entirely up to you, Giant Moccasin, I guess.

Personally, I just look at it from a purely sports angle, but it's worth remembering, similar to wrestling, the UFC relies so much on the draw. It's a talent on it's own, I guess, to inspire so many fans and make them tune in. I guess it's like when people consider Shawn Michaels the greatest wrestler ever, yet he wasn't even a top 5 draw. Art and commerce, or art over commerce? It's an interesting debate on its own, not one I would fully dismiss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/09/2017 at 1:50 PM, ColinBollocks said:

It's entirely up to you, Giant Moccasin, I guess.

Personally, I just look at it from a purely sports angle, but it's worth remembering, similar to wrestling, the UFC relies so much on the draw. It's a talent on it's own, I guess, to inspire so many fans and make them tune in. I guess it's like when people consider Shawn Michaels the greatest wrestler ever, yet he wasn't even a top 5 draw. Art and commerce, or art over commerce? It's an interesting debate on its own, not one I would fully dismiss.

The difference there is that you simply cannot judge a pro wrestler on his wins and losses, because they aren't real. A bit like giving out an Oscar to Stallone because he killed the most Russians in Rambo, or because he defied the odds to beat Clubber Lang in their second bout.

MMA does rely on PPV draws to make money, but so does boxing. I don't see us casting doubt over Ali's standing as the greatest of all time just because his numbers against Trevor Berbick weren't the best, or because he didn't break any records when he beat Cleveland Williams in '66.

There is a place for recognition when it comes to drawing a lot of eyeballs to any sport, and the likes of Mayweather and McGregor deserve that recognition, but it should be kept completely separate from the GOAT discussion.

In my opinion.

Edited by David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think that Ali would still be considered the greatest if he wasn't such a showman and cultural phenomenon? I know his personality resonates through with his style. Personally, I believe he is the greatest on ability alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali has three things going for him.

Ability

Who He Beat

Cultural Context

He was the best fighter in an era stacked with incredibly good and varied heavyweights and he beat them all in spectacular fashion.  But I also think you have to take into account that he did it right in the teeth of the civil rights movement AND his conversion to Islam.  He faced challenges and issues before he stepped into the ring that most modern fighters couldn't even conceive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with all of that, Loki. Smoking Joe could have been a long term champion in any other era, for instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the most staggering thing about Ali (in the ring) was how he adapted his fighting style, after his three years off, when his incredible foot work was no longer what it used to be. It's mad seeing the difference in his fighting style pre-suspension to post-suspension. Nonetheless, Ali managed to adapt and remain a world class fighter, which is remarkable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Do you think that Ali would still be considered the greatest if he wasn't such a showman and cultural phenomenon? I know his personality resonates through with his style. Personally, I believe he is the greatest on ability alone.

I think the question to be asked is would Ali still be considered the greatest if he hadn't beaten George Foreman? If he'd not won the trilogy with Frazier? I'm not saying that there isn't an element of showmanship involved, but in most cases you'll find that guys like Ali have backed it all up in the ring.

In fact, it could even be said that he did so against all odds, whereas a lot of fighters today are fast-tracked to title shots in order to attain the money PPV buys.

The showmanship and so on should be an additional talking point when you're discussing the GOAT in any sport in my opinion, it can't be the overall driving force as some would suggest. If it is, it won't be long before we have someone reminding me of how much of a draw Kimbo Slice was. Cultural phenomenon, eyeball attraction, but a thoroughly piss poor MMA fighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×