UFC on FOX - Diaz vs Bendo Discussion

freakzilla wrote:

Ali wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

Ninja wrote:

Nate looked like garbage.

He didn't deserve to be in a title fight to begin with.

He dominated Cerrone and Miller.

Neither were top 5.

Both are top 10...which is more than you can say about any of Pettis or Cerrone's recent wins. Gray is only one fight removed from losing a title fight. Guida is ineligible. Gil still in Strikeforce. The only guy that deserved it more than Nate was Frankie Edgar but we werent going to get that.

freakzilla wrote:

Ali wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

Ninja wrote:

Nate looked like garbage.

He didn't deserve to be in a title fight to begin with.

He dominated Cerrone and Miller.

Neither were top 5.

Agree with freak

freakzilla wrote:

Ninja wrote:

Nate looked like garbage.

He didn't deserve to be in a title fight to begin with.

Agree. It should have been Showtime.

Miller was top five at one point.

Ali wrote:

Miller was top five at one point.

He was never top 5.

I think you should beat a top 5 guy before you get a title fight.

freakzilla wrote:

Ali wrote:

Miller was top five at one point.

He was never top 5.

Yes he was Jim went on a 7 fight win streak before he lost to Bendo and an 8 win straight before he lost to Maynard.

Ali wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

Ali wrote:

Miller was top five at one point.

He was never top 5.

Yes he was Jim went on a 7 fight win streak.

Not 1 guy he beat was top 10. He has never beaten a top 10 fighter.

freakzilla wrote:

I think you should beat a top 5 guy before you get a title fight.

who should have got the fight then?

KingsOwn19 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

I think you should beat a top 5 guy before you get a title fight.

who should have got the fight then?

Anthony Pettis. I'd rather have seen Bendo-Edgar 3 also.

freakzilla wrote:

Ali wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

Ali wrote:

Miller was top five at one point.

He was never top 5.

Yes he was Jim went on a 7 fight win streak.

Not 1 guy he beat was top 10. He has never beaten a top 10 fighter.

I think he deserved the fight and I thought all along it was a bad matchup. I mean look at rds 2 and 3 against cerrone. Leg kicks played a big part and Benson has too much hop in his step to eat 1000 punches from nate.

freakzilla wrote:

KingsOwn19 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

I think you should beat a top 5 guy before you get a title fight.

who should have got the fight then?

Anthony Pettis. I'd rather have seen Bendo-Edgar 3 also.

but he didnt beat anybody in the top 5 nor the top 10 since he lost to Guida. Henderson was fringe top 10 when Pettis defeated him. The consensus is just the Bendo has improved by leaps since then. Since Pettis has lost to Guida, had a close fight with Jeremey Stephens and knocked out Joe Lauzon. He really hasnt been all that impressive in the UFC otherwise he would have got the shot already. Nate Diaz beat the better fighters and in dominant fashion. You can't make your arguement against Diaz and then say Pettis should have got the fight if Diaz didnt deserve it then Pettis definitely did not. Henderson's ranking now does not cary over to 2010. It just does not work like that.

Bendo-Edgar III would have been the fight to make since Edgar got hosed, but the books read two straight losses to Henderson and the past two years of the UFC LW title had been rematches. There was no way they were gonna make a third fight when they didnt even want to make the second fight.

Close fight with Stephens? Not at all. Pattis win over he champ was enough for me.

It was a close fight...maybe for all the wrong reasons but one judges card did go to Stephens, the other two had Stephens winning a round, and Pettis was less than stellar in the fight. I thought there was a chance Stephens would win the decision which i thought would have been bullshit but guys win fights in MMA like Stephens almost won that one all the time.

KingsOwn19 wrote:

It was a close fight...maybe for all the wrong reasons but one judges card did go to Stephens, the other two had Stephens winning a round, and Pettis was less than stellar in the fight. I thought there was a chance Stephens would win the decision which i thought would have been bullshit but guys win fights in MMA like Stephens almost won that one all the time.

I was there and don't remembering it being close at all. Thought it was boring compared to expectations. Kind of hard to see all aspects live and not on TV.

Bendo's last official loss was to Pettis. I think that and Pettis' recent wins were enough to warrant a rematch.

freakzilla wrote:

Bendo's last official loss was to Pettis. I think that and Pettis' recent wins were enough to warrant a rematch.

Well i disagree. He lost since then to the only top 10 guy he faced in the UFC, He hasnt been very active at all, not enough impressive performances, and his opponents are quite frankly not nearly as good as the ones Diaz smashed on his way to a title fight. Nate deserved the fight, he just didnt match up. Pettis should get a shot if he beats Cerrone. No way he should be able to ride a win from 2 years ago to a title shot when his best wins since his last loss were non top 10 guys. It's not fair to the guys getting the job done against top 10 guys now while Pettis fights 2 times a year at the most.

Showtime has had several injuries and chose to fight instead of waiting for the champ. I don't think lack of activity is by choice.

KingsOwn19 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

KingsOwn19 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

I think you should beat a top 5 guy before you get a title fight.

who should have got the fight then?

Anthony Pettis. I'd rather have seen Bendo-Edgar 3 also.

but he didnt beat anybody in the top 5 nor the top 10 since he lost to Guida. Henderson was fringe top 10 when Pettis defeated him. The consensus is just the Bendo has improved by leaps since then. Since Pettis has lost to Guida, had a close fight with Jeremey Stephens and knocked out Joe Lauzon. He really hasnt been all that impressive in the UFC otherwise he would have got the shot already. Nate Diaz beat the better fighters and in dominant fashion. You can't make your arguement against Diaz and then say Pettis should have got the fight if Diaz didnt deserve it then Pettis definitely did not. Henderson's ranking now does not cary over to 2010. It just does not work like that.

Bendo-Edgar III would have been the fight to make since Edgar got hosed, but the books read two straight losses to Henderson and the past two years of the UFC LW title had been rematches. There was no way they were gonna make a third fight when they didnt even want to make the second fight.

Henderson was an underrated fighter back then due to not being in the UFC. And I don't think we've seen some enourmous improvement in Henderson since, sure he's improved, but I think the "improvement" is more along the line of people giving him his due now because he is in the big org.

Not that I necessarily think Pettis deserved the fight ahead of Diaz, but let's not downplay Pettis's best win. It was a great win, in a great fight.

Is it just me or were they handing out 10-8 rounds like it was candy on Halloween?

Primetyme199 wrote:

Is it just me or were they handing out 10-8 rounds like it was candy on Halloween?

I noticed that as well.

Primetyme199 wrote:

Is it just me or were they handing out 10-8 rounds like it was candy on Halloween?

There was one round where I'm fine with it. Not sure about 2 though. I personally like handing them out more often. Should help decisions out. Its far too often fighter 1 dominates fighter 2 one round then there is two close rounds where its not decisive and fighter 2 somehow ends up with a decision.

Terry Boehlke 3 of 6 rounds he scored 10-8

Sal D'Amato 3 of 14 rounds he scored 10-8

Dave Hagen 2 of 11 rounds he scored 10-8

Lester Griffin 1 of 12 rounds he scored 10-8

Marcos Rosales 2 of 14

Glenn Roy 0 of 3

11 of the 60 rounds scored, full fights, were 10-8

I was definitely glad to see some more 10-8s but they went crazy in a few of those fights. Siver got like a 30-24 against Nam when rounds 2-3 were pretty much straightforward takedown followed by decent GnP from half guard. But I was glad to see Rory get one for that 2nd round, Cruickshank get one for the first, etc. They need to be used more often

How did Cruickshank not get KOTN?