Future Fedor vs. Brock fight....
- 07-12-2009, 11:51 PM
Future Fedor vs. Brock fight....
We all hope for it and all want to see it. Well it isn't for sure,.... but apparently the talk is getting around, as when I log on to Yahoo and its mentioned in the front page article, I begin to wonder,......
Lost in the antics was Lesnar’s performance, a brilliant effort that showed both his growth as a mixed martial artist and the immense potential. The question becomes, who the heck can tame this mountain of a man from the Minnesota woods?
Shane Carwin? Cain Velasquez? Mir in a final chapter of a trilogy of fights? No doubt they’ll get a chance, and no doubt they stand a chance.
The greatest beneficiary of each Lesnar snarl, however, lives in Stary Oskol, Russia, a man named Fedor Emelianenko who is considered the No. 1 heavyweight (if not pound-for-pound fighter) in the world. If anyone has the knockout power to stop the 6-3, 265-pound Lesnar, it’s Emelianenko.
Fedor doesn’t fight in the UFC though. He’s with its rival promotion, Affliction. He’ll fight Aug. 1 in Anaheim, Calif., in what is the last match of his contract. Affliction is hoping to re-sign him until 2012, but the UFC will come hard after him. More now then ever. And that means money, big money.
“Eventually Fedor is going to be here,” White said. “I want Fedor. We’ll end up getting that deal done and then we’ll do Brock vs. Fedor and we’ll do a huge fight.”
Time will tell, but the pressure to sign the elusive Russian has been ratcheted up. A villain was born and there isn’t an obvious superhero in sight. The UFC brought Brock Lesnar over from the WWE for just this kind of a sensation. And the big man has delivered – the good, the bad and the embarrassing.
Only Dana White has no scriptwriters that can contain him.
The Lesnar show - UFC - Yahoo! Sports
This obviously doesn't prove anything, but I think it becoming more prevalent in the news and in combination of Brock's new "antics," might just bring Fedor into the mix. Its all about $$$ here, and I think no matter the negative comments Dana has said in the past about Fedor,... for Dana White, bringing Fedor in, means bringing in more money.
- 07-13-2009, 02:02 AM
Although I don't think Brock would be able to beat Fedor I still don't like this fight much. If Fedor ends up losing (I mean, he has had his injuries and is not getting any younger), people will start claiming Brock is the best fighter ever, and, well, we all know that to be false.
So IDK, i hope he doesn't sign.
- 07-13-2009, 02:22 AM
07-13-2009, 02:26 AM
07-13-2009, 02:55 AM
Isnt Brocks success pretty much a direct showing of how MMA fighters right now are pretty much the leftovers from other sports. I mean, Brock failed at most everything else before he came to MMA and is now a heavyweight pro, much less champ no? I mean, MMA fighters are wrestlers and BJJ vets who couldnt hack it in boxing or something so they came to MMA and now its touted as the toughest "realest" fighting out there. It seems to incorporate so many disciplines it doesn't mean they are well rounded but just sloppy all around and its packed with the leftover athletes from other bigger sports.
07-13-2009, 02:57 AM
You know Dana's other hope is the next TUF season. I just hope there's some big ass monsters that show potential. Brock's not the only large athlete with speed and size in the world. Fortunately that is all it would take. Some malleable beast who is quick to pick up MMA just like Brock. We don't need Machida. Just someone Brock can't toss around and who hits hard and won't end up on his back.
07-13-2009, 03:18 AM
07-13-2009, 03:30 AM
i would disagree on being leftovers. many of these guys could do something else and be pro. these guys liek to fight and just boxing has become pretty lame. its just new and people wanna do it and its a great challenege. on the other hand there are a couple of people who might be looked at as leftovers.
07-13-2009, 03:17 PM
The leftovers comment is, with due respect, stupid. Kos, Fitch and Lesnar were NCAA Div I champions - literally, the cream of the crop in collegiate wrestling; other fighters such as Parisyan, Akiyama, and Sokoudju were world-champion Jukodas - again, performing at the highest calibre. That point is moot.
In terms of Lesnar: he is a 6'3" 285lb individual who benches over 500, squats over 600, and runs the 40 in 4.7; with no football experience aside from High School, he garnered an entry-level contract with the Vikings. It goes without saying there are few boxing heavyweights who could accomplish this feet.
Brock's success is a validation of the complete opposite of what you are saying: that the UFC is a repository for elite level athletes of every discipline.
07-13-2009, 03:52 PM
Spot on Mullet.
As far as lesnar beating fedor, Im sorry I dont think anybody would say hes the best fighter, but if he beat fedor I would have to give him his due. No excuses either
07-14-2009, 03:00 PM
I concur, I was about to write paragraph two, almost verbatim myself.
In regards to Fedor vs Brock, as it stands right now, Fedor would still win. I honestly think Fedor has enough power & accuracy to KO Brock and we all know Fedor is even deadlier on the ground.
NSCA - CSCS
07-14-2009, 03:51 PM
07-14-2009, 04:32 PM
Official Get Diesel Representative
PM me with any questions
07-14-2009, 04:46 PM
07-14-2009, 05:55 PM
07-14-2009, 07:44 PM
I almost sh*t myself when I read the "leftovers" comment. They are elite level athletes, with top notch conditioning and training regimens. Just because Chuck Liddell sucks at football or any other sport (He may or may not, just using him as an example) doesn't mean that he isn't an elite level athlete. How many ex-NFL players have attempted MMA careers and got straight KTFO...in a hurry?
07-14-2009, 10:29 PM
You mention wrestling and various martial art forms but these are hardly mainstream sports drawing from a large talent pool. In the same way the US team for rugby might be some rough guys, theyd get beaten off a collegiant football field.
07-14-2009, 10:52 PM
In terms of the professional wrestling, I left this out because it is entirely incidental to his athletic ability, and; further, he was not a "good" wrestler - literally, he was one of the best HW collegiate wrestlers ever. (And regarded as such at the time, mind you.) On the matter of the Vikings, though: the fact he even garnered a try-out, let alone obtained an entry-level contract - which was, as you stated, reneged upon by the Vikings - is a testament to his sheer athleticism.
What I find interesting about your position is that boxers routinely fail in MMA, due to the diversity of combat afoot - put otherwise, they are unprepared for the complexity and multi-faceted athleticism of MMA. Or, put otherwise still: they are not good enough athletes to adapt.
Yes, and consequently, former collegiate and NFL football players are beaten out of the Octagon quite routinely - the same logic applies, for the same reason; however, this is again secondary to the point. What you fail to understand is that MMA pools from the very elite of a wide-range of disciplines, and these individuals, often world champions and/or Olympic athletes, do not always [...or even often...] thrive in the sport; alone, this is a resounding endorsement of the level of athleticism and skill necessary to participate in MMA. Professional boxing, on the other hand, pools almost exclusively from amateur boxing; quite plainly, this puts a damper on the progression of the sport, due to a lack of pressure from rapid advancement. MMA, on the other hand, constantly evolves from the consistent infusion of Olympic/world-level athletes providing new techniques and new considerations to the other fighters. Enter massive progress due to diversity.You mention wrestling and various martial art forms but these are hardly mainstream sports drawing from a large talent pool. In the same way the US team for rugby might be some rough guys, theyd get beaten off a collegiant football field.
Well, aside from the recent Hatton/Pac-Man fight, UFC PPVs routinely destroy boxing's live-buys, and they are also quite even in the live-gates. Wage, however, has nothing to do with the skill-level of the athletes involved, but the political climate of the sport itself. The UFC is a monopoly, and so, they have the power to control wages.Hardly. Boxing purses for "huge" prize fights like this rape the 400K the "heavyweight champ" of the UFC made. Floyd Mayweather got 25 million for his fight with De La Hoya. And people think boxing is dying. Lol.
I for one love Boxing, and think it can co-exist with MMA. If you notice, it is usually only boxing afficianados such as yourself that attack MMA, and not vice-versa; seems to be an insecurity on the part of the Boxing community.
07-15-2009, 05:31 AM
07-15-2009, 06:14 AM
07-15-2009, 09:12 AM
07-15-2009, 10:56 AM
07-15-2009, 11:47 AM
Well, the fact that the NFL only recently instituted the 2-year college rule proves your last statement to be false; prior to that, most great players entered after the Freshman year. At any rate, that is again pretty incidental to the point.Show me a mainstream sport where guys can come in with little expierience and dominate. Baseball, basketball, football, etc. You wont see it. No one walks into those sports and dominates the game. No one definintly walks into football like that. Even the best players bound for the HOF stay 3-4 years in college.
Most people are unable to "walk-on" in those sports because they require intricate experience - i.e.) it has less to do with athleticism than it does with game savvy; savvy, mind you, that comes after years and years of playing. More on this below.
There is no nice way to say this, so I will just say it: you are completely wrong. Brock was actually signed to an entry-level contract due to massively impressing Mike Tice [the coach at the time] and the rest of his [potential] teammates with his development and athleticism. In reality, his cut had little to do with his athleticism, and everything to do with little football experience and a groin injury sustained from a motorcycle accident earlier that year. The Minnesota Vikings were incredibly interested in developing his knowledge - see: not athleticism - and he even racked up a QB sack in a pre-season game.No its not...he looked good on paper due to his lifts and wrestling but got made into a bitch on the field. Wrestling is what got a guy from my high school a full ride to University of Texas for football. They thought he could manage the other guy better for it. Brock is now a world champion in UFC and yet, he couldnt even make the cut despite being "such an athlete."
Again, simply inconsistent logic. Consider Georges St. Pierre: a WW with the UFC who had never wrestled in high school, or college, and yet his MMA-obtained skills garnered him a request by the Canadian Olympic team. Let me guess: Olympic wresters have not-up-to-par conditioning as well. In reality, you have the absolute elite from every discipline coming to the UFC, so your "muddied down" argument is again moot. What you really have is NCAA Div I wrestling champions, Olympic Wrestlers, Olympic Judokas, World Champion BJJ players, K-1 Champions, etc., etc., converging in one place to constantly evolve the sport - i.e.) a far more substantial and elite talent pool than boxing.In this day and age, quantity seems way better than quality. The multifacted side of MMA is its downfall IMO. It uses to many diciplines, that you wont see quality examples of each one, but rather dulled down slop due to having to be so versed. It lets **** like Brock Lesnar go be a world champ after training for like 2 years. Thats sad. Frank Mir's training looked pathetic. His pad work was so damn slow youd think he wasnt wearing freaking 4oz gloves but 32. By and large, it seems that MMA conditioning isnt up to par. Where else could a 38 year old with a beer belly be a world champ at anything except a pitcher in baseball.
When it comes down to it, MMA is constantly evolving due to internal pressure from the constantly diversified talent pool, while boxing is not. And so, what makes MMA comparisons between eras moot is the level to which the actual sport has progressed in terms of skill-sets, techniques, and so forth. Boxing, on the other hand, does not suffer from such issues; thus, the only factor which makes multi-era comparisons moot is the level of conditioning and athleticism - technique and skill-wise, it progresses much slower than MMA. This alone flushes your point out to be untrue.
The connection was the exact same one you made, so it surprises me you cannot see it. Allow me to explain further. Your point was that no MMArtist could break into "mainstream" sports due to the higher level of athleticism, and relative ease of MMA; on the other hand, these "mainstream" athletes get absolutely destroyed in MMA - i.e.) MMA takes an equal or greater amount of skill and athleticism as "mainstream sports". Put otherwise: you are again incorrect.So a bunch of football players out of a job get beat out of the ring. Im not seeing the connection. And boxing doesnt need progression. What I love about it is its timelessness and the fact you are given less to work with and are forced to strategize, condition, and train around that. I dont really care how elite these purported athletes are, the fact is they dont draw from the mainstream and remain fringe activities. They are elite because of that, not in spite of that.
And yes, Texas, wrestling, judo, martial arts, are "fringe" activities. If any NFL'er, NBA'er, NHL'er or such could come into MMA and dominate, you would have a point; however, you do not. MMArtists are elite athletes precisely because of the confluence of disciplines and conditioning necessary to compete at a high level in this sport.
Decades away from touching irrelevant associations, belts, and high-level politics dictating purses and number one contenders? Again, the wages payed has absolutely nothing to do with the athletes involved, and the UFC crushes boxing in PPV numbers.I was correcting the notion that 400K means ****. The UFC is decades away from touching what boxing is now, even in it's "dying state."
You should step into a JJ class and prove me wrong, then; or even step into the ring for an amateur MMA fight. Certainly a good way to prove how easy it is.Because it gets extremely annoying to just hear all the MMA spewing, and I see hordes of vehicles with TAPOUT on the back. Most of the fans have never thrown a punch in their life. Yet I get to hear Joe Rogan Jr telling me about some jackasses "ground game bro." The one thing thats nice is you took all the douchebag fanboys of fighting. People somehow regard MMA as "real fighting" which always cracks me up and somehow its way more intense than boxing/other forms of fighting. MMA's rate of expansion will do more harm than good in the long term.
07-15-2009, 12:17 PM
07-15-2009, 12:23 PM
07-15-2009, 12:54 PM
And, from what I see, the popularity of MMA has led to quite an increase in the amount of people actually practicing various forms of MMA, myself included. MMA fans can be rowdy douchebags, just like any sport's fans, but I bet on average they throw a better punch than your typical beer bellied Bears fan.
07-15-2009, 01:34 PM
MMA fans arent fans. They do it because they are fascinated by the fighting and the blood. They idolize it. After military school, Im just not enamored with the violence because Ive seen how far it can go and the cost of it. I prefer boxing because of the mindset and how it differs from MMA. And yes, Im sure they throw better punches than bears fans but it doesnt matter when Hurricane Ditka rains hell down on you.
07-15-2009, 02:29 PM
07-15-2009, 02:34 PM
I see your point with being frustrated by all the TAP OUT fans and bro's who would have picked Kimbo over Fedor a year back, but I mean, maybe you're a fighter, maybe you're not, I don't know. However, there are a whole list of people, such as actual fighters, amateur or pro, who have an actual right to be frustrated by posers. Being a hardcore fan, really isn't that hardcore.
P.S. No disrespect, I'm just say'n. I notice a lot of MMA fan elitism and it's rather unfounded, with the exception of those who actually step in a ring.
NSCA - CSCS
07-15-2009, 02:48 PM
Funny story on the topic of "fake fans." I was standing behind these two guys discussing the Lesnar/Mir fight. Person A says, "there's somebody who would be a perfect match up for Brock, they're the same size, about the same strength." Person B then blurts out, "oh yeah! Fedor." Person A says, "Yeah! wait... nooo.. the person I'm talking about is black, he's really buff." Person B, "are you sure it's not Fedor?"
Without getting into the details of their conversation, the fighter they were describing was Bobby Lashley. If being black was put in the description and Fedor was still a maybe ..... That would bother some more then others. To each their own I suppose, but everyone starts somewhere.
NSCA - CSCS
07-15-2009, 02:50 PM
Everyone needs to chill. You don't need to be a fighter to be a "true fan" of MMA anymore than you need to be a basketball player to be a "true fan" of the NBA. The "boxing vs MMA" stuff needs to cool down IMO because it's fine to like one or the other or both....why does it have to be this big contest over which is "better"....that's up to personal preference.
Being annoyed with TAPOUT dude-bros is one thing, but indicting all MMA and it's fans is silly.
I'm not a fan of the over-the-top violence either. I didn't find it all that "cool" when homey jump-punched the other dude in the face after he was down the other night. (forgot their names, I'm a relatively new MMA fan) But...I know it's within the rules, so I prepare myself for that kinda sh1t to go down when I watch. Watching a guy laying on his back having his face bashed into bits is pretty savage, I'll admit, but just listen to Evander Holyfield try to put a sentence together and then tell me that the "sweet science" should be held on a higher pedestal.
07-15-2009, 02:50 PM
Same for MMA fans. The bad ones are so bad that they give the rest of us a bad name regardless of their actual total percentage. However, boxing is a much more violent sport when you look at long term health consequences for the fighters. That's been shown true over and over again. I started off as a bigger boxing fan, but MMA has completely taken over my attention.
I also work for the defense industry designing weapons/weapon systems. I've seen the violence they are capable of, and am also in no way a fan of raw violence for the sake of raw violence. MMA, however, as its name states, is an art.
Last edited by TMack40; 07-15-2009 at 03:27 PM.
07-15-2009, 02:54 PM
Correct, as no boxer has ever dominated after training for a mere 2-4 years. Except, that is, Rocky Marciano, Lennox Lewis, Muhammad Ali, Bernard Hopkins, Mike Tyson, Joe Louis - you know, only five or so of the top fifteen boxers to ever live. In reality, the historical record for boxing is littered with instances where an individual 'picked up' boxing and began dominating almost instantaneously. Lennox, for example, only decided to box full-time in '83 and competed in the Olympics in '84; same time frame for Ali; and Marciano never boxed until '46 and won in '52; Louis had never touched a glove until '32 and got his first title shot in '35, and so on. You see, the only difference between Brock and, say, Louis, is that boxers fight 40 cans before engaging in a legitimate battle, whereas the same is not true for MMA. Why? Because professional boxing is plagued with completely irrelevant politics and back-door dealings which are crippling it.The example stands. People dont go from zero to pro in 2 years in anything except MMA or fringe sports.
You can continue to do all the logical contortions you please, but the point still remains: he is, was, and will continue to be a phenomenal athlete, a trait indicative of MMArtists; which was, initially, your entire point. He [barely] failed at Football due to experience, something you continue to ignore.The point is he couldnt make it because the game isnt something you can walk into and be amazing at. Yeah he got a sack and pissed off the other team too by being a **** while doing it.
No, you making statements which are moot, untrue, and/or inconsistent makes it so; and so, I will stop calling you out when you stop stating clearly untrue bull**** [with due respect].Declaring things moot, untrue, or inconsistant doesnt make it so. Stop doing it. You missed the point.
This has no significance to the conversation. In all sports, this concept is called something: "a strategic advantage". Sidney Crosby is the best hockey player in the world, but has a mediocore slap-shot, does this mean hockey is an illegitimate sport in your eyes? What about Tyson? Does the fact his hooks and uppercuts were far and away beyond his sub-par footwork mean boxing is illegitimate? No, it does not. What it means is that certain individuals in certain sports will have advantages in certain areas due to nothing more than an athletic advantage in that area. Nothing illuminative here, and it does nothing to reduce the legitimacy of those sports. It's called life.You might have guys coming in who are the "elite" at one aspect. The rest they are mediocre at best at.
You are right: the fact that Ali carved out a niche as an elusive fighter must mean boxing is irrelevant as a sport as well. This is again simply incorrect. It means that, in your example, Rampage exploited one of Chuck's weaknesses, which is what makes MMA inherently more difficult than MMA: you have to be knowledgeable and proficient in a wide-range of disciplines.It seems you just develop a niche speciality because people cant be skilled at every aspect and win for a while and then the next guy's niche comes and thats that. Rampage had chucks number and chuck had everyone elses with those huge looping punches that I really dont know how they worked but they did. Youre right boxing doesnt suffer from that. People just fight, outsmart, and work harder in a tighter competition.
I do, but apparently you do not. People come to MMA because there are no [well-paying] professional leagues for freestyle/grecco-roman wrestling, judo, BJJ, etc., etc. It has nothing to do with skill level.You dont get it. People dont go to MMA unless they have nothing to turn to. The best in boxing would never go to MMA. Why would they? Hey, make 10x less money and come learn a new fighting style all over again! Or hey! You get the guys who dont hack it in other sports. Why would Adrian Peterson even think about MMA when hes racking up enormous rushing yards every season and making a pisston of money.
I must have forgotten about the huge purses in Olympic Wrestling. That's right, the Olympics pay jack ****, which is precisely why they come to MMA.See above. The cream rises to the top where the money is, not MMA
07-15-2009, 03:02 PM
07-15-2009, 03:05 PM
07-15-2009, 03:09 PM
is this a bodybuilding website or a fighting website brk nemesis.?
I think you know that answer.
This site should ban people like you
07-15-2009, 03:11 PM
07-15-2009, 03:14 PM
Mike Tyson unified the heavyweight titles at the age of 20. He totally sucked. If boxing were a "real sport" it would have taken him much longer to achieve such success.
07-15-2009, 03:29 PM
I wear tapout sometimes and I am a huge fan. I am always watching old fights ive seen hundreds of times. Peopel should get over the tapout thing it pays the fighters to keep fighting. Its just like nike or and 1 or any other stports thing minus the stupid show they put on.
07-15-2009, 03:32 PM
98% of this website is surely dedicated to all things bodybuilding, with the exception of, "The MMA Forum." For the record, you may find political topics in "The Politics Forum."
NSCA - CSCS
Similar Forum Threads
- By VolcomX311 in forum MMAReplies: 6Last Post: 07-06-2010, 03:27 PM
- By mytime09 in forum MMAReplies: 91Last Post: 06-12-2009, 12:04 PM
- By xtreme1 in forum MMAReplies: 77Last Post: 06-21-2008, 08:18 AM
- By MMABoxing in forum MMAReplies: 23Last Post: 05-18-2008, 07:51 PM
- By warriorway in forum MMAReplies: 13Last Post: 07-25-2007, 04:33 PM