ACCBiggz Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 As Gabriel and I talked about Couture's performance is that much more impressive. I think it needs to be someone who can be equal in the clinch and have solid stand-up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolleje Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 I'll add another question :-) With Dana White being sure he'll sign Fedor...: Say UFC signs Emelianenko to a 3-fight contract, who would you let him face? I think I would go with Couture Vs Emelianenko first (in a contenders match). If Fedor defeats Couture, he could challenge Lesnar for the title. If Couture wins you still would have an interesting Couture Vs Lesnar-rematch and Fedor could take on another contender (Mir, Velasquez, Carwin, Cro Cop...). But if he beats both Couture & Lesnar... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnar hendershow Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 Someone's going to have to control Brock for 5 rounds. Do nothing flashy and just wait it out for a decision. It can be anyone, they just have to hold him down and land some blows for points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Potato Head Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 Fedor vs. Couture comes first because that's a dream match and Fedor will hopefully look impressive enough in the win to get people even more hyped for Fedor/Brock. Then comes Fedor/Brock. If he wins, you put him against whoever the next challenger is. If he loses...Mir maybe. You don't want him to stall some up-and-comer's momentum, he needs to be only against people who can afford a loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 If the UFC signs Fedor Emelianenko, his first fight will be against Brock Lesnar. The winner of Carwin/Velasquez would have to wait for their title shot, and I could see that person taking on the winner of Nog/Couture instead. You do not... you do NOT waste a signing like Fedor on a non-title fight, because right now, Brock/Fedor is THE money match. If Fedor gets put against someone else first and loses... what then? The whole reason to sign him is for Dana to either prove that he's not the number one heavyweight in the world, or to allow him to prove that he is, but inside the UFC. So... if Fedor signs a 3 fight deal, he gets the following, assuming he wins... Brock Lesnar... the winner of the mini-tournament involving Couture, Nogueira, Velasquez and Carwin... and then Frank Mir, if he's rebounded with a couple wins and stays as dedicated and focused as he has been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 I'll add another question :-) With Dana White being sure he'll sign Fedor...: Say UFC signs Emelianenko to a 3-fight contract, who would you let him face? I believe Dana simply said he wanted to sign him, and that eventually it'd happen. Not that he is sure he'll sign him right away. But to your hypothethical. Fedor would fight Brock Lesnar. Period. He was the PRIDE HWGP and Heavyweight Champion, he is/was the WAMMA champion, the #1 Heavyweight in the world, and argubly the #1 P4P fighter in the world. He would get the title shot out of the gate. To cement it further, look no further than Dan Henderson. As PRIDE champion he was given unification bouts (even though PRIDE was gone) in each division, and Fedor would come in and the fight will do more PPV buys than UFC 100. After Fedor/Brock you can potentially do the fight people have wanted between Couture and Fedor (depending on outcomes - Fedor and Couture would both have to win). But without question his first fight WOULD be for the UFC Heavyweight Championship. End of discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanDMan Posted July 16, 2009 Report Share Posted July 16, 2009 I saw an interview Tito Ortiz did recently and he said he wants a catchweight fight with Fedor. As if Dana White needs more reasons to sign Fedor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayzon Posted July 16, 2009 Report Share Posted July 16, 2009 (edited) I saw an interview Tito Ortiz did recently and he said he wants a catchweight fight with Fedor. As if Dana White needs more reasons to sign Fedor. He he he... That'd be funny to watch. Edited July 16, 2009 by Jayzon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Too bad it's rumored Tito Ortiz has RE-SIGNED WITH THE UFC. And will headline UFC 103 vs. Rich Franklin. Again, rumored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostMachine Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Tito Ortiz is the only fighter I can think of that I actually hate. I do like seeing BJ Penn or GSP get their asses kicked, but I'd rather see them win fights than Ortiz. Can't think of a single fighter they could put up against Ortiz where I'd be hoping for him to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnar hendershow Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 Too bad it's rumored Tito Ortiz has RE-SIGNED WITH THE UFC. And will headline UFC 103 vs. Rich Franklin. Again, rumored. From Dana's Twitter: Doesn't mean he's back it means we aren't smashing each other anymore and we don't hate each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Blue Guy Posted July 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 (edited) Was Dana White wearing a dress when he tweeted that? Tito bores me to tears and is not relevant to the UFC LHW picture. Please, Mr. White, can we have a fight were the somebody benefits from a win? Stupid main eventless UFC 103. Tito is no walk in the park for Franklin, but... c'mon. His time is done. Tito Ortiz is a shell and if a fight with Franklin goes down, his year long layoffs, his surgically repaired back and knees, and the fact his opponent will not be Ken Shamrock will be very evident. The guy hasn't had a clear cut, decisive win against anybody that matters since Patty Cote. And the only thing people remember about that fight was Cote knocked him down kinda. Meh, UFC is a business. Tito still has a loyal following. The belief is that Tito still equals fan interest and I guess Rich could use a win over somebody with name value. I do actually enjoy how easily Tito can get under Dana's skin, though. That whole thing sounded a lot more bitter than I intended it to. Double meh. Edited July 19, 2009 by Enter Blue Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Potato Head Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 UFC's shooting themselves in the foot by conditioning fans to expect a main event of a certain level every month, when they don't have enough high-drawing fighters to actually pull it off. Scenarios like this are just going to be more and more common if they can't get their act together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 Something I would like to see happen, is for a change in price to take effect. The $50 price tag is fine when there's a title fight with two superstar fighters in the main event. Then maybe if it's two stars but no title, $40... and no "superstars" in the main event goes for $30... The problem really, is justifying shelling out $50 for a main event of Rich Franklin Vs Wanderlei Silva, when Brock Lesnar Vs Frank Mir is only a couple weeks later. Now, if UFC 99 was $30, because of the fact that it's in Europe and no title on the line, then maybe I would have purchased it, knowing full well that I was getting UFC 100... but because it was $50, airing from Germany and featured a main event that featured two guys who are on the outside looking in right now, I decided not to. I watched it, but I didn't pay for it. I'm just saying... you don't go to McDonald's and pay $4.50 for a cheeseburger. If you're paying $4.50, you damn well better be getting a fucking Big Mac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 UFC's shooting themselves in the foot by conditioning fans to expect a main event of a certain level every month, when they don't have enough high-drawing fighters to actually pull it off. Scenarios like this are just going to be more and more common if they can't get their act together. As I told you the other day, they aren't conditioning fans to expect anything. Let's just take a look at the 2009 PPVs: UFC 100: Biggest PPV in UFC history and really is an anomaly because of it being 100. They wanted to make it special with some big fights. UFC 99 - The Comeback: In Germany, Rich Franklin vs. Wanderlei Silva. A fight mostly hardcore fans wanted to see and would pay for, little hype around it outside of just the fighters name value. No other really big fight on the card, and no fight had any real title significance. UFC 98 - Machida vs. Evans: To this point Machida showed little to no PPV drawing power, and neither did Evans. Also had Hughes/Serra which had lost some steam but finally happened. Not a huge PPV by any means, but definitely built a new star in Machida. UFC 97 - Redemption: Another star-studded main event with ultimate drawer Thales Leites... --- Yes it has Anderson, but in all honesty Anderson has never drawn all that great. Chuck vs. Shogun is another fight that lost a lot of interest due to Chuck's recent losses. UFC 96 - Jackson vs. Jardine: You really going to call that setting expectations for people? UFC 95 - Sanchez vs. Stevenson: Really? UFC 94 - St. Pierre vs. Penn II: Probably one of the first actual UFC "Superfight", and even at that it was a re-match. UFC 93 - Franklin vs. Henderson: Again, another Europe show that was headlined by decent but not great stars. Was it a decent match-up? Yes. But so is nearly every UFC main event. Nearly every fight has some sort of significance. Looking at those cards I can't see how you say they are conditioning anyone to do anything. They book based off of what the top of the divisions look like, or else would you really want Stevenson, Jardine, etc. headlining your cards? No. I might be inclined to agree with you if for 3-4 consecutive months we got GSP/Penn, UFC100, and so forth. But we haven't and aren't getting that. Something I would like to see happen, is for a change in price to take effect. The $50 price tag is fine when there's a title fight with two superstar fighters in the main event. Then maybe if it's two stars but no title, $40... and no "superstars" in the main event goes for $30.. No offense, but that's just stupid. Makes no business sense per the buyrates and the buyrate difference between "lesser" or events that are not live. The stuff you mention are cunsumer issues, not the UFC's. It would be an issue IF the consumer acted as such, but they don't. The buyrate for UFC 99 would not have changed much at all if it were lowered 15 dollars, the biggest problem was that it was not live and therefore a lot of fans knew the results. They up'd the PPV price just last year 5 dollars from 40-45 and nothing changed showing that the PPV pricing isn't an issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 (edited) Just announced: Rich Franklin vs. Dan Henderson II will headline UFC 103. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO FUCKING BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO JOE SILVA.... BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Oh yeah, Soszynski vs. Vera at 102 as Hamill is injured. Edited July 20, 2009 by ACCBiggz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzy Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 (edited) And Dan Henderson isn't getting a rematch with Anderson Silva ... why? This rematch does nothing for anyone. Hamill had to drop out of his fight with Brandon Vera, they should've just went with Franklin/Vera. Sure, Vera probably doesn't deserve a fight with Franklin yet, but it at least makes more sense than this rematch... Edited July 20, 2009 by Fitzy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRN Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 *sigh* is all I have to say about that. Still looking forward to UFC 103, simply for the Swick/Kampmann fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Hamill had to drop out of his fight with Brandon Vera, they should've just went with Franklin/Vera. Sure, Vera probably doesn't deserve a fight with Franklin yet, but it at least makes more sense than this rematch... Fitzy, I didn't even think of that --- Brilliant. That is EXACTLY what should have happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRN Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 (edited) Yeah, that would have made loads more sense to go about it that way. Argh, that main event is just doing my head in because it makes no sense at all! I mean, what more does Henderson need to do to get a second shot against Silva? Defeat Franklin again? KO Bisping one more time? Edited July 20, 2009 by OphidiSRN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.