***spoilers*** UFC News and Discussion Thread

[Gazz]

You could spend six months working on footwork alone and still look like a flat-footed oaf. I don't think you quite appreciate how much there is to learn to get to a UFC standard level of competence.

[EndOfAnEra]

Yeah, I do. Doesn't change the fact that I feel bad for Punk here.

[apsham]

1 hour ago, Walker Adultman said:

I don't see how he was "humbled" or where the whole line of "He thought he could just walk in and be an MMA fighter!" comes from.

He never pretended like he was going to be good. He always said he was there to give it a try and nothing more. He was gracious in defeat and wants to get back to work. 

As much as I want to pin a participation ribbon on Punk's chest his whole attitude going into it (at least publicly) was a very "well, if I end up being fucking terrible I can just say that I wanted to try it" kind of move. Which is fine - but at the same time there are legitimate gripes with him getting on the card at all ahead of people who have been working to that point all their life.

I know the business aspect of it but at the same time, many fans would prefer that a guy who has been working at it for years would get even a match on the undercard versus seeing a guy with a bunch of money get even more money 'cause he wanted to'. There was no work up to the point that he was fighting at and once again, yeah - put all the business reasons for him being there aside - I'd be pretty happy that this is over and people can move on. There's been a lot of fuckery with the way that the UFC does business this past couple of years and putting this one aside because CM Punk had a dream to be a UFC fighter is eh.

[Benjamin]

6 hours ago, TCO said:

I'm sure a lot of armchair critics would step up and get submittedin 1 round of an MMA fight for the money he got paid. Difference, is they'll never get the opportunity.

He's rightfully going to be laughed at, he got his ass handed to him after two years of the best training when he should have been nowhere near the octagon.

If those armchair critics would somehow manage to bring in the eyeballs that Punk brought in for this event, then they deserve the amount of money he got paid. The difference is they don't, all of them most probably would never be able to. Punk had the drawing power, AND the balls. That's a big difference, so yeah, laughing at him is pretty fucking sad.

However, it's the internet, it's a sad place all over.

Also, saying that a lot of people would step up and get submitted in that 1 round has never gotten beaten up and almost choked into unconsciousness by a professional fighter like Punk just did.

Punk didn't go to the UFC, they offered it to him. Who wouldn't take that kind of money if they had the guts to actually do it? Plus it's CM Punk, no matter which arena he took the fight in, he was going to get scrutinized and criticized by everyone, no matter who he fought, no matter whether he won or lost.

[Walker]

The issue is with UFC then, not Punk. At the end of the day they approached him.

I don't see anyone criticising UFC though so I don't buy that to be the case. It seems more like people are still bitter about the circumstances of Punk's exit from WWE and are using this as fuel for the personal dislike.

[Benjamin]

1 hour ago, Liam said:

Pretty much. He is an unashamed wanker, so I do actively enjoy that it happened.

Whilst not on the same scale, the fact that this happened on the same night as Brook vs Golovkin in the boxing seemed to make Punk's piss poor performance seem even more laughable.

What does this have to do with Brook vs. GGG?

[Liam]

7 minutes ago, Benkid Nada said:

What does this have to do with Brook vs. GGG?

Of an evening where people were throwing out that both Brook and Punk had balls for doing what they did, Punk basically rolled over and got fucked, whilst Brook remained competitive against a guy two weights bigger than him, potentially the most dangerous puncher who has existed at any level, and a guy that people in his own division were avoiding.

Brook obviously being a boxer makes him more likely to be competitive against another boxer, but it isn't as if Micky Gall is Randy Couture/Chuck Lidell/GSP level. As Gazz said, the guy had two years with some of the best guys in the business, and offered so little. That he was able to fight off the chokehold for a little while before tapping is about the only thing that makes it slightly above James Toney level bad.

[Walker]

Gall has been training three or four times as long and is younger and healthier. I don't see why Punk could be expected to do better than he did? I mean, he escaped twice after Rogan wrote him off so clearly he did do more than rollover. He lasted longer than Gall's last opponent as well, I assume you are not going to take issue with that guy getting a UFC fight?

[Liam]

Just now, Walker Adultman said:

Gall has been training three or four times as long and is younger and healthier. I don't see why Punk could be expected to do better than he did? I mean, he escaped twice after Rogan wrote him off so clearly he did do more than rollover.

I didn't necessarily expect more from him. I just think he is a colossal tosspot, he knows he is a colossal tosspot, and considering the nature of how he had conducted himself for a relatively large window of time, I think he deserves an element of 'yah boo sucks to you' from the crowd who have probably financed his ability to do this kinda thing in the first place.

[Benjamin]

I'm so confused, are you saying that Brook had more balls than Punk or something? Isn't what they both did incredibly gutsy? Brook took a world championship fight against arguably the best in the world right now, but he himself was an undefeated world champion, on most pound-for-pound lists. 

CM Punk is a guy who had no competitive MMA experience, amateur or pro, barely any martial art background, and fought a guy 13 years younger than him, had years of experience in a combat sport prior to his entry into MMA, also had training that was far longer than two years, and was still able a good two minutes before being submitted. Two minutes under a professional fighter, a professional BJJ brown belt, must feel like fucking eternity. I don't think Punk did anything amazing, but he certainly didn't do anything to be embarrassed about. He did something 95% of the human population wouldn't have the balls to do.

2 minutes ago, Liam said:

I didn't necessarily expect more from him. I just think he is a colossal tosspot, he knows he is a colossal tosspot, and considering the nature of how he had conducted himself for a relatively large window of time, I think he deserves an element of 'yah boo sucks to you' from the crowd who have probably financed his ability to do this kinda thing in the first place.

So I guess Walker was right, it has less to do with how he did in the Octagon and more about people's personal feelings about him. That's kind of sad.

[Walker]

To me that just sounds like bitterness that has nothing to do with this event and everything to do with your personal dislike for Punk as a person. I don't really get it. 

And yeah, I don't know why people think 2 years is a long time to be training MMA. 

[Liam]

Just now, Benkid Nada said:

I'm so confused, are you saying that Brook had more balls than Punk or something? Isn't what they both did incredibly gutsy? Brook took a world championship fight against arguably the best in the world right now, but he himself was an undefeated world champion, on most pound-for-pound lists. 

CM Punk is a guy who had no competitive MMA experience, amateur or pro, barely any martial art background, and fought a guy 13 years younger than him, had years of experience in a combat sport prior to his entry into MMA, also had training that was far longer than two years, and was still able a good two minutes before being submitted. Two minutes under a professional fighter, a professional BJJ brown belt, must feel like fucking eternity. I don't think Punk did anything amazing, but he certainly didn't do anything to be embarrassed about. He did something 95% of the human population wouldn't have the balls to do.

So I guess Walker was right, it has less to do with how he did in the Octagon and more about people's personal feelings about him. That's kind of sad.

Ok, I dislike him because he was shit in the Octagon if that would make you happier. He took a spot and money off of a more deserving person.

Also, people make judgements about people all the time based on how they present themselves. It is why people dislike War Machine, irrelevant of what he was ever capable of in a ring. Acting like you are in some way above that is sanctimonious in the extreme.

The Brook comparison was just drawing attention to what a pisspoor performance it was. Golovkin to boxing is far above Gall to MMA, and Brook isn't a world class fighter, irrelevant of his record and his undefeated streak at the time. He ate a punch in the first minute that should have put him out of the contest - instead, he regrouped and was ahead on a card or the cards as a whole when the fight was stopped. Punk, against a guy who is decent at MMA, did fuck all.

5 minutes ago, Walker Adultman said:

To me that just sounds like bitterness that has nothing to do with this event and everything to do with your personal dislike for Punk as a person. I don't really get it. 

And yeah, I don't know why people think 2 years is a long time to be training MMA. 

So we can't be pleased or enjoy when someone who is a self-aware knobend (he doesn't exactly try to hide it) loses?

Sport is born out of the desire to support certain guys and have rivalries with others. He has done nothing for many people to ingratiate himself and gain their support, irrelevant of the WWE stuff.

Just for a fact - I didn't really care that he left the WWE. I barely followed it then, barely follow it now. I have an issue with the fact that he comes across like a prick in pretty much everything he does, and generally admits to behaving that way himself. He knows that he is a prick.

Two years isn't a long time, of course it isn't, However, when you have nothing else going on (I guess outside of the comic thing), that is a lot of time sunk into practice. He isn't like you or I, squeezing it around a 40+ hour job.

[Walker]

You can enjoy him losing if you like, I just don't see why you try to justify it as anything more than that.

You can say it is because he took a spot from someone but you know that is bullshit. He was offered the spot because UFC wanted to make money from his name, and if we lived in a crazy world where Punk turned it down because he didn't deserve the spot it doesn't mean UFC would have decided to give an opportunity to a no name. 

You see the difference between not liking War Machine and not liking Punk as well, right? 

[Liam]

Just now, Walker Adultman said:

You can enjoy him losing if you like, I just don't see why you try to justify it as anything more than that.

You can say it is because he took a spot from someone but you know that is bullshit. He was offered the spot because UFC wanted to make money from his name, and if we lived in a crazy world where Punk turned it down because he didn't deserve the spot it doesn't mean UFC would have decided to give an opportunity to a no name. 

You see the difference between not liking War Machine and not liking Punk as well, right? 

Of course I do, it was a hyperbolic example, considering apparently people can't form opinions of people that are in the public eye.

I'm not really trying to justify it past anything outside of 'I like seeing people who are general pricks' get beaten. However, this didn't seem good enough for the other poster, so I'm just layering a couple of other reasons people give for enjoying Punk getting beaten.

I've posted way more than I actually care about this - I just got annoyed about people being sanctimonious just because some people don't like Punk and enjoyed him losing.

[Gazz]

21 minutes ago, Benkid Nada said:

Two minutes under a professional fighter, a professional BJJ brown belt, must feel like fucking eternity.

Trust me, it's longer and that's from my personal experience and I didn't have to worry about getting punched in the face at the same time.

[Benjamin]

16 minutes ago, Liam said:

Of course I do, it was a hyperbolic example, considering apparently people can't form opinions of people that are in the public eye.

I'm not really trying to justify it past anything outside of 'I like seeing people who are general pricks' get beaten. However, this didn't seem good enough for the other poster, so I'm just layering a couple of other reasons people give for enjoying Punk getting beaten.

I've posted way more than I actually care about this - I just got annoyed about people being sanctimonious just because some people don't like Punk and enjoyed him losing.

You have been trying to justify it for other reasons, though. You say he took a spot and money off a more deserving person, as if the UFC would just turn around and give that same amount of money to someone else not named CM Punk. If anything, he created more money for everyone else on that card, because his appearance definitely raised several people's paydays, and he definitely created more opportunity for Mickey Gall, a guy who wouldn't have had a chance of making the kind of money he probably made, especially this early in his career.

You can say as much as you want that it's been about you not liking him simply because he's a prick, but it's sad that you try and justify your reasoning for laughing at his performance because he apparently got to that position because he somehow snaked his way into it.

[Liam]

5 minutes ago, Benkid Nada said:

You have been trying to justify it for other reasons, though. You say he took a spot and money off a more deserving person, as if the UFC would just turn around and give that same amount of money to someone else not named CM Punk. If anything, he created more money for everyone else on that card, because his appearance definitely raised several people's paydays, and he definitely created more opportunity for Mickey Gall, a guy who wouldn't have had a chance of making the kind of money he probably made, especially this early in his career.

You can say as much as you want that it's been about you not liking him simply because he's a prick, but it's sad that you try and justify your reasoning for laughing at his performance because he apparently got to that position because he somehow snaked his way into it.

Because apparently just disliking someone wasn't good enough. I'm giving you the numerous reasons that have rattled around the internet over the past 18-24 hours, all which have a certain validity to them.

Also, I didn't laugh at his performance, I'm defending people's right to laugh at his performance. I just was happy that he lost. Not quite the same thing.

Once again, stop being sanctimonious about this. At least Walker is able to argue a cogent point without resorting to making judgements on people's character. I'll take the warning for it if it comes my way, but stop talking like a prick to people. The majority of your last few posts have read like the written version of the :/ face.

 

[Benjamin]

17 minutes ago, Liam said:

Because apparently just disliking someone wasn't good enough. I'm giving you the numerous reasons that have rattled around the internet over the past 18-24 hours, all which have a certain validity to them.

Also, I didn't laugh at his performance, I'm defending people's right to laugh at his performance. I just was happy that he lost. Not quite the same thing.

Once again, stop being sanctimonious about this. At least Walker is able to argue a cogent point without resorting to making judgements on people's character. I'll take the warning for it if it comes my way, but stop talking like a prick to people. The majority of your last few posts have read like the written version of the :/ face.

 

People can have the right to laugh at his performance all they want, but it's a little pathetic that they do so by trying to justify it through all the various reasons you bring up, because some of them are illogical and some of them are just plain unfair. They also aren't really valid, like you saying that he had 2 years to do nothing but train (which isn't just absurd, it's not true, since he had 2 injuries and 1 surgery), plus the fact that even with 2 years with nothing else to do, that still doesn't mean you're somehow some fucking MMA expert, because it takes years upon years upon years of practice to even get remotely good at, and that's with amateur and other combat sport experience. Also, you did laugh at his performance, or did you not bring up the Brook comparison?

Also, stop calling me sanctimonious when your reasoning for not liking someone and laughing at a person's defeat and beatdown is "because I think he's a prick".

[Liam]

1 minute ago, Benkid Nada said:

People can have the right to laugh at his performance all they want, but it's a little pathetic that they do so by trying to justify it through all the various reasons you bring up, because some of them are illogical and some of them are just plain unfair. They also aren't really valid, like you saying that he had 2 years to do nothing but train (which isn't just absurd, it's not true, since he had 2 injuries and 1 surgery), plus the fact that even with 2 years with nothing else to do, that still doesn't mean you're somehow some fucking MMA expert, because it takes years upon years upon years of practice to even get remotely good at, and that's with amateur and other combat sport experience. Also, you did laugh at his performance, or did you not bring up the Brook comparison?

Also, stop calling me sanctimonious when your reasoning for not liking someone and laughing at a person's defeat and beatdown is "because I think he's a prick".

Do you know what sanctimonious means?

Also, the Brook comparison was just what it was. It wasn't an analogy that was a million miles away. I didn't laugh at Punk losing. I enjoyed seeing him lose. There is a fair difference.

No-one expected him to be an MMA expert. Some people expected him to do something a bit more than what he did.

[Rich]

1 minute ago, Benkid Nada said:

People can have the right to laugh at his performance all they want, but it's a little pathetic that they do so by trying to justify it through all the various reasons you bring up, because some of them are illogical and some of them are just plain unfair. They also aren't really valid, like you saying that he had 2 years to do nothing but train (which isn't just absurd, it's not true, since he had 2 injuries and 1 surgery), plus the fact that even with 2 years with nothing else to do, that still doesn't mean you're somehow some fucking MMA expert, because it takes years upon years upon years of practice to even get remotely good at, and that's with amateur and other combat sport experience. Also, you did laugh at his performance, or did you not bring up the Brook comparison?

Also, stop calling me sanctimonious when your reasoning for not liking someone and laughing at a person's defeat and beatdown is "because I think he's a prick".

To be fair that isn't his reason, his reason is that Punk is a self confessed prick and Liam agrees.

can you both stop now? You both look like a pair of idiots going round in circles. Liam it's ok to enjoy Punk getting beaten up for being a prick. Ben, it's ok in the sport of MMA to enjoy someone who you don't like getting beaten up, stop acting so contrary please, and lets talk about Werdum being robbed of a TKO victory.