Brock Lesnar and "Progress"

You're right on the 'well rounded' thing; its overrated imo.

However there is still a big difference between the fighters from Severns, and even Colemans time. Lesnar is doing the same things, but just on a much higher level.

'Evolution' isn't just adding more and more techniques, its also more talented, younger athletes who are trained more effectively to exploit there own skillset, rather than just become a brownbelt at everything,

 

In one way you are dead on; but on the other look how much better colemans strategy of ground and pound are than Severns plan of ground and....see if you can work a sort of modified wrestling hold or basic sub, and even how much better his striking was. Then look at how much better Kerrs sub grappling skill was. Now look at how much better Lesnars striking is than any if them.

On the other hand you have Tom Erikson who was very similar to Severn, but eventually picked up some striking and some more grappling.

So while I think that you are right in that formula is still the same, the same type of person is still doing the business, they are picking up the rest of their game at the same speed as the rest of the sport. They are becoming more well rounded at a slightly higher pace than many types of fighters, but not by much. The whole sport is just getting better and wrestlers are too, maybe at a slighly quicker rate, but not neccesarily.

They are evolving compared to the previous generation, but the rest of the sport is as well, so the big wrestlers are comparitively in the same relative position to the rest of the sport, maybe slightly ahead.

 

i think lesnar is a better wrestler than the other 2,and lesnar has tremendous speed for a man his size and he has better striking(look at the knee he hit and the standing elbow shot on couture)but i understand the point you were trying to make

 

Severn and Coleman are both better wrestlers than Lesnar and its not even close.

What he is is younger and naturally bigger than those guys, and probably a better 'athlete' in re. to the attributes that are useful in MMA.

 

id love to see lesnar now fight severn from 95or96.

 

Lesnar is no diffrent to a prime Coleman. He uses brute strength coupled with his size and athleticism to get the job done. After 4 wins its way to early to make any assumptions about Brock yet. But theres no evolution here in the slightest. Coleman punctuated that mold along with Mark Kerr and everyone else has followed suit. Ironically i think Brock would have fared better under PRIDE rules as knee's on the ground were VERY beneficial to Colemans very limited arsenal.

 

Severn is a superior wrestler to Brock and Coleman. He had a vast array of submmisions as well as one of the purest wrestling techniques iv ever seen. At least if Severn got you're back there was a chance of a submission. If Coleman or Brock get your back there not going to do **** there except pound the **** out of your ears.

 

Kerr was far superior to either brock or coleman in terms of submission wrestling as well.

 

Credentially is Severn a greater wrestler than Lesnar? This is a serious question, not rhetorical, because I honestly don't know.

Also, technique is undoubtedly extremely important but if Lesnar would win in a wrestling match because he is bigger and stronger and has good ENOUGH technique, doesn't that make him a better wrestler?

 

Most defintly. All those 3 had drug problems though. Colemans been on GH for almost his entire career. Kerr was on a ton of controlled substances and Brock spent his early years in the NCAA/OVW/WWE on GH and Steroids.

 

Its funny as well because alot of the ufc fanboys are now trying to discredit barnett because of the drugs :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

UFC fans have as much depth as a puddle of spit. They know **** all about this sport. Its common knowledge the UFC are in bed with organisations like the CSAC and NSAC. The random drug test dont mean ****. Bare in mind some of there biggest stars have been on steroids, Ken Shamrock, Sylvia, Monson, Sherk, Bonnar etc. The UFC pick and choose who they check. Additionally when Barnett was first caught on hormones he was in the UFC. The entirety of team Hammerhouse left for Japan because they could use illegal performance enhancers freely there. Thing is you can do the same in the UFC if you know the right people. The Japanese made no attempt to hide it and thus it never became an issue. Over in the UFC they champion how "clean" there fighters are when id wager a guess that at least 50-70% of that stable is on some form of peformance enhancer.

 

Barnett discredited himself by testing positive three times in his career.

 

Yeah, but that is just a guess backed up by no real reasoning except "it's common knowledge" which really means nothing.

The NSAC says Brock is clean after UFC 100. Brock's muscle definition is significantly less than it was when he was a pro-wrestler. I don't know how you can be so sure that he is on steroids...