Could Anderson Silva have accomplished more had he never joined the UFC?

A post after telling me what I'm thinking?

 

I don't know if theyre trolls, but theyre definitely ducking my posts in this thread. :deal

 

It comes down to how you jude the fighters size I'd say, to me Anderson is a natural LHW fighting at MW while GSP is a natural WW who'd be a small MW or at least one packing an excessive amount of muscle.

The UFC WW division is for me much stronger than MW aswell, Hughes, Alves and Fitch were all highly established when GSP beat them where as even Franklin didnt really have a prooven record agenst the best at MW.

Right now I'd have the P4P list as something like...

1.GSP
2.Shogun
3.Anderson
4.Edgar
5.Aldo
6.Cain
7.Melendez
8.Fitch
9.Fedor
10.BJ

In Andersons favour he does seem to have some legit tests coming at MW in Vitor and perhaps Sonnen again.

 

What do you mean outside? its all he does inside as well.

 

Exactly, the same way Brock was promoted as the "baddest man in the planet" to counter Fedor and his SF fights. Zombies ate it hook line and sinker nut

 

Not rubbish but clearly not the number 1 P4P.

The problem is when MMA fans blindly believing anything that comes out of a promoter and a known serial liar.

I dont agree with the flavor of the moment ranking where anyone coming off a loss no matter their previous achievements gets relegated. I definitely dont see an agenda when a zuffa fighter comes off a loss and a non zuffa fighter i.e. zuffa fighter gets a loss they retain their position or drop only a few places, when a non zuffa fighter (Fedor) looses one fight in ten years he drops out of the top ten.

Look at their win:losses, Fedor isnt the only fighter their with losses, yet he gets punished for one loss when others dont. Heck AS has 4 already and less fights.

Same reason people ignore you at work buddy and the same reason why you dont have many friends. Your just not a very interesting person lol j/k.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-PIckHrZ0o[/ame]

 

Fedor too high or too low for you?

Theres no established criteria for P4P and I take the view that short term results should be a factor but not to the same degree as in the divisional rankings. If I was rating purely by skill I'd certainly have Fedor in the top 5 but he is coming off of a loss.

Shogun may have lost to Forrest who Anderson beat but I think his recent performances have shown that result was heavly influnced by injury and not a reflection of where he is now.

As I said I think you need to take size into account and Anderson to me is pretty much the same size as Shogun so again I take the veiw that you look at their results side by side. The fact Leites, Cote, Lutter and Maia were fighting for the belt is pretty meaningless to me, they are not fighters of near to the same quality as those Shogun has beaten, besides Maia none of them were anywhere near to being top 10 at MW in terms of skill at the time IMHO and I wouldnt expect any of them to be sucessful at LHW.

Even Hendo who's generally hyped as Andersons biggest win lost the majority of big fights he had at LHW(Wanderlei, Arona, Lil Nog, Rampage).

 

If I can't rate Shogun based partly on skill then why moan about Fedor being too low? As far as the first Machida match goes I view that as a Shogun win no matter what the record states.

To be honiest the lower reaches of any P4P list are always going to be pretty nebelious, Fedor at #8 and Fitch at #9 wouldnt make much difference.

As I said I do think short term results should be a sizeble factor though, if Fedor were to beat Werdum or Overeem he'd climb very quickly up my list, indeed if he beat both I could well see him being #1 again.

 

`Inactivity is hurting both fighters in terms of p4p rankings. Very difficult to judge where they are at. In terms of ability and past performances though both are shoe in's for top 5 spots imo. But everyone's criteria is different