Too Many Upsets???

Discussion in 'MMA Forum' started by alewaboy52, Sep 24, 2007.


  1. alewaboy52

    alewaboy52 Member Full Member

    302
    0
    Sep 17, 2004
    i think upsets can be great for a sport, it gives hope to a lot of the underdogs out there, it forces fighters to bring their A game and show what they truely can do, but with that being said has there been too many upsets this year, i mean is there a point where it just becomes too much, how do you keep an accurate top ten when everyone keeps on losing and all these people coming out of the woodworks start winning...both liddell and shogun lost, wanderlei has been ko'd 2 fights in a row, whos the number 1 contender, tito? he just had a draw with rashad evans, forrest griffen? got ko'd by jardine, jardine? ko'd by alexander and thats just at lhw, what about heavyweight? unless ufc signs fedor theres nodody really out there right now, and mw and ww, does rich ranklin really have a shot after the way he was steam rolled in their first fight, hughes then gsp lost, koscheck and sanchez lost, the lw champ is probably gonna get stripped of his title, damn, what a crazy world in mma, i loved the upsets for a while but lets get things back to normal so i can make sense of it all
     
  2. Wilhelm

    Wilhelm Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,914
    4
    Jul 19, 2004
    There's just too many ways to lose in MMA. The best way to find out who REALLY is the best is to have them fight more often and to make the rankings public and to always have "tournaments" going on. They're more or less pretty good about doing this, but yeah, it's strange when the "best" guys lose every third or fourth fight.
     
  3. chimba

    chimba Off the Somali Coast Full Member

    20,005
    7
    Mar 8, 2007
    I dont know how MMA fans became obsessed with being undefeated or guys who are invincible. I think Dana started this whole thing with TUF with guys like Diego, hyping them all as undefeated. I mean Pancrase back in the days til now have fighters losing to each other and it wasnt a big deal. You come back and try to win again. Same with K1.

    I think this exposes the problem that MMA has. Its the lack of superstars.. 1 loss and people loses interest (its also in the way they lose, sometimes very sloppy). If you take WWE for example, even if its fake people who loses the belt gains their popularity back and fans could care less.

    Thats why Ive been saying to make the fights more exciting..fck these boring ground game..unless their attempting subs or pummeling the guy at the bottom, they should stand it up.. Sometimes the stand up gets boring also, then do what Pride use to do deduct from the purse.

    If this keeps going on where fans invests energy into following a fighter that was built up, then he loses..MMA could face future problems
     
  4. radianttwilight

    radianttwilight Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,539
    18
    May 5, 2007
    Actually, that's what I like about MMA.

    you can be 10-4 and still get a title shot...title shots seem much more based on how good you are/appear to be, and not the quality of your resume alone.

    Boxers usually have to go 20-0 or something like that to get a title fight...and all it takes is 1 loss and you are deemed "exposed as a fraud" or some other bull****

    That and the fact that MMA has far fewer weight classes and the fighters tend to jump around alot more in weight classes (Henderson holding 2 belts, Couture, etc) means that there are ALOT of good fights CONSTANTLY getting made...and because the UFC sets up fights there is little/no ducking (except in some cases, but it's NOWHERE near as bad as boxing and its politics). I think it's awesome that you have guys like Henderson and Wanderlei who fought at MIDDLEWEIGHT (albeit a higher middleweight bracket than boxing) and then step up to HEAVYWEIGHT and fight guys like Mark Hunt....it's great.

    Nobody in boxing has the balls to make the big fights, really...they're all scared about losing that '0'
     
  5. theunderdog

    theunderdog Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,814
    1
    Jul 4, 2006
    this is the trade-off with getting really good matches. some of the top guys will lose. that's why the ufc is skyrocketing right now. the give the people what they want. but sometimes that is really not the right thing to do businesswise. look at cro cop, he was a big attraction when he came in, he got ktfo'd by gonzaga, then in his return match, he took on a dangerous fighter in kongo. white should have picked a tomato can to fight cro cop first so they can make money of him

    another is shogun, why the hell did they make him fight forrest? the american vieweres barely know who shogun is, if the ufc made him fight a tomato can to display his skills, then the fans would want to watch more of him in the next time. now he lost to forrest, what now? shogun is finished if they make him fight another live body the next time out.

    then there is lidell. i don't remember when two fighters, both coming off from loses met for a main event. this was not smart for the ufc. one guy will get his groove back, the other will be buried. they should have faced different opponents. i think the UFC has already peaked. too many ppv with too many dream matches in a really short time. this was not smart