Joe Rogan

TimRiggins

Anyone else getting abit sick of his commentary? He sways alot of the public with his views and I was very disappointed during the Pendred fight he didn't give Pendred at all and just focused on Spencers technique when in truth both fighters were quite poor and wasn't a robbery, poor decision but i've seen far far worse.

Last night he questioned the stoppages Ogle and Henderson in the cage with Amirkhani and Mousasi when both were legitimate and I thought it was awkward when he asked Gustaffsson to translate his message to the crowd into English

DerekDGoldfish

TimRiggins wrote: »

Anyone else getting abit sick of his commentary? He sways alot of the public with his views and I was very disappointed during the Pendred fight he didn't give Pendred at all and just focused on Spencers technique when in truth both fighters were quite poor and wasn't a robbery, poor decision but i've seen far far worse.

Last night he questioned the stoppages Ogle and Henderson in the cage with Amirkhani and Mousasi when both were legitimate and I thought it was awkward when he asked Gustaffsson to translate his message to the crowd into English

I agree, he also asks overly elaborate questions with multiple parts through interpreters that are either going to takes ages to be translated back and forward and lost in translation. It may be a requirement from the guys above to get more talk in English from the fighters but it rarely works well.

He does show bias but at least in the Fox fights they go back to a panel who can challenge his opinion they should bring a panel into the numbered events.

mailburner

when the alternative is the likes of hardy and godden, goldie and rogan
are irreplaceable

best ive heard commentating outside of these two is mir, did a wec event some years back and was as good if not better

TimRiggins

mailburner wrote: »

when the alternative is the likes of hardy and godden, goldie and rogan
are irreplaceable

best ive heard commentating outside of these two is mir, did a wec event some years back and was as good if not better

I quite like Hardy on commentary to be honest

xtal191

Stann is the best commentator by far imo

Dtp1979

What was hardy commentating at this when rogan was there? Also one fight both were talking over each other???

TimRiggins

Dtp1979 wrote: »

What was hardy commentating at this when rogan was there? Also one fight both were talking over each other???

Think it was a BT **** up

Dtp1979

TimRiggins wrote: »

Think it was a BT **** up

I'm sure the mixed commentary was alright, but why have both there is what's confusing me!

CurryFlavoured

He was terrible last night, how he believed Ogle was an early stoppage beggars belief and it pisses me off that so many sheep follow his opinion. He can be funny on commentary but for knowledge he isn't great.

MrStuffins

I used to be a big fan but I must admit, the fact that he pushes his own viewpoint (UFC in Fox spoiler)

,like the stoppage of Hendo which I thought was understandable,

rather than just be a neutral and impartial presenter grates on me. He should keep his opinions to himself until he does his podcast. But in the cage on official UFC duty he should just do his job.

johnpro

mailburner wrote: »

when the alternative is the likes of hardy and godden, goldie and rogan
are irreplaceable

best ive heard commentating outside of these two is mir, did a wec event some years back and was as good if not better

I like rogan and hardy, goldie's not great to be fair but he's like an old family dog...he doesn't do much and at times he stinks but you'd miss him if he wasn't there.

Would really love an event with sonnen and Mir calling the shots think it could be a good ying and yang combo but with genuinely great insight from both

darced

This post has been deleted.

chopperbyrne

I think he'd be a better on an analysis panel than on commentary.

Hardy is quite good on commentary. His colleague is worse than Goldie though.

Naos

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's contradictory to what he says often about grapplers though, that if one person can get another to the floor and hold them there, then there should be no standing them up.

He often states that it's up to the other fighter to get up from them bottom even if it's boring to watch.

Clive

Rogan's role is to be his excitable self and to provide some technical analysis for less experienced fans.

Anyone with experience will know that he often makes technical errors, which is understandable, given that he's never had an MMA fight, judged one or trained someone for one.

He is essentially a fan with a grappling background, which is why his commentary often revolves around what he thinks should be, rather than the reality.

Riddle of Steel

Clive wrote: »

He is essentially a fan with a grappling background, which is why his commentary often revolves around what he thinks should be, rather than the reality.

I'd say his striking background is also worth mentioning, he competed a lot in TKD years back, according to him on his podcast.

I like his commentary, that's both based on his own merit and how poor other commentators can be. Goldbaerg isn't bad, he's made out to be worse than he is.

I agree than Brian Stann is one of the best they have had commentating. I do not like the English commentators, I don't know whether it's their voices or what.

If you're a fan of MMA then you can make up your own mind about the fight, whether stoppages were jus in your opinion etc. If you're new to MMA then they do a good job of explaining positions and whats actually happeneing, the majority of the time. However if someone new to MMA was watching that Pendred fight they would definitely get a strongly biased perspective on the fight. From the UFC commentary I've seen; more often than not that is not the case.

John_D80

Ref: Joe Rogan and striking.

A friend of mine told me once that as well as being a state and national champion at TKD, Joe also won a few open weight full contact tournaments.

Same guy who told me is a pretty well known name on the TKD scene in Ireland and a massive nerd on all things TKD whose word is pretty much solid gold.

Go Tobban

Usually like Rogan but he was awful on Sat. The way he treated Makwan Amirkhani after the fight was ****ty. Really negative interview in what was a great performance

But Goldie...fcuking hell he's awful. I know his job is to promote future fights but you can tell he's reading off a card 90% of the time in that stupid voice of his. He's like a robot .They should bring Maura Ranallo in imo

Mellor

Clive wrote: »

He is essentially a fan with a grappling background, which is why his commentary often revolves around what he thinks should be, rather than the reality.

His striking background is just as extensive as his grappling tbf.

Fromvert

I like Rogan as a commentator, he gets a little over excited and blinded because he is a huge fan but makes him more likeable to me anyway.

Wonder how long he'll keep doing it though, he's very outspoken about fighters suffering concussions and brain trauma from fighting. Will the UFC be happy with one of their faces being so outspoken?

Clive

I don't know where people are getting Rogan's striking background from, unless there's something I don't know. He participated in WTF TKD which bears very little relevance to MMA striking (I say that as someone with the same background).

Mellor

Clive wrote: »

I don't know where people are getting Rogan's striking background from, unless there's something I don't know. He participated in WTF TKD which bears very little relevance to MMA striking (I say that as someone with the same background).

AFAIK, He competed in TKD originally and later took up BJJ and Muay Thai.

What exactly is WTF TKD?
Would it be similar to the way with BJJ, an awful lot of it is not applicable to MMA? Or is all completely unusable?

Chairman Meow

I liked Rogan at first but he kinda annoys me now. Get sick of his talking head segments before a fight where he tells you how pretty much every single fighter hes talking about "HAS THE SKILLS TO BE THE GREATEST IN THE DIVISION". Its like, take their cock out of your mouth for 5 minutes Joe for gods sake. In a perfect world UFC wouldve hired Bas Rutten to do commentary after pride was bought out

yourdeadwright

Some people can't grasp the fact the UFC commentators are employed bythe UFC,

There for there is a huge chance that they are told to try push certainfighters on the viewers more than others,

Also why u hear many times of how world class someone is and how goodthey could become because there promoting the UFC itself by saying look we haveworld class guys,

Uncle Dana would be far from happy to hear, we have two really poor guys in hear now who will never go any where in this division , its just not good for bizness,


It's totally different from other sports where the networks that areshowing the games or contests have there own commentators that have no reason tobe biased,

cletus

Mellor wrote: »

AFAIK, He competed in TKD originally and later took up BJJ and Muay Thai.

What exactly is WTF TKD?
Would it be similar to the way with BJJ, an awful lot of it is not applicable to MMA? Or is all completely unusable?

Here you go

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o_fcY32Q0ZE

In WTF there is no punching.

Axwell

cletus wrote: »

In WTF there is no punching.

I agree with you as regards Joe's striking ability but I am pretty sure this is incorrect, you are allowed punch - but you arent allowed punch in the face. The reason most dont is its a lot harder to land a punch due to having to come in close and you are more than likely going to take a kick and conceed a pont. Also in WTF TKD fighters stand side on so a punch is less effective as you cant hit the strike zone (chest guard) too easily and you would have to hit it dead on the same as a kick and show enough impact to merit a point.

Joe Rogan apparently did full contact TKD when he was younger which allows punches to the head and body. Even at that though its still TKD so I cant see his striking being that high level compared to others from different disciplines, he spent most of his years doing BJJ and getting his black belts in that.

wardiaz

Go onto youtube lads and watch rogan showing gsp how to throw a side kick and another one with duane ludwig,hes well qualified to commentate on MMA fights he makes mistakes here and there but he knows his stuff.

Clive

WTF taekwondo is the full contact style that's in the Olympics. You can punch to the body, but it's very hard to score. You can kick to the body and head, but only using the foot.

Some of the kicks translate to MMA, but the entire structure of the competition format means that it's a very different animal to MMA striking.

Mister Vain

I'm more sick of the other fella who says the exact same things in every fight.

"And here weeeee go."

"Its allllllllllll over."

wardiaz

Clive wrote: »

WTF taekwondo is the full contact style that's in the Olympics. You can punch to the body, but it's very hard to score. You can kick to the body and head, but only using the foot.

Some of the kicks translate to MMA, but the entire structure of the competition format means that it's a very different animal to MMA striking.

half of mcgregors kicks are TKD techniques,rogan is legit.

cletus

Axwell wrote: »

I agree with you as regards Joe's striking ability but I am pretty sure this is incorrect, you are allowed punch - but you arent allowed punch in the face. The reason most dont is its a lot harder to land a punch due to having to come in close and you are more than likely going to take a kick and conceed a pont. Also in WTF TKD fighters stand side on so a punch is less effective as you cant hit the strike zone (chest guard) too easily and you would have to hit it dead on the same as a kick and show enough impact to merit a point.

Joe Rogan apparently did full contact TKD when he was younger which allows punches to the head and body. Even at that though its still TKD so I cant see his striking being that high level compared to others from different disciplines, he spent most of his years doing BJJ and getting his black belts in that.

Sorry you are correct, I did mean to post that it was punches to the head, posting quickly on my phone.

I didn't mean for my post to be in any way a comment On Rogans striking ability. In fact I thought it was ITF rather than WTF that he practiced. It was just to demonstrate to Mellor what WTF looked like

Clive

wardiaz wrote: »

half of mcgregors kicks are TKD techniques,rogan is legit.

Yes, some of Conor's kicks are from TKD - he works with Johnny Dargan on them. The kick to the knee he uses is most commonly seen in kung fu.

I don't know what that has to do with Joe Rogan.

ACANDROID

Listening to Dominick Cruz on this weeks MMA Hour, very analytical head which would do well for commentary, saying that I would rather him to be focusing on getting back to full fitness

lertsnim

Dtp1979 wrote: »

What was hardy commentating at this when rogan was there? Also one fight both were talking over each other???

TimRiggins wrote: »

Think it was a BT **** up

I am sure it was a UFC **** up as both those guys are the UFC commentary for events in Europe and Asia. Goldberg and Rogan were there only because it was being shown on FOX

T-K-O

I like Rogan/Goldie, they work well as a pair.

Frank Mir is a guy I would like to hear more of.

MrStuffins

T-K-O wrote: »

I like Rogan/Goldie, they work well as a pair.

Frank Mir is a guy I would like to hear more of.

I wasn't mad about him back in the WEC days. He was ok, but he used to get fighters names wrong.

He used to call Condit "Carlos Conduct"!

T-K-O

MrStuffins wrote: »

I wasn't mad about him back in the WEC days. He was ok, but he used to get fighters names wrong.

He used to call Condit "Carlos Conduct"!

I like it

Ush1

MrStuffins wrote: »

I wasn't mad about him back in the WEC days. He was ok, but he used to get fighters names wrong.

He used to call Condit "Carlos Conduct"!

Sure most people on here call him Conduit.

HSapien

One of the great ironies of people criticising commenters for bias is that it usually indicates their own bias, which they're oblivious to. You support fighter X, and if the commenter doesn't slobber over Fighter X it appears to your mind as bias against him. The human mind is so delusional about its ability to remain impartial and to judge other people's impartiality. It's a good bet that very few of Rogan's critics would be as good as him consistently, regardless of how much effort they put in -- the blowback they'd receive would curdle their blood.

It's extremely difficult to please everyone watching such an emotionally-drenched sport and delivering an objective and entertaining analysis that everyone agrees with. Given the circumstances he does an excellent job.

That_Guy

I actually don't mind Rogan. He's very good when it comes to stuff on the ground and explaining what is happening/what might happen in certain situations.

What I don't agree with is questioning winning fighters as to whether or not they believe there was an early stoppage. It's embarrassing and it's not the fault of the fighter if a ref does stop a ref prematurely the odd time.

Opinions are fine but to air them in a professional capacity is not on imo. Maybe save it for his own podcast or whatever.

evil_seed

Ye do realise he gets fed questions by producers

FreshLaochra

TimRiggins wrote: »

Anyone else getting abit sick of his commentary? He sways alot of the public with his views and I was very disappointed during the Pendred fight he didn't give Pendred at all and just focused on Spencers technique when in truth both fighters were quite poor and wasn't a robbery, poor decision but i've seen far far worse.

Last night he questioned the stoppages Ogle and Henderson in the cage with Amirkhani and Mousasi when both were legitimate and I thought it was awkward when he asked Gustaffsson to translate his message to the crowd into English

I posted something about it on a Google+ community, here's my take.

"What do people think of Rogan opening his mouth lately about stoppages and wins, without knowing what he's talking about, and clearly showing bias to certain fighters?

Do you think the UFC should tell him, stick to commentating on the bout and keep his opinions of "robberies" or "bad calls" to himself?

I think Rogan has too much sway on the casual MMA fans, he's got a cult following, and they take his word as gospel, which causes arguments and debate where there shouldn't be. He admits himself, he does not score fights whilst commentating (how could you?) and doesn't know who won, yet ignorantly proclaims who did, and who was robbed, or if a fight was a bad stoppage. Love Joe, love his podcasts, but the man needs to be more professional."

Mellor

He is the colour commentator, his job is to call fights as he sees it and to give his opinion on fights.

If people can't make up their own mind on a fight, they shouldn't blame Rogan's commentary imo.

FWIW, i thought the Hendo stoppage was a fraction early. He was dropped, but no where near out, and was aware enough to grab a single.
With Ogle, he had no where to go, but I don;t think Amirkani was doing much

Dietsquirt

If you've heard Josh Barnett on Joe's Podcast he seems very sharp.

He'd be good as a commentator; having said that, I like Joe - he breaks down a fight in simple terms. The reality is, 90% of viewers don't train.

Lenin Skynard

evil_seed wrote: »

Ye do realise he gets fed questions by producers

No. That's not how it works.

scudzilla

Mellor wrote: »

FWIW, i thought the Hendo stoppage was a fraction early. He was dropped, but no where near out, and was aware enough to grab a single.

So did i at the time, then this week after hearing that another smack on the eye and he could have lost it i'm thankful the fight was stopped when it was

scudzilla

evil_seed wrote: »

Ye do realise he gets fed questions by producers

Lenin Skynard wrote: »

No. That's not how it works.

You're both sorta right, he asks questions himself on the spot but occasionally a producer will ask him to ask something, like the time he interviewed Rousey and it was a total fcuk up due to a stupid question being asked in his ear by producers

The Bored One

I think the problem with Rogan is that he's there as a colour commentator but he's also sort of bled into the role of a technical commentator as well. Now while it's possible for someone for do both at the same time, ie Bas Rutten, with Joe its sometimes unclear what hat he's wearing when he makes a remark. You can't be sure whether he's trying provide shading and opinion to make the fight more interesting or whether he's trying to provide a technical analysis.

Fromvert

Dietsquirt wrote: »

If you've heard Josh Barnett on Joe's Podcast he seems very sharp.

He'd be good as a commentator; having said that, I like Joe - he breaks down a fight in simple terms. The reality is, 90% of viewers don't train.

Good shout, would love to see Barnett doing some commentary. Definitely sharp and articulate.

Mellor

Dietsquirt wrote: »

If you've heard Josh Barnett on Joe's Podcast he seems very sharp.

He'd be good as a commentator; having said that, I like Joe - he breaks down a fight in simple terms. The reality is, 90% of viewers don't train.

Barnatt is a lunatic and a dark dark guy. Heard some quotes from him during metamorris cis Kit Dale, hilarious.
Would be good commentating imo.

And I'd say way more than 90% dont train. Easy 99%.

That_Guy

I really hope they let Brian Stann back on the commentary soon. Very easy to listen to and really knows his stuff. Usually paired up with the grating Jon Anik though.