Official Conor McGregor thread (part 2). **Read warning in 1st post**

edit: wrong thread.

Outlaw Pete

Just me or is McGregor looking a little lighter than he has in a long while. Getting ready for a cut?


https://twitter.com/TheNotoriousMMA/status/773408446813200385

joshrogan

He can always lose to Alvarez and instantly get a shot at Aldo for the belt whenever he wants. If he loses to Aldo first then it's harder to make a case for the fight and Alvarez vs Aldo wouldn't sell many PPVs. I'm not sure why the UFC would want him to fight Aldo first it's a lot more risky than Alvarez.

StringerBell

Where has Alvarez v Aldo come from?

The UFC appear to want him defend his belt in the division he holds the title, for the first time, following two fights outside the division where he holds the title.

hatrickpatrick

joshrogan wrote: »

I'm not sure why the UFC would want him to fight Aldo first it's a lot more risky than Alvarez.

To be honest I don't think the UFC really does want him to fight Aldo. What they really wanted was for Edgar to win in July so as Conor could have fought him for the unifying bout (and that would have seriously excited people) but unfortunately it didn't work out that way. I think to be fair, they want the featherweight division to be able to move forward which it can't as long as its belt isn't up for contest, but I would be willing to bet that they didn't want it to be Aldo for the next fight.

Now I personally think that the rematch with Aldo could be a fantastic fight, just as the Diaz rematch was, but a fantastic fight isn't the deciding factor here - crowd interest for PPV, and the risk of Conor getting beaten which, unlike losing to Diaz at short notice, would put a serious and potentially long term dent in his image, are probably much bigger factors for the UFC, so all things considered I'd say they're furious about how the Edgar fight went but that's just the way it goes. McGregor vs Edgar would have been a much more exciting prospect than McGregor vs Aldo revisited.

joshrogan

StringerBell wrote: »

Where has Alvarez v Aldo come from?

The UFC appear to want him defend his belt in the division he holds the title, for the first time, following two fights outside the division where he holds the title.

Just meant that a potential 145/155 superfight is off the cards if McGregor loses to Aldo, PPV #s wise no one will buy it whereas if McGregor fights Alvarez first he's guaranteed 2 massive pay days for himself and the UFC.

TimRiggins

wonderfullife wrote: »

Conor does hold a lot of the Aces but he'd be wise not to underestimate Ari Emmanuel (new co-owner). I'm sure most of you are familiar with Jeremy Pivens portrayal in Entourage based on the real guy.

But he's far more ruthless in real life. And, to be fair, Lorenzo Fertitta proved himself pretty cut-throat too.

Conor is far and away the biggest draw in the sport but his leverage is reduced for milestone events.

UFC 200 and UFC 205 are milestone events that the UFC probably feels does 1 million PPV buys irrespective of Conor headlining - purely by virtue of the historic element of the cards.

The real question is do the UFC want a landmark 2 million+ PPV event at MSG.

I think it's very possible if they stack the card roughly like this:

Conor v Eddie (Champion v Champion match - Conor retains FW belt)
Joanna v Karolina
Lawler v Cerrone
Weidman v Romero
Rockhold v Jacare


That, to me, is about the best they can do with the available, fit talent.

You could re-jig that order somewhat, but with those fights i'd definitely want Conor headlining and the all-Polish title fight co-headlining, for a number of reasons. A chance to further enhance womens MMA on a global stage and the fact that NY has a simply massive Polish population.

That would be the highest selling PPV of all time and come very close to pushing through that 2 million barrier.

DC v Rumble wouldn't look out of place on that card either or Cruz v Cody but it's doubtful.

The Middleweight tournament with Weidman, Rockhold, Romero, Jacare would be pretty epic and then have a fun fan fight with Cowboy and Robbie, leading into the 2 title shots at the top of the card.

The UFC want Weidman against Jacare and Rochhold against Romero. Rockhold and Jacare have already have a 5 round main event would not feel right to see them compete over 3 now.

darced

This post has been deleted.

wonderfullife

TimRiggins wrote: »

The UFC want Weidman against Jacare and Rochhold against Romero. Rockhold and Jacare have already have a 5 round main event would not feel right to see them compete over 3 now.

well according to sources, Weidman v Romero is very close to a Bout Agreement and Rockhold was offered Jacare and has turned it down over not being offered enough money. If the UFC come back with a better offer, then it'll be on.

That's the most reliable info coming out of the usual reliable connected journos.

The fact Conor hasn't defended the belt yet depends how you look at the situation:

Jose Aldo twice went over 12 months between defending - twice. Injuries and questionable pull outs.

Cain Velasquez went 18 months between his 2nd and 3rd defence.

It's not even 10 months since Conor won the belt.

Now, the difference CLEARLY is that Conor fought twice since winning the belt and Cain/Jose were inactive.

There's very few credible contenders at Light Heavy once you look past Jon Jones. You've got Alex coming back from a lay-off, Rumble (who DC has already beat), Bader (lost to Rumble and Glover).....

let's imagine DC takes a couple of money fights at Heavyweight.... i wouldn't want him stripped, on the basis there are no credible contenders in his own division.

Credible contenders need to be present.

The 2 most credible contenders at FW are Aldo and Holloway - both of whom Conor has defeated.

Let them fight each other and have a true number one contender.

If Conor fights Eddie in November he'll most likely be fit to go again by March latest - which will be 13 months since winning the belt. Same as Aldo has done twice in the past.

This idea that the division is "being held up" is a nonsense. It implies a stack of contenders sitting around waiting. That's not the case. There's 2 credible contenders and Anthony Pettis who is an arguable case.

wonderfullife

A source known to be well connected has today revealed the following:

Conor v Eddie hold-up in announcing fight is Conor refusal to vacate FW belt, and has told UFC he will defend it early 2017. Money and bout agreed.

and

Conor turned down movie role to fight at MSG.

Saipanne

wonderfullife wrote: »

A source known to be well connected has today revealed the following:

Conor v Eddie hold-up in announcing fight is Conor refusal to vacate FW belt, and has told UFC he will defend it early 2017. Money and bout agreed.

and

Conor turned down movie role to fight at MSG.

Who is the source?

darced

This post has been deleted.

akelly02

wonderfullife wrote: »

well according to sources, Weidman v Romero is very close to a Bout Agreement and Rockhold was offered Jacare and has turned it down over not being offered enough money. If the UFC come back with a better offer, then it'll be on.

That's the most reliable info coming out of the usual reliable connected journos.

The fact Conor hasn't defended the belt yet depends how you look at the situation:

Jose Aldo twice went over 12 months between defending - twice. Injuries and questionable pull outs.

Cain Velasquez went 18 months between his 2nd and 3rd defence.

It's not even 10 months since Conor won the belt.

Now, the difference CLEARLY is that Conor fought twice since winning the belt and Cain/Jose were inactive.

There's very few credible contenders at Light Heavy once you look past Jon Jones. You've got Alex coming back from a lay-off, Rumble (who DC has already beat), Bader (lost to Rumble and Glover).....

let's imagine DC takes a couple of money fights at Heavyweight.... i wouldn't want him stripped, on the basis there are no credible contenders in his own division.

Credible contenders need to be present.

The 2 most credible contenders at FW are Aldo and Holloway - both of whom Conor has defeated.

Let them fight each other and have a true number one contender.

If Conor fights Eddie in November he'll most likely be fit to go again by March latest - which will be 13 months since winning the belt. Same as Aldo has done twice in the past.

This idea that the division is "being held up" is a nonsense. It implies a stack of contenders sitting around waiting. That's not the case. There's 2 credible contenders and Anthony Pettis who is an arguable case.

Aldo is the number one contender, he has the interim belt.its that simple really.Now conor just fight aldo for a unification bout that he clearly deserves and then on to the lightweight division

wonderfullife

Saipanne wrote: »

Who is the source?

@TalkMMA on twitter. Not sure his real name.

He's followed by every journo and correctly scooped Al Iaquinta v Thiago Alves announcement before everyone else.

He's had a lot of successful scoops before so he's gotta have some sort of contacts high up in Zuffa.

hatrickpatrick

wonderfullife wrote: »

Conor v Eddie hold-up in announcing fight is Conor refusal to vacate FW belt, and has told UFC he will defend it early 2017. Money and bout agreed.

So this is another case of a McGregor vs UFC showdown over process? I don't like the sound of that to be honest. If last time is anything to go by, the UFC simply don't back down regardless of how much money is on the line.

Of course, it's been said many times that under the new ownership, they might be far more commercial-minded and that Dana White may have less influence than before - but is this actually the case? There's no real evidence that the new owners would side with Conor over Dana other than assumptions and wishful thinking

What would people think if Conor were to vacate the belt, beat Alvarez at LW, and then fight to reclaim the FW belt in early 2017 while holding on to the LW belt? Would that hold the same appeal as if he were to keep the FW belt for now and win a LW belt at 205? At the end of the day, he'd still be holding two belts - and as we've seen, a delay in McGregor's career isn't necessarily a bad thing. I've heard many people say that he could easily have lost to Diaz if he'd made it to UFC 200, without that extra few weeks of training.

Outlaw Pete

Saipanne wrote: »

Who is the source?

They said they'd prefer to remain anonymous.

hatrickpatrick

wonderfullife wrote: »

@TalkMMA on twitter. Not sure his real name.

If this guy is legit... Boy oh boy.

https://twitter.com/TalkMMA/status/773534765307793409

https://twitter.com/TalkMMA/status/773542123882835968

StringerBell

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If this guy is legit... Boy oh boy.

https://twitter.com/TalkMMA/status/773534765307793409

https://twitter.com/TalkMMA/status/773542123882835968

Pulling out of what?

Easy to throw mud on twitter, not even being specific like. Reeks of ITK click-bait bollix

I see, he means title defences in general. Aldo was one of the most active champs in the UFC right up until he had a bad run of injuries dropping his average FPY his record stacks up favorably to the rest of the champs.

Dunno why we need to knock one to build another up, McGregor doesn't need to be made look good by painting another bad, he makes himself look good by his performance in the cage.

hatrickpatrick

StringerBell wrote: »

Pulling out of what?

Easy to throw mud on twitter, not even being specific like. Reeks of ITK click-bait bollix

I see, he means title defences in general. Aldo was one of the most active champs in the UFC right up until he had a bad run of injuries dropping his average FPY.

Dunno why we need to knock one to build another up

I hope he's full of sh!t on this one tbh. Unsubstantiated rumours of shenanigans get old very fast in any sport, and I certainly don't want to see a fighter like Aldo's image getting destroyed.

Seems to me that ever since Lance Armstrong's fall from grace a few years ago, everything from scraps in school playgrounds to choosing the next pope is mired by doping allegations. :pac:

wonderfullife

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I hope he's full of sh!t on this one tbh. Unsubstantiated rumours of shenanigans get old very fast in any sport, and I certainly don't want to see a fighter like Aldo's image getting destroyed.

Seems to me that ever since Lance Armstrong's fall from grace a few years ago, everything from scraps in school playgrounds to choosing the next pope is mired by doping allegations. :pac:

He's scooped all the mainstream MMA media on fight announcements in the past year, multiple times. The fact he's followed by every mainstream outlet also speaks to something.

No idea how he is connected within Zuffa but he hasn't made one dodgy call in the last year. If he says it, he tends to be sure of his info.

Aldo pulling out due to possible shenanigans (pre-USADA) isn't exactly the biggest stretch in the world to make.

The entire sport was rife with it in the TRT era.

JJayoo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If this guy is legit... Boy oh boy.

l]

About as legit as reading through YouTube comments, why post this rubbish?

wonderfullife

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

So this is another case of a McGregor vs UFC showdown over process? I don't like the sound of that to be honest. If last time is anything to go by, the UFC simply don't back down regardless of how much money is on the line.

Of course, it's been said many times that under the new ownership, they might be far more commercial-minded and that Dana White may have less influence than before - but is this actually the case? There's no real evidence that the new owners would side with Conor over Dana other than assumptions and wishful thinking

What would people think if Conor were to vacate the belt, beat Alvarez at LW, and then fight to reclaim the FW belt in early 2017 while holding on to the LW belt? Would that hold the same appeal as if he were to keep the FW belt for now and win a LW belt at 205? At the end of the day, he'd still be holding two belts - and as we've seen, a delay in McGregor's career isn't necessarily a bad thing. I've heard many people say that he could easily have lost to Diaz if he'd made it to UFC 200, without that extra few weeks of training.

ps. Conor won't vacate anything.

He'll either hold on to it or be stripped.

He firmly meant it when he said there's no way in hell he vacates his title. It would be a huge story if they strip the biggest star in the sport, especially one who is so active and bringing the company in $180 million in the last 3 fights.

newbbieb

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I hope he's full of sh!t on this one tbh. Unsubstantiated rumours of shenanigans get old very fast in any sport, and I certainly don't want to see a fighter like Aldo's image getting destroyed.

Seems to me that ever since Lance Armstrong's fall from grace a few years ago, everything from scraps in school playgrounds to choosing the next pope is mired by doping allegations. :pac:

Its hardly a surprising allegation for Aldo given the whole dropping pee,arresting tester situation.

hatrickpatrick

I'm not saying it's surprising, I'm just saying that unsubstantiated rumours in sport are becoming a real bore. If he has evidence, then come out and say it - otherwise stop spreading rumours just to stir sh!t up.

It's not that I believe there were shenanigans one way or another, I'm just sick of the "nudge nudge wink" stuff going on across the sporting world when it comes to tweets like this. If you've got an allegation to make, come out and make it - dancing around it to deliberately stir up speculation is pathetic.

And yes, I do realise that I have unwittingly contributed to that by responding to the tweets in this thread :pac:

wonderfullife

JJayoo wrote: »

About as legit as reading through YouTube comments, why post this rubbish?

you can't compare Youtube comment section "nate won 1,2,3,4,5 conor McTapper ran the whole fight" and "Lord Conor McGoat sees stiffness" to a guy on twitter who CORRECTLY scooped big fight announcements before the mainstream MMA media.

It's incomparable.

The fact he gets cited by the Mainstream MMA media shows he's at least somewhat credible.

Doesn't mean everything he says is gospel but it's not a comparable thing to Youtube comments.

hatrickpatrick

wonderfullife wrote: »

you can't compare Youtube comment section "nate won 1,2,3,4,5 conor McTapper ran the whole fight" and "Lord Conor McGoat sees stiffness" to a guy on twitter who CORRECTLY scooped big fight announcements before the mainstream MMA media.

It's incomparable.

The fact he gets cited by the Mainstream MMA media shows he's at least somewhat credible.

Doesn't mean everything he says is gospel but it's not a comparable thing to Youtube comments.

I'm not criticising his fight predictions, I'm just saying that I'm personally fed up with seeing people making thinly veiled doping / other shenanigans allegations without substantiating them. It's reached epidemic proportions since Armstrong, literally every major sporting event seems to be hit by allegations - without proof or evidence ever being provided - of doping, match fixing, bribery, etc etc etc.

Maybe this kind of stuff is genuinely just rife in competitive sport these days, but you'd think if it was that people would be able to provide some sort of citation to back up their comments. Take the Conlon fight in the Olympics for instance - that had actual evidence to suggest that the result was dodgy, from many boxing experts weighing in on it to the fact that Nikitin was too banged up to compete in his next fight.

What I'm getting sick of is the "I supposedly know something, so I'm going to vaguely allude to it without anything to back up my comments, and let the internet rumour mill put the pieces together" stuff. It's happening in sport all over the place at this stage.

Billy86

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

StringerBell wrote: »

Pulling out of what?

Easy to throw mud on twitter, not even being specific like. Reeks of ITK click-bait bollix

I see, he means title defences in general. Aldo was one of the most active champs in the UFC right up until he had a bad run of injuries dropping his average FPY.

Dunno why we need to knock one to build another up

I hope he's full of sh!t on this one tbh. Unsubstantiated rumours of shenanigans get old very fast in any sport, and I certainly don't want to see a fighter like Aldo's image getting destroyed.

Seems to me that ever since Lance Armstrong's fall from grace a few years ago, everything from scraps in school playgrounds to choosing the next pope is mired by doping allegations. :pac:

And only right too, given how much efforts people (both those involved in the doping and fans alike) have gone out of their way to pretend it isn't rife in most if not all competitive sports. Just look at soccer, especially Spain where a judge demanded that all the blood samples found in the cycling case that were for other sports be destroyed immediately before they could be looked at.

darced

This post has been deleted.

finglashoop

If conor is stripped fights alvarez and goes back to fight aldo may be the easiest route. Cant see him giving it up and be surprised if dana backs down.

Either way he can fight both in any order and if he wins both he has two belts

BOHtox

joshrogan wrote: »

Just meant that a potential 145/155 superfight is off the cards if McGregor loses to Aldo, PPV #s wise no one will buy it whereas if McGregor fights Alvarez first he's guaranteed 2 massive pay days for himself and the UFC.

If Aldo beats McGregor what's to stop Aldo fighting Alvarez to hold both belts at once?