Official Conor McGregor thread (part 3) *Updated Warning in 1st Post Re:Boxing match

Saipanne

wonderfullife wrote: »

It says more for a lot of your reactions that you're focusing on attacking her rather than applauding her anti-bullying stand. Goes to show the "alt-right" is creeping into Ireland, sad really.

I don't care if she's a socialist or not. I care that her message was standing up to bullying by an incoming President who has spent his entire life bullying people.

Attack the message not the Messenger. And her message was a beautiful one.

Conor v Streep in Rizin I suppose. Japan loves that sh1t.

Where does she stand on grown men sleeping with thirteen year olds?

Subcomandante Marcos

Saipanne wrote: »

Where does she stand on grown men sleeping with thirteen year olds?

He didn't "sleep with" her. He drugged and raped a child and she gave him a standing ovation.

Saipanne

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

He didn't "sleep with" her. He drugged and raped a child and she gave him a standing ovation.

Indeed. I'm sure there's a valid reason for her adulation though. Let's see...

wonderfullife

Saipanne wrote: »

Where does she stand on grown men sleeping with thirteen year olds?

I suppose it was inevitable Roman Polanski would end up in a Conor McGregor thread some day.

I don't know where she stands on it.

We're going to be all shifted over to the Politics forum if we keep at this though. My general point was simply:

1) she didn't attack MMA. It simply ended in "Arts" which she needed for her next sentence to make sense.

2) Her message was anti-bullying and should be universally applauded.

3) Kavanagh and Dana sticking the boot in slagging her off for her age, upbringing and politics achieves nothing but negative headlines.

JohnMc1

wonderfullife wrote: »

It says more for a lot of your reactions that you're focusing on attacking her rather than applauding her anti-bullying stand. Goes to show the "alt-right" is creeping into Ireland, sad really.

I don't care if she's a socialist or not. I care that her message was standing up to bullying by an incoming President who has spent his entire life bullying people.

Attack the message not the Messenger. And her message was a beautiful one.

Conor v Streep in Rizin I suppose. Japan loves that sh1t.

Liberals love claiming to be anti-bullying, but they're the biggest bullies out there. Look at the Liberal business that went "If you voted for Trump. We don't want your business." No Conservative run one did that when Obama won.

And let's not forget the Identity politics the Left loves so much. Disagree with them and you're labelled a racist, sexist, homophobe, xenophobe,Alt-Right, etc. That is bullying people into silence and submission.

Clear the log from your eye before trying to remove the speck from your neighbours.

JohnMc1

wonderfullife wrote: »

I suppose it was inevitable Roman Polanski would end up in a Conor McGregor thread some day.

I don't know where she stands on it.

She gave the scumbag a standing ovation. Only a fool would not know where she stands on it.

EagererBeaver

wonderfullife wrote: »

Remember, the first fight set the PPV record of 4.6 million.

His next fight against Berto did 400,000.

There's absolutely no disputing that a fight with Conor does far more PPV's than a Pac rematch.

That's not to say "Floyd needs Conor" but clearly he's the biggest money fight Floyd can make (by a mile).

50% drop off from the first fight for May-Pac 2 and it still sells 700k more than any UFC pay per view in history. Spin the line that Pacquiao was injured, has recovered and looked more than decent since his comeback and I think you get 50% of the first fight pretty handily.

So yes, there's plenty of disputing that a fight with your new best friend sells more. You have literally no evidence to back up your claim of "no disputing" whatsoever.

Lukker-

EagererBeaver wrote: »

This is rubbish.

The only reason Floyd is entertaining the mere speculation of it is money. Same for McGregor. If Floyd wants to keep boxing he could click his fingers and have a Pacquiao rematch organised immediately. He's still the biggest draw in boxing and is a long way from needing to "stay relevant".

I dunno about that, the Paquaiao fight essentially killed boxing. It highlighted everything wrong with the sport. His "final" fight barely broke 500k PPV. Conor's broken through to the younger generation in a way that Mayweather can only dream of.

wonderfullife

EagererBeaver wrote: »

50% drop off from the first fight for May-Pac 2 and it still sells 700k more than any UFC pay per view in history. Spin the line that Pacquiao was injured, has recovered and looked more than decent since his comeback and I think you get 50% of the first fight pretty handily.

So yes, there's plenty of disputing that a fight with your new best friend sells more. You have literally no evidence to back up your claim of "no disputing" whatsoever.

You've no evidence a Pacman rematch does 2.3 million buys and you're, imo, delusional to believe it.

Floyd is gonna go from 400k to 2.3 million? People were up in arms about the absolute travesty of a fight Pacman was.

You're being very optimistic that a rematch could reach 2.3 million buys.

Conversely, "my new best friend" has 5 consecutive PPV's over 850,000 and his last 4 all cleared 1 million.

The interest in a crossover Floyd fight would be huge. People who know far more than me, and whose opinions i respect far more than your drivel, estimate that Floyd v Conor easily surpasses 3 million buys and easily outsells a Pacman rematch.

I'm talking FrontRowBrian, Dave Meltzer and others.

Everyone attacks the person and not the message. Attacking Streep instead of dissecting her message. Attacking her giving Polanski a round of applause yet don't attack Conor for being pictured giving David Byrne big hugs and the latter most certainly was responsible for more heartache than Polanski ever caused - that girl he sexually assaulted asked for people to publicly forgive him - or for that matter Kavanagh/others ties with the Bahrain Royal Family, guilty of human rights abuses..

Anyway, I'm not wasting any more of my time in here.

Lukker-

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Liberals love claiming to be anti-bullying, but they're the biggest bullies out there. Look at the Liberal business that went "If you voted for Trump. We don't want your business." No Conservative run one did that when Obama won.

And let's not forget the Identity politics the Left loves so much. Disagree with them and you're labelled a racist, sexist, homophobe, xenophobe,Alt-Right, etc. That is bullying people into silence and submission.

Clear the log from your eye before trying to remove the speck from your neighbours.

Save this sh*t for Politics Café honestly it pains me to read about Liberals, Trump, the alt right in a f*cking MMA forum thread about Conor McGregor. Have to listen to that sh*t everywhere else, not here please.

harney

How much would the UFC think they are entitled to if the boxing match went ahead?

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Liberals love claiming to be anti-bullying, but they're the biggest bullies out there. Look at the Liberal business that went "If you voted for Trump. We don't want your business." No Conservative run one did that when Obama won.

I'm pretty sure there was a doctor in one of the southern US states that had a sign up stating you couldn't enter if you voted Democrat/Obama.

*edit* In Florida, but yea it's the left that are scum.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/04/02/Doctor-doesnt-want-to-treat-Obama-voters/UPI-64291270255237/?st_rec=9621386053200

Depp

harney wrote: »

How much would the UFC think they are entitled to if the boxing match went ahead?

no way to know really but id imagine it would be at least 50%, most likely more, with conor under contract they hold all the cards unfortunately

harney

Depp wrote: »

no way to know really but id imagine it would be at least 50%, most likely more, with conor under contract they hold all the cards unfortunately

Ouch, would that include ppv numbers also? If not, I guess he would make a killing if the UFC publicity machine got behind him.

sonofenoch

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Liberals love claiming to be anti-bullying, but they're the biggest bullies out there. Look at the Liberal business that went "If you voted for Trump. We don't want your business." No Conservative run one did that when Obama won.

And let's not forget the Identity politics the Left loves so much. Disagree with them and you're labelled a racist, sexist, homophobe, xenophobe,Alt-Right, etc. That is bullying people into silence and submission.

Clear the log from your eye before trying to remove the speck from your neighbours.

That's the thing about the left, they don't just have opinions they also have to give you yours........there's a far right but the left can never go too far

moneyman

Absolute mess of a thread. I don't always agree with wonderfullife but he's right here.

And the political point scoring of posters here is embarrassing. Take it to the politics forum please, nobody wants to hear your constant whinging and whining about the left (or anyone else).

CatFromHue

Mellor wrote: »

If anything, I considered the fact that she single out MMA alongside NFL as the only things left, ahead of all the other mainstream sports as a sign of progress.

I've just looked back at what she actually said and you're right. She only mentioned MMA due to its popularity and is in no way having a go at it.

Thank you, Hollywood foreign press. Just to pick up on what Hugh Laurie said. You and all of us in this room, really, belong to the most vilified segments in American society right now. Think about it. Hollywood, foreigners, and the press. But who are we? And, you know, what is Hollywood anyway? It's just a bunch of people from other places.

I was born and raised and created in the public schools of New Jersey. Viola [Davis] was born in a sharecropper's cabin in South Carolina, and grew up in Central Falls, Rhode Island. Sarah Paulson was raised by a single mom in Brooklyn. Sarah Jessica Parker was one of seven or eight kids from Ohio. Amy Adams was born in Italy. Natalie Portman was born in Jerusalem. Where are their birth certificates? And the beautiful Ruth Negga was born in Ethiopia, raised in -- no, in Ireland, I do believe. And she's here nominated for playing a small town girl from Virginia. Ryan Gosling, like all the nicest people, is Canadian. And Dev Patel was born in Kenya, raised in London, is here for playing an Indian raised in Tasmania.

Hollywood is crawling with outsiders and foreigners. If you kick 'em all out, you'll have nothing to watch but football and mixed martial arts, which are not the arts. They gave me three seconds to say this. An actor's only job is to enter the lives of people who are different from us and let you feel what that feels like. And there were many, many, many powerful performances this year that did exactly that, breathtaking, passionate work.

If you get rid of Hollywood, which is the point she's making, you only have NFL and MMA to watch.

I personally wouldn't really consider sport as part of the arts.

Gamebred

McGregor made a cameo there alongside Paddy Holohan on tv3 Jobstown programme.

Mellor

Saipanne wrote: »

The 2011 census, I think Limerick was the highest main city. One of the highest anyway. It should be online.

Not according to this. Donegal, Wexford, Dublin inner west, Connemara, NW Kerry and most of the midlands all had higher rates of unemployment

https://irelandafternama.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/unemprate_m920101.jpg

wonderfullife wrote: »

Streep isn't even that rich. Her net worth is apparently $40 million. Conor claims to be worth more yet Streep donates over $1.5 million per year.

She'll also keep earning millions into her 80s. Conor's money career is moer limited.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Those gloves Floyd was complaining about having to wear against Dela Hoya, you can be assured would be precisely the kind of gloves he would want to fight Conor wearing, as they would reduce his chance of being hit by him and also drastically reduce his chances of being hurt by by him.

I could open the video you posted in work.

I might be missing something, as I only know the basics about gloves. But how would that reduces Mayweather's chances of being hit? or being hurt?

wonderfullife wrote: »

Is 8oz the lowest a sanctioning body can allow in boxing? Is there any way they could sanction the use of hybrid 5oz/6oz gloves for this contest?

The could put on a fight with 6ox hybrid gloves. But it wouldn't be officially an MMA or a boxing fight. So no belts on the line.

wonderfullife wrote: »

Question is how many PPV's does a Pacman rematch do?

It woulds still be in the top 5 boxing PPVs of all time imo, which are to date. Ahead of every UFC PPV.

There's absolutely no disputing that a fight with Conor does far more PPV's than a Pac rematch.

I'd dispute that.
It's not a given either way. No way we can say McGregor walks it.
I remember you predicted UFC 205 does 2.5 million. I haven't seen number yet, but it was nowhere near that. Historically, the mega events that were expected to sell records, have failed to hit the mark.

wonderfullife wrote: »

2) Her message was anti-bullying and should be universally applauded

You keep saying that, but it's not true. She didn't mention bullying once. Nothing in her speech suggested she was taking about bullying. She was equating illegal immigrants with non-americans working in hollywood. It was a dumb point.
Her message was anti-Trump. Pretending it was about anything else is silly.

CatFromHue

her speech covered a number of things

There was one performance this year that stunned me. It sank its hooks in my heart. Not because it was good. There was nothing good about it. But it was effective and it did its job. It made its intended audience laugh and show their teeth. It was that moment when the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter, someone he outranked in privilege, power, and the capacity to fight back. It kind of broke my heart when I saw it. I still can't get it out of my head because it wasn't in a movie. It was real life.

And this instinct to humiliate, when it's modeled by someone in the public platform, by someone powerful, it filters down into everybody's life, because it kind of gives permission for other people to do the same thing. Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence. When the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose.

This brings me to the press. We need the principled press to hold power to account, to call them on the carpet for every outrage.That's why our founders enshrined the press and its freedoms in our constitution. So I only ask the famously well-heeled Hollywood Foreign Press and all of us in our community to join me in supporting the committee to protect journalists. Because we're going to need them going forward. And they'll need us to safeguard the truth.

One more thing. Once when I was standing around on the set one day whining about something, we were going to work through supper, or the long hours or whatever, Tommy Lee Jones said to me, isn't it such a privilege, Meryl, just to be an actor. Yeah, it is. And we have to remind each other of the privilege and the responsibility of the act of empathy. We should all be very proud of the work Hollywood honors here tonight.

wonderfullife

Mellor wrote: »

You keep saying that, but it's not true. She didn't mention bullying once. Nothing in her speech suggested she was taking about bullying. She was equating illegal immigrants with non-americans working in hollywood. It was a dumb point.
Her message was anti-Trump. Pretending it was about anything else is silly.

This bit:

It was that moment when the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter, someone he outranked in privilege, power, and the capacity to fight back.

When someone mocks a person they outrank in power and capacity to fight back, it's called bullying. She went on to describe how a person in a position of power bullying someone sets a bad example and enables/emboldens everyone to do it.

That message should be universally applauded and it just saddened me that prominent members of the MMA community, such as Kav and Dana, chose to retaliate with abuse instead of commending her speech.

Dana White spoke more on Meryl Streep publicly than he has on Cody East and Michael Graves. So he's comfortable attacking a liberal actress yet not comfortable attacking & sacking his own fighters for being domestic abusers?

John Kavanagh spoke more on Streep in his rant than he ever has on the human rights abuses committed by the Bahrain Royal Family, whom he was only too happy to turn a blind eye and take their $$$.

They want to attack an elderly actress for using her platform to deliver a selfless speech yet have nothing to say about domestic violence and human rights abuses by people making them $.

Ok. Cool principles lads. Really speaking up for the little guy there. At least Streep tried.

J Mysterio

Kavanagh is not going to be pleased when he reads this.

Gamebred

Will be the last time Wonder if welcomed to SBG.

wonderfullife

J Mysterio wrote: »

Kavanagh is not going to be pleased when he reads this.

He couldn't (and shouldn't) give a monkeys what I (or any other) random person thinks.

Anyway the last laugh is with him. I've bought many copies of his book in 2016 with the little bit of money I was able to cobble together for presents.

wonderfullife

Gamebred wrote: »

Will be the last time Wonder if welcomed to SBG.

I'm sure there will be an offer to "demonstrate" the effectiveness of his guillotine from closed guard.

Django99

Interim lightweight title now official for 209 between Khabib and Ferguson. Guess we won't see McGregor for a few months.

wonderfullife

Django99 wrote: »

Interim lightweight title now official for 209 between Khabib and Ferguson. Guess we won't see McGregor for a few months.

I wonder will Conor stay ready in case Wonderboy or Ferguson gets injured. Doubtful I suppose but he'd be able to demand a huge fight purse for a late-notice fight.

Mellor

wonderfullife wrote: »

This bit:

It was that moment when the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter, someone he outranked in privilege, power, and the capacity to fight back

When someone mocks a person they outrank in power and capacity to fight back, it's called bullying.

I respectively disagree. I've been slightly involved with kids bjj and anti-bullying. Virtually ever definition of bullying I've read (health.gov, beyondblue, etc) says that bullying is meant to be hurtful, threaten or intimidate the victim.
It's painfully obvious that Trump wasn't trying to bully that reporter. He was trying to undermine his position to get his own point across. It was in incredibly bad taste, extremely dumb, and kinda nasty - perhaps even subconscious which tells another story. But it wasn't bullying imo.

If you want to class that impression as bullying, fine. But in that case, we should really lump Streep in for that awful Irish impression she did. So bad it was offensive. :P
I also notice that various Jewish groups are up in arms over the anti-Zionist undertones in her speech. The fact that she mentioned everyone else's home country, except for Natalie Portman - who was born in Israel.

Regardless, whether we consider it bullying or not isn't the point.
Do you honestly think that Streep purely was speaking up for that reporter? That anti-bullying was her motive? Or (illegal) immigration? Come on, you are better than that. It was anti-Trump to its core and pretending it was any different is disingenuous. Had Hillary been elected I doubt she's have mentioned any of it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the diatribes directed towards her by John, Dana and whoever else. As I said we should be happy that MMA was deemed all that's left. The ones that should be offended are the NBA, MLB, NHL and Boxing.
I'd just don't understand why everyone is twisting the story to suit their agenda. Is that intelligent debate has become in 2017? The whole thing is a storm in a teacup, and it's already gotten far more inches that it warranted.

Django99

wonderfullife wrote: »

I wonder will Conor stay ready in case Wonderboy or Ferguson gets injured. Doubtful I suppose but he'd be able to demand a huge fight purse for a late-notice fight.

He would but I doubt at this stage that he's going to fight until well after the baby comes. Someone on Sherdog thinks that this means he's fighting GSP but I really doubt that.

At this point the fights to happen are the two at 209, and Aldo v Max. Maia against the winner of Woodley and Wonderboy. If we disregard Floyd (which I actually think is quite likely at this stage), he'll fight the winner of one of those title fights.

FW - unlikely he goes back here I think, Max or Aldo would have to move up to get a rematch

LW - Khabib could explode in popularity with a win. He's playing the part well so far, if he gets his hand on an interim belt he could ramp up playing the heel. Possibly a huge fight.

Tony doesn't seem to interested in getting involved with the promotion so I don't think McGregor will take that fight.

WW - If either Woodley or Thompson has the belt I think McGregor would fancy his chances and take the fight. If Maia has it I don't think he would. 90% chance of being tapped in round 1.

Outside of these there's GSP, a Diaz brother, Cody, and a host of other fights which would have no standing when it comes to belts or rankings but would make money. If none of the title fights interest him/make him enough money he'll go for one of these.

wonderfullife

Mellor wrote: »

I respectively disagree. I've been slightly involved with kids bjj and anti-bullying. Virtually ever definition of bullying I've read (health.gov, beyondblue, etc) says that bullying is meant to be 1. hurtful, threaten or intimidate the victim.

If you want to class that impression as bullying, fine. But in that case, we should really lump 2. Streep in for that awful Irish impression she did. So bad it was offensive. :P

I also notice that various Jewish groups are up in arms over the anti-Zionist undertones in her speech. 3. The fact that she mentioned everyone else's home country, except for Natalie Portman - who was born in Israel.

Regardless, whether we consider it bullying or not isn't the point.
Do you honestly think that Streep purely was speaking up for that reporter? That anti-bullying was her motive? Or (illegal) immigration? Come on, you are better than that. 4. It was anti-Trump to its core and pretending it was any different is disingenuous. Had Hillary been elected I doubt she's have mentioned any of it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the diatribes directed towards her by John, Dana and whoever else. As I said we should be happy that MMA was deemed all that's left. The ones that should be offended are the NBA, MLB, NHL and Boxing.

1. You say you teach a bit of kids BJJ ("a pillar of the community" as Conor said to Nate ). Would you be ok with one of the popular kids taking the mickey out of a kid with cerebral palsy in the locker rooms? Once would be understandable. But if it was repeated regularly, then it'd be bullying and you'd have to take a look at it I'm sure.

More to the point, what if the kids in your gym saw you - their teacher - mocking someone for their disability? Not a good example to set right?

Trump is not a child. He's 73 years old and it's frightening he's still behaving like the spoiled brat bully he was 60 years ago.

Kav's rant called Streep "ultra rich and ultra entitled" which is pretty close to textbook IRONY given Trump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and would be absolutely nowhere in life without the millions his daddy gave him.

2. Her impression was terrible to be sure, to be sure.

3. I did find it odd she just said Jerusalem and not Israel but that might have been out of respect for Natalie Portman herself who has been fairly outspoken and pro-Palestine & the 2-state solution.

4. It was 100% an Anti-Trump speech. Not quite a hit-job though.

What did she actually say? If she stood up there and talked about Trump cheating on his wife or grabbing women by the P***y, etc then I'd have no time for a character assassination.

She mentioned Trump "bullying"/mocking a disabled reporter. She mentioned the diversity of backgrounds of the immigrants in Hollywood. She mentioned freedom of the press.

Those are all reasonable concerns shared by the majority of American citizens. It was Anti-Trump in rhetoric but not a character assassination.


Anyway, I've no idea what example Kav and Dana are setting to anybody in responding to her speech by slagging her off and telling her to fcuk off. Absolutely embarrassing stuff. She's a 67-year-old actress and both of them went and attacked her for her political ideology and her age.

I honestly lost it when I saw JK slate her for her "privileged" childhood. For a start, he was wrong. So bloody what if her parents had a few bob and put her through good schools? How in Gods name is that a 12-year old childs fault that her parents can afford to send her to a decent secondary school? The woman held down 2 jobs while in University, including being a waitress on $4 an hour.

Pure ignorance.

I'm not going to waffle on. This ended up in a Conor McGregor thread because the Daily Star ran with "Conor McGregors Coach (tells Streep to fcuk off)."

Maybe Chael Sonnen was right when he said McGregor's Coach needs to realize he's not the star of the show.

Mellor

wonderfullife wrote: »

Would you be ok with one of the popular kids taking the mickey out of a kid with cerebral palsy in the locker rooms?

I stopped reading at this sentence.
I never once said it was ok or excused Trump.

Mellor wrote:

It was in incredibly bad taste, extremely dumb, and kinda nasty

And I when I went to copy that line I noticed you edited it out of your post.