Official Conor McGregor thread (part 5) *Read Mod Note in Post 1*

EagererBeaver

sonofenoch wrote: »

This thread makes me want to cry at times.

Asks a specific question about Ferguson. Gets answer. Extrapolates this into anti McGregor conspiracy.

Ash.J.Williams

Zero-Cool wrote: »

UFC official account even getting in on the action

https://twitter.com/ufc/status/947917053679230976

Retweet then back off then PROFIT

EagererBeaver

EagererBeaver wrote: »

sonofenoch wrote: »

This thread makes me want to cry at times.

Asks a specific question about Ferguson. Gets answer. Extrapolates this into anti McGregor conspiracy.

sonofenoch

EagererBeaver wrote: »

sonofenoch wrote: »

This thread makes me want to cry at times.

Asks a specific question about Ferguson. Gets answer. Extrapolates this into anti McGregor conspiracy.

It's the official Conor McGregor thread

the initial post discounted his chance against Khabib irrefutably .........Ferguson can't beat him because 'he doesn't have the striking power to bother him'


to not acknowledge McGregor does at least have that can't be anything but agenda

pudzey101

Will we see mcgregor fight in 2018 ?

EagererBeaver

The fact it's the McGregor thread means you can just accuse people of having an agenda? Interesting view on the purpose of the thread.

Ffs, you can't logically draw a line from "Ferguson can't bother him striking" to "McGregor can bother him striking" simply because McGregor is a better striker than Ferguson. There's no equivalence in there. And then to convince yourself that that adds up to an agenda.

LollipopJimmy

pudzey101 wrote: »

Will we see mcgregor fight in 2018 ?

Definitely, but most likely in the forge

sonofenoch

EagererBeaver wrote: »

The fact it's the McGregor thread means you can just accuse people of having an agenda? Interesting view on the purpose of the thread.

Ffs, you can't logically draw a line from "Ferguson can't bother him striking" to "McGregor can bother him striking" simply because McGregor is a better striker than Ferguson. There's no equivalence in there. And then to convince yourself that that adds up to an agenda.

"Nate broke Conor in two rounds, he wouldn't make it out of the first with Khabib. He'd be walked down, mauled and give his back again"

Where's the equivalence there then? the Diaz fight and what Khabib will do?

notwithstanding the fact there was a 2nd fight (ignored)

why you singling out what I posted unless you share the same agenda....and yes I can accuse have you read this and all the other posts on these treads Ffs

dashoonage

fitzparker

JohnMc1 wrote: »

The marketing gimmick for him in Boxing is that he's a reigning UFC Champion. That's the big draw for him in Boxing "How would a UFC Champion do in Boxing?" If he's not a Champion those opportunities will dry up faster than Rhonda's acting career once she lost her belt.

The marketing Gimmick is HE IS Conor McGregor, point blank. ask anyone in the boxing or MMA game would they rather fight Conor Mcgregor or the No1 contender in the division and Mcgregor will be busy the rest of his career. regardless of titles,belts etc, HE IS the money fight, boxing or MMA champion or not.

eg, in MMA, Darren Till for example, on the cusp of a title shot, if he was offered "exhibition" Mcgregor or title shot V woodley he would take MCG every day,

same with GGG or Canelo, rematch against each other or MCgregor. Day Day to the rematch.

as would 100% of boxing and MMA roster.

End of the day for anyone in the world $$$ is the bottom line, would you rather have a shiny belt in a box room or full pocket in a mansion?

Khabib's pre-UFC record is very padded. Well into his pro career - when he had 10+ fights to his name - he was fighting 0-2 guys. 1-1 guys. In his 15th pro fight he fought a guy with zero pro fights.

Honestly I think he is overrated and another product of the marketing machine.

Mellor

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

You won't fight him or Tony because you're afraid of a third L in 4 fights and see Nate as the easier pay day.

Wouldn't it be the 2nd loss in 4 fights seeing as is 2-1 in his last 3 fights (no matter which 3 you count).

Deleted User wrote: »

The UFC titles are becoming a joke already but if they start making interm champs defend their title that is just even more ridiculous.

They had people defending Interim titles as long as interim titles existed. Arlovski, Sylvia, Big Nog, Frank Mir, Barao.
Shows how important HW was for their numbers back in the day

walshb

I would pick Conor to beat Khabib...

Few ifs.......he's neater, faster and rangier. I think he could time him, slow the pace and strike him out of there....Neatness and clinic-ism win out.

Mellor

Deleted User wrote: »

Khabib's pre-UFC record is very padded. Well into his pro career - when he had 10+ fights to his name - he was fighting 0-2 guys. 1-1 guys. In his 15th pro fight he fought a guy with zero pro fights.

That's the nature of fighting in Russia.
Does it mean his early record is padded? Yes.
Does a padded record mean he isn't legit? No. He can only beat whoever they put in front of him.

jcd5971

Mellor wrote:

That's the nature of fighting in Russia. Does it mean his early record is padded? Yes. Does a padded record mean he isn't legit? No. He can only beat whoever they put in front of him.

Khabib is a monster on the ground.
But he is ponderous on the feet.

I could easily see McGregor being taken down and grinder into oblivion for 5 or submitted.
I could also see Khabib getting slept handily on the feet.

Kinda why I'd like to see the damn fight happen.

callaway92

Deleted User wrote: »

Khabib's pre-UFC record is very padded. Well into his pro career - when he had 10+ fights to his name - he was fighting 0-2 guys. 1-1 guys. In his 15th pro fight he fought a guy with zero pro fights.

Honestly I think he is overrated and another product of the marketing machine.

Not sure how you can say that on the back of his performances so far in the UFC.

Mellor

jcd5971 wrote: »

Mellor wrote:

That's the nature of fighting in Russia. Does it mean his early record is padded? Yes. Does a padded record mean he isn't legit? No. He can only beat whoever they put in front of him.

Khabib is a monster on the ground.
But he is ponderous on the feet.

I could easily see McGregor being taken down and grinder into oblivion for 5 or submitted.
I could also see Khabib getting slept handily on the feet.

Kinda why I'd like to see the damn fight happen.

I agree completely tbh.
My point was simply that the soft record doesn't affect his ability. He's as good as he his regardless of who he fought. He can only beat whoever is in front of him.
On UFC performances alone he is stellar.

VW 1

Khabib was rocked by Johnson before he got it to the ground, conor definitely has the tools to beat him with his technique or precision. If it goes past the first with khabibs relentless pressure I can't see conor keeping it off the floor or having the gas to keep back peddling and fighting from a defensive point of view.

dashoonage

dulux99

Khabib doesn’t land every takedown he goes for, and people can get up from below him – Abel Trujillo kept getting up when Khabib took him down for instance. McGregor has got good TDD and is good at getting up from bottom, but my fear would be that the energy he’d expend by A.) fighting the takedown and B.) getting up from bottom, would eventually catch up with him and he’d lose all the pop from his shots and eventually get finished late or lose a decision. He would need to go into the camp of all camps to prepare for Khabib IMO, but it is doable.
 
I’ve probably fancied McGregor in every one of his UFC fights to date, but I’d have to give the edge to Khabib in this one. It is THE fight though, in my eyes. A dream match up. He’s already had a career of iconic moments but if he were to beat Khabib, it would top them all in my opinion.

walshb

It's his first fight that I have heard of against a natural talented big dude....

Yes, he won FW and LW belts.......he was supposed to as far as I am concerned....two "little" men he beat...

His best win is against Diaz, and Diaz for me is just not great!

AlmightyCushion

walshb wrote: »

It's his first fight that I have heard of against a natural talented big dude....

Yes, he won FW and LW belts.......he was supposed to as far as I am concerned....two "little" men he beat...

His best win is against Diaz, and Diaz for me is just not great!

He KO'd also Aldo, a man who was undefeated for years, in 13 seconds. He TKO'd mendes, a wrestler who hits hard and people were saying was Conor's Kryptonite before the fight. He also made Alvarez look like an absolute amateur. Those are great wins. Also, before the second Diaz fight most of the experts were giving him no chance.

Urindanger

walshb wrote: »

I would pick Conor to beat Khabib...

Few ifs.......he's neater, faster and rangier. I think he could time him, slow the pace and strike him out of there....Neatness and clinic-ism win out.

I'd agree, but this isn't a boxing match.

Gonad

Think Conor knocks Khabib out myself .
Michael Johnson showed that he can be hurt and Conor is to precise with his shots.

The shots Conor was landing on Diaz in both fights would have Khabib asleep inside a round . Even when Khabib has guys down his shots although relentless are not really doing that much damage . Guys are getting back to their feet against him weather it be at he start of the next round or fighting back to their feet but they are not precise enough to keep him off

Someone like Conor it just takes one shot as he has shown in all his fights he hurts people when he lands. Apart from the Mendes fight when he was clearly not in ye best of health nobody has kept him down . IMO the Mendes off those days was a better fighter than Khabib .

ASOT

The man took multiple barboza head kicks clean and still kept coming, johnson "wobbling" him is highly exaggerated.

Ultimate Seduction

ASOT wrote: »

The man took multiple barboza head kicks clean and still kept coming, johnson "wobbling" him is highly exaggerated.

"Clean" is highly exaggerated.

Both head kicks were blocked by Khabib as far as I could see and one where just his toes clipped Khabib shoulder.

Urindanger

The fact Johnson was able to land pretty easily is far more noteworthy. I feel a lot of people are taking Joe Rogan's words as gospel again with regards to him being hurt. Joe Rogan talks as much nonsense as he does sense. I haven't seen that fight since it happened but I remember Khabib still coming forward and sticking to the gameplan. Very little evidence to say he was hurt. Conor has good power and good shot selection. There is no doubt he has the potential to hurt Khabib, but there's an argument that Khabib can hurt Conor with striking as well.

Ultimate Seduction

Urindanger wrote: »

The fact Johnson was able to land pretty easily is far more noteworthy. I feel a lot of people are taking Joe Rogan's words as gospel again with regards to him being hurt. Joe Rogan talks as much nonsense as he does sense. I haven't seen that fight since it happened but I remember Khabib still coming forward and sticking to the gameplan. Very little evidence to say he was hurt. Conor has good power and good shot selection. There is no doubt he has the potential to hurt Khabib, but there's an argument that Khabib can hurt Conor with striking as well.

Khabib with his little t-rex arms can hurt Conor with striking? Now that is nonsense.

Tazzimus

Urindanger wrote: »

The fact Johnson was able to land pretty easily is far more noteworthy. I feel a lot of people are taking Joe Rogan's words as gospel again with regards to him being hurt. Joe Rogan talks as much nonsense as he does sense. I haven't seen that fight since it happened but I remember Khabib still coming forward and sticking to the gameplan. Very little evidence to say he was hurt. Conor has good power and good shot selection. There is no doubt he has the potential to hurt Khabib, but there's an argument that Khabib can hurt Conor with striking as well.

Have you seen how sloppy his striking is?
Only way he's landing a punch is if Conor is on his back or gassed.

Standing, he'll be butchered.

walshb

Urindanger wrote: »

I'd agree, but this isn't a boxing match.

Striking is not boxing either...