nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Official Conor McGregor thread (part 4) *Updated Warning in 1st Post Re:Boxing match

Axwell

Official Conor McGregor thread (part 3) *Updated Warning in 1st Post Re:Boxing match
The last thread was nearing the 10k post limit so here's part 4.

The same rules as the last thread apply here. People seem to have strong opinions either way when it comes to McGregor and threads here tend to get a bit heated from time to time. Please keep it civil and discuss all things Conor in a mature way.

Any name-calling, trolling, baiting, or being a general ass-hat will earn you a ban from the thread and possibly the forum.
If you have an issue with a post, please use the report post function.

Any off topic posts will be deleted.
Any "Do you even train Bro?" or "I'm an mma fan longer than you" type posts are not permitted either. They only make you look like a fool and as a result, everyone hates you. Yes everyone.

**Upate with Mayweather vs McGregor announced**

Lads consider this the one and only warning - big fight with a lot of hype around it. It brings new fans to the forum as well as the regulars so try and get along. Any trolling or nonsense and people will find themselves on a break from the forum and that applies to everyone.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

JohnMc1

glasso wrote: »

"He was a little bit over emotional there, but you sort of understand when you know his and Charlie’s relationship over the last number of years."

The only honest thing that Coach Kavanagh said!
Freudian slip?

My reaction to that is at 10:23 t0 10:57 of this video [though you can watch the rest of the video if you want

Subcomandante Marcos

PhilipsR wrote: »

**** him and his fake apology. Thought his bravado was for show but not any more. Hope he get thumped in the next fight.

December 30th. Don't be surprised motherfluffers.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BRRjK15gH9z/

Mellor

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Either way, the UFC wouldn't cut him, they'd just let his contract tick away and use the champions clause to let him rot like they did to Randy Couture and there's nothing he could do about it.

Pretty sure since then there are contractual measures to prevent that happening. They have to offer a fight within a given time limit if a fighter is available. GSP mentioned it during negations recently

[Deleted User]

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

December 30th. Don't be surprised motherfluffers.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BRRjK15gH9z/

Nate let the celebrity get to him and he thought the second fight would be as easy as the first. If Nate goes back and makes adjustments to his game I think he beats Conor easy.

Fromvert

The problem with the Diaz's though is they don't do game plans.

- Box and if a submission presents itself take it

Can't stop wrestlers from holding them against the cage/down and won't check leg kicks. Since we've seen them they havnt improved either hole in their game and they're not going to. Even guys where they'd likely have a grappling advantage they rarely engage it but will happily box.

I'd agree that if Nate adopts a heavy clinch/takedown game plan he'dlikely wear out McGregor faster than using his face to block shots. But I'm sure he won't and the third fight will depend on Mcgregor's cardio.

wonderfullife

Deleted User wrote: »

Nate let the celebrity get to him and he thought the second fight would be as easy as the first. If Nate goes back and makes adjustments to his game I think he beats Conor easy.

If I had to pick one (active) fighter to fight for my life in an 8-minute fight, I'd pick Conor without too much hesitation. He is arguably the P4P best 8-minute fighter in all of MMA and whoever he fights is in for a nightmare first round and a half. A case can be argued for Cody, Oezdemir, Rumble obviously before he retired but I'd choose Conor myself.

After the 8-minute mark he becomes vulnerable but it's foolish to think he'll be easy pickings for anyone. He's lost one first round on the scorecards in his last 19 fights (Chad Mendes). That's extremely impressive given the caliber of opposition.

It could be interesting tactically because I have a hunch Conor was genuinely uncomfortable throwing so many leg kicks and will try use the jab to set up more offence. His jab has come on leaps-and-bounds if we take the Floyd fight at face value so I could see him choosing to come in behind that as opposed to timing so many punches off the leg kicks.

The problem there is if it comes to a battle of jabs you'd have to think Nate would come out on top.

Interesting stuff. I still think it'll be Ferguson next with GSP to follow, with the Nate fight held back for when/if Conor loses a fight. The Nate fight feels like a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card for the UFC, they'd be foolish to play it now.

Mellor

Deleted User wrote: »

If Nate goes back and makes adjustments to his game I think he beats Conor easy.

If Conor sorts out his cardio he minces Nate for 5 rounds.

Unrealistic Ifs are fun.

Outlaw Pete

Some people seeing what they want to see in all this (not just on on this thread).

First of all, I'd say this deleted tweet from McGregor is a truer reflection of his mindset than what he said in the apology:

Bloke KO'd on floor bout a minute straight and ref trying to say fights not over Conor. That's when I lost it.

However, the following from Goddard is not the full truth of what occurred at all:

There has been the notion and belief of the fact that I had pushed Conor McGregor when this factually and categorically untrue – please again watch the video and you will see very clearly that I have my arms in between Charlie and Conor whilst trying to tell Charlie to return to his corner and let me make my determination, pushing fighters, or anyone unnecessarily so is simply not in my nature, or protocol of conduct to do so. It is then again, clearly, that you will see that Conor McGregor who put his hands on my chest to shove me, I then turn and walk away to go back and check on the condition of John Redmond.

The video does not lie.

The truth is that Goddard actually walks off after telling Charlie to go his corner but then turns back around and puts HIS hands towards Conor's chest, not the other way around at all as Goddard is claiming. Conor just instinctively pushes him away. Goddard says the video doesn't lie, damn right it doesn't:

I see some users saying that McGregor pushed Goddard against Redmond. That's not true either. As when Conor pushes Goddard he actually pushes him AWAY from Redmond:

The actual contact made on Redmond (which resulted in him stumbling to his right) was not made by Conor either, nor even caused by him. It was actually caused by some guy in a suit that runs over from the other side of the octagon when he sees one of the Bellator guys holding Conor against the cage. He runs over and pushes the Bellator guy sending him backwards into Redmond:

I agree with the apology was poorly thought out but lets be clear about what he did and did not do in that cage that night.

Mellor

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The actual contact made on Redmond (which resulted in him stumbling to his right) was not made by Conor either, nor even caused by him.

Saying Conor didn't cause it because somebody else actually ran over is nonsense. EVERYTHING that happened in there, was cause my Conor being in there when he shouldn't have.

Outlaw Pete

Don't be pedantic......

As said, I was replying to comments that had been made saying McGregor had directly caused Redmond to fall over.

Mellor

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Don't be pedantic......

As said, I was replying to comments that had been made saying McGregor had directly caused Redmond to fall over.

Conor did directly cause it. The fact he was in the cage, and had to be restrained directly led to it.

If somebody has claim that Conor push Marc into John, sure that's wrong too. But I haven't seen that post, and you didn't quote it. So without that contect, your post reads very oddly.

Muahahaha

wonderfullife wrote: »

Have to agree, it seems likely the only reason he apologizes there today on the back of Audie Attar's comments is that he still intends to fight Tony December 30th.

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

December 30th. I'm telling ye lads.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BbfIx-9nljj/

December 30th is only 45 days away and he has been on the razz since the end of August. No way can I see McGregor going into the Octogan on December 30th, especially against Tony. If he does he will be vastly unprepared and will lose badly.

Gamebred

Gamb!t wrote: »

Big difference in class with Goddards statement and Mcgregors.

I'd love it if the UFC had the balls and tore up his contract as I for one wouldnt lose any sleep if I never saw him fight in UFC again.

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Who's he going to fight?

The UFC should let him rot like they've done to Couture and watch him burn through his money and disappear up his own hole.

D.Q wrote: »

He's completely and totally turned me against him anyway.

Would love to see him humbled and then would love to see him **** off.

Deleted User wrote: »

I dont care if the guy is Irish! I hope he gets the head pucked off him in his next fight.

PhilipsR wrote: »

**** him and his fake apology. Thought his bravado was for show but not any more. Hope he get thumped in the next fight.

PMSL the state of this fake outrage you'd swear hes gone and murdered a few kids get a life lads seriously.

darced

This post has been deleted.

rob316

Buddy of mine met him in Dublin on friday night they were staying in the same hotel. Said he was drunk but great with the fans took pictures, had a few jokes. no complaints

The Nal

Gamebred wrote: »

PMSL the state of this fake outrage you'd swear hes gone and murdered a few kids get a life lads seriously.

Its nuts isn't it? People losing their minds over it.

Sweet Science

Gamebred wrote: »

PMSL the state of this fake outrage you'd swear hes gone and murdered a few kids get a life lads seriously.

What he done last Friday isn't even the lowest for me anymore . Bringing Joao Carvalho into it to justify his actions was the straw that broke the camels back . What an awful thing to do . 189 seems like a lifetime ago .

billybonkers

Conor won't be on Dec 30th, its looking like Woodley and Diaz at the moment

[Deleted User]

The Nal wrote: »

Its nuts isn't it? People losing their minds over it.

Nah, just a lot more people have realised that McGregor is an arseh0le

Boom_Bap

billybonkers wrote: »

Conor won't be on Dec 30th, its looking like Woodley and Diaz at the moment

That's something I's like to see!
Woodley would have to actually have a scrap.

EagererBeaver

Boom_Bap wrote: »

billybonkers wrote: »

Conor won't be on Dec 30th, its looking like Woodley and Diaz at the moment

That's something I's like to see!
Woodley would have to actually have a scrap.

Woodley would absolutely rag doll him.

Useful.Idiot

yep, stupidest fight ever. Nate has pretty much no advantages.

The Nal

glasso wrote: »

Nah, just a lot more people have realised that McGregor is an arseh0le

Did people think he was a saint before this?

[Deleted User]

The Nal wrote: »

Did people think he was a saint before this?

I'm not sure but they're pretty sure that he's a lying arseh0le now

ardinn

Nate vs woodley will be good for Conor, break down that chin for him! As said above woodley will have to have a knock and when he realizes he basically has an angry punching bag in front of him we will go to town on Nates face!!

The Nal

glasso wrote: »

I'm not sure but they're pretty sure that he's a lying arseh0le now

Just find it both odd and amusing that people feel so let down by a cage fighter.

Tazzimus

I'll be surprised if Woodley finishes Nate on the feet, him and Nick take massive damage and still come at you throwing abuse.

DrPhilG

The Nal wrote: »

Just find it both odd and amusing that people feel so let down by a cage fighter.

What has that to do with anything? Are there certain occupations where being a ball bag is par for the course?

A lot of very eloquent and well educated fighters would no doubt take exception to that suggestion.

The Nal

DrPhilG wrote: »

What has that to do with anything? Are there certain occupations where being a ball bag is par for the course?

A lot of very eloquent and well educated fighters would no doubt take exception to that suggestion.

Replace that with footballer, rugby player, cyclist. Any sport really.

But especially in the fight game. Barely been anyone ever at the top who hasn't dropped a bollick somewhere. Whether it be behaviour like that, stupid and offending quotes, idiotic religious beliefs, sexism, drug use, rapes.......

I'd much rather see him in acting the mickey like that than failing drugs tests.

cletus

The Nal wrote: »

Replace that with footballer, rugby player, cyclist. Any sport really.

But especially in the fight game. Barely been anyone ever who hasn't dropped a bollick somewhere. Whether it be behaviour like that, stupid and offending quotes, idiotic religious beliefs, sexism, drug use, rapes.......

So we should not be disappointed by any of that behaviour? Which, by the way, in your mind seems to run quite the gamut. I would be much less disappointed if somebody expressed a silly religious beliefs than if they were convicted of rape