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

Conor McGregor thread (MMA Talk Only - Read 1st Post Before Posting)

Axwell

With the recent addition of the Off-topic discussion thread, I am closing the current McGregor thread so that chat going forward can be located in the correct threads. This thread is for MMA related discussion only - any other gossip/showbiz type stories are to be discussed in the off topic thread.

Please make sure to review the updated charter before posting - there have been some amendments made in light of these changes and in posting here you are at all times expected to follow those rules and guidelines.

As before there is a strict rule on no chat to be had here about legal issues or court cases as per the charter - this is a strict no go regardless of where it has or hasn't been posted in the media it is not allowed on boards.ie at all. This is not up for debate and it has been said multiple times now.

Axwell

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

SuperSean11 wrote: »

The flock of sheep worshipping connors feet will pay

Pay who? I always need to find a dodgy stream.

dave1982

Deleted User wrote: »

Pay who? I always need to find a dodgy stream.

@danawhite he's here

[Deleted User]

dave1982 wrote: »

@danawhite he's here

We got him.

AlmightyCushion

xtal191 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Maclifeofficial/status/1360315242232705024

I'm happy to see McGregor fighting again so soon (obviously still not guaranteed) but FFS have these guys fighting someone else first. Have the re-re-match after a few more fights if you insist on having it.

weldoninhio

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I'm happy to see McGregor fighting again so soon (obviously still not guaranteed) but FFS have these guys fighting someone else first. Have the re-re-match after a few more fights if you insist on having it.

100%, is getting knocked out by Poirier after a round and a half, gonna knock off the “ring rust” and improve him enough to win a rematch?? Very doubtful.

cloudatlas

Do the fans want this re-match?

Do fans even want Conor and Pac man?

Ash.J.Williams

cloudatlas wrote: »

Do the fans want this re-match?

Do fans even want Conor and Pac man?

Definitely not pac man , cringe even hearing it mentioned

AlmightyCushion

cloudatlas wrote: »

Do the fans want this re-match?

Do fans even want Conor and Pac man?

This rematch, maybe at some stage but not now. Pacman, nope, not at all.

celticWario

Conor lost because it just wasn't the right time to win rn, Conor will beat Dustin then Khabib will come back and Conor will get revenge, then he'll defend against Dustin and Tony and go on to take on the winner of Usman and Burns to do the double again.

[Deleted User]

celticWario wrote: »

Conor lost because it just wasn't the right time to win rn, Conor will beat Dustin then Khabib will come back and Conor will get revenge, then he'll defend against Dustin and Tony and go on to take on the winner of Usman and Burns to do the double again.

I'm going to award this a 6/10.

crybaby

The thing that baffles me is how did John Kavanagh not stop Conor and say "Look the way you are doing this boxing stance, we are going to be get dismantled exactly like how we dismantled Diaz in the 2nd fight"?

They were at odds about the game plan for the Khabib fight and that they were beaten by the most obvious strategy in this fight, maybe better if McGregor went and worked with someone who would actually tell him exactly what to do?

[Deleted User]

crybaby wrote: »

The thing that baffles me is how did John Kavanagh not stop Conor and say "Look the way you are doing this boxing stance, we are going to be get dismantled exactly like how we dismantled Diaz in the 2nd fight"?

They were at odds about the game plan for the Khabib fight and that they were beaten by the most obvious strategy in this fight, maybe better if McGregor went and worked with someone who would actually tell him exactly what to do?

Maybe the problem is Conor.

Esse85

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Maybe the problem is Conor.

Exactly, I think Conor feels so badly burnt on the advice he took in preparation for the Khabib fight that he took it apon himself to train for the Dustin fight the way he wanted to, while taking into account a fight with Manny later in the year. The result is he underestimated Dustin and we all know what happened then.

The man who chases two rabbits catches none. Focus on boxing or MMA, but you can't do both.

Dtp1979

crybaby wrote: »

The thing that baffles me is how did John Kavanagh not stop Conor and say "Look the way you are doing this boxing stance, we are going to be get dismantled exactly like how we dismantled Diaz in the 2nd fight"?

They were at odds about the game plan for the Khabib fight and that they were beaten by the most obvious strategy in this fight, maybe better if McGregor went and worked with someone who would actually tell him exactly what to do?

Because Conor is surrounded by yes men. He needs to move to a team in America

yourdeadwright

Dtp1979 wrote: »

Because Conor is surrounded by yes men. He needs to move to a team in America

Where ? Which teams does he move to that will improve him at this stage ?
Which team does he not have a direct rival at ?
IV heard people say Tri Star but they haven't really had much success bar GSP .

Conor is 32 year old with 3kids and more importantly a millionaire ore than a few times over, he seems to be loving his life floating around on yachts in the med ,

Not sure he would be arsed moving somewhere the states to be training full time and grinding day in day ,Them days are well and truly gone ,

Conor has achieved what there all still chasing and thats the cash ,no ones interested in the title anymore its just the money fights,

Legend_DIT

Maybe I'm wrong here but given the amount of money/prestige Conor would bring with his clientele, would most new training gyms who want to work with Conor not also turn into yes men, in order to keep him onside?

I imagine the ones who would be prepared to treat him like every other fighter would also not touch him with a bargepole.

JJayoo

The mental gymnastics in this thread. McG only lost because (insert excuse).

He lost because Dustin dustin is better pretty simple really.

McG doesn't need people to come up with excuses he is perfectly capable of making up his own excuses

Still Ill

JJayoo wrote: »

The mental gymnastics in this thread. McG only lost because (insert excuse).

He lost because Dustin dustin is better pretty simple really.

McG doesn't need people to come up with excuses he is perfectly capable of making up his own excuses

So there's no way he could possibly beat him in a rematch? MMA doesn't work like that.
Cormier beat Stipe because he's better?
Stipe beat Cormier because he's better?
I don't see many people 'making excuses'. People are discussing the fight. It's an MMA forum. What else should they be discussing? I don't see anyone saying McGregor deserved to win. Poirier won fair and square. Better man on the night. Who knows what happens in a rematch?
I don't even think there should be an immediate rematch FWIW.

eagle eye

JJayoo wrote:

McG doesn't need people to come up with excuses he is perfectly capable of making up his own excuses

McGregor said he was beaten fair and square.

MrStuffins

eagle eye wrote: »

McGregor said he was beaten fair and square.

"I was beaten fair and square, no excuses. But here's a list of my excuses........."

eagle eye

MrStuffins wrote:

"I was beaten fair and square, no excuses. But here's a list of my excuses........."

Did he say that? Have you links to his comments?

MrStuffins

eagle eye wrote: »

Did he say that? Have you links to his comments?

I'm sure you can find them.

eagle eye

MrStuffins wrote:

I'm sure you can find them.

If you are claiming it you should be posting links.

MrStuffins

eagle eye wrote: »

If you are claiming it you should be posting links.

Tazzimus

In fairness, I heard him give reasons why he lost, as opposed to excuses.

OneLungDavy

Tazzimus wrote: »

In fairness, I heard him give reasons why he lost, as opposed to excuses.

Some people don't know the difference it seems.

Still Ill

OneLungDavy wrote: »

Some people don't know the difference it seems.

Yeah, it's like a football manager saying after a match- 'We lost tonight because we gave the opposition too much time on the ball, they were sharper than us and capitalised on our poor defending' and people saying - 'STOP MAKING EXCUSES!!'

MrStuffins

To be fair, you're right. He gave reasons as to why he lost and not excuses.

I was wrong here.

Legend_DIT

MrStuffins wrote: »

To be fair, you're right. He gave reasons as to why he lost and not excuses.

I was wrong here.

I wish more people were able to make posts like this so fair play.

hots

MrStuffins wrote: »

To be fair, you're right. He gave reasons as to why he lost and not excuses.

I was wrong here.

Jesus someone admitting they're wrong on the internet, someone frame this.