Official Conor McGregor Thread (READ MOD WARNING IN OP)

I think he easily should go in ahead of swanson.

Swanson faced siver too and got definitely beaten by siver in the first round and only won in the 3rd. Conor made it look easy.

Swason only decisioned poirer and conor annilated him.

Does he deserve to go any further up the ranking? Id say no as the others are crazy good but is conor better than them? Probably 1 or 2 at least imo but we will have to see in time

Beating the number 10 guy shouldn't really elevate him above in to the top 4 tbh. He did it well and was very dominant in the fight but to go from 5 to 4/3 for beating 10 doesn't make sense.

kryogen wrote: »

Beating the number 10 guy shouldn't really elevate him above in to the top 4 tbh. He did it well and was very dominant in the fight but to go from 5 to 4/3 for beating 10 doesn't make sense.

Yes it does! As per my last post?! How does it not make sense for him to go above swanson?

sdowling04

walshb wrote: »

Beating a lower ranked foe shouldn't elevate him.

Looking at Swasons past opponents you could say that Conor has faced very similar ranked opponents apart from Edger whom he got beaten badly by. His past 4 wins were Stephens, Siver, Poirier and Oliveira.

Beersmith wrote: »

Yes it does! As per my last post?! How does it not make sense for him to go above swanson?

Is it ok if I think it doesn't make sense even if it does to you?

I don't think he should go above the number 4 ranked fighter by beating the number 10 ranked fighter.

You do, Im ok with that.

paulieeye wrote: »

has this changed recently? It was my understanding that the UFC decided the rankings. Hence why so many journalists took them with a pinch of salt and why some say that the new payout under the reebok deal would be unfair?

No change, its anyways been like that. Most MMA journalists who vote IIRC.
There might be adjustments as to who votes. Adding people, taking away etc.

sdowling04 wrote: »

Wonder does Conor move up in rankings or stay at 5?
Current FW rankings:
C Aldo
1 Mendes
2 Edger
3 Lamas
4 Swanson
5 McGregor

At the very least he moves ahead of Cub who lost his last fight to Edgar. But mostly on the basis that he didn't doninate Siver like Aldo did.
I'd put him ahead of Lamas too, but some won't.

And if you want to be really obtuse about it who have mendes and lamas fought that have been top top class. Both beat cub swanson and lost to aldo. Thats about it, otherwise their records are similar to conors imo.

Edgar and aldo are the only ones likely to be better than conor now atm imo but we i do think conor could match them.

kryogen wrote: »

Is it ok if I think it doesn't make sense even if it does to you?

I don't think he should go above the number 4 ranked fighter by beating the number 10 ranked fighter.

You do, Im ok with that.

Siver used to be number 3. If he beat him then would be be ok to put him at 3 or 4?

kryogen wrote: »

Is it ok if I think it doesn't make sense even if it does to you?

I don't think he should go above the number 4 ranked fighter by beating the number 10 ranked fighter.

You do, Im ok with that.

Yeah thats fine but he did more than just beat him. Do you think he is better than swanson though? Cause thats how the rankings are made.

Mellor wrote: »

Siver used to be number 3. If he beat him then would be be ok to put him at 3 or 4?

Is this a serious question?

The rankings arent about leap frogging high ranked guys, or even just wins. It's based on ability, that's it.

I rate McGregor as better than Cub Swanson, and Lamas too. I rate Edgar and Mendes as better (even though Mendes lost, he ability showed through).
Where Siver was ranked is not irrelevant.

kryogen wrote: »

Is this a serious question?

It's a rhetorical question.
You may have missed the point.

Edit: to spell it out.
Siver ability when he was ranked 3rd, was not significantly different to when he was 10th. Or when hebfought Cub.
He's ranking doesnt affect the relative ability Connir showed by dominating him.

Mellor wrote: »

The rankings arent about leap frogging high ranked guys, or even just wins. It's based on ability, that's it.

I rate McGregor as better than Cub Swanson, and Lamas too. I rate Edgar and Mendes as better (even though Mendes list, he ability showed through).
Where Siver was ranked is not irrelevant.

Exactly. It was before rankings were around i know but imagine if people ranked on pure numbers when something like matt hamills 'win' over jon jones propelled him to a title shot

that would be weird and funny.

gallag

You can't really do MMAth, siver is getting on and a few years makes a big difference at his point.

Mellor wrote: »

It's a rhetorical question.
You may have missed the point.

So your position is that because a fighter was at one time ranked 7 places higher then he is when you beat him you should automatically be ranked where he was at his peak?

And you think I may have missed something

Brilliant, If someone is ranked 5th and they beat the guy ranked 3rd there is an obvious reason to say they should be moved up the rankings.

If someone is ranked 5th and they beat a guy who is ranked 10th, they have beaten a guy who is ranked 5 places lower then them, oh and as you have said, was once ranked 3. So they have beaten a guy on the slide and on his way out of the rankings. Some have questioned his validity as a top ten fighter as it is.

gallag wrote: »

You can't really do MMAth, siver is getting on and a few years makes a big difference at his point.

It's not like we are talking about his early fights at LW.
The relevant fights for FW have been in the last 2 years.

There's no run to say he has to go up the rankings. But if people are of the opinion he stays at 5th (or whereever), they should be able to back up why.

kryogen wrote: »

So your position is that because a fighter was at one time ranked 7 places higher then he is when you beat him you should automatically be ranked where he was at his peak?

And you think I may have missed something

Brilliant, If someone is ranked 5th and they beat the guy ranked 3rd there is an obvious reason to say they should be moved up the rankings.

If someone is ranked 5th and they beat a guy who is ranked 10th, they have beaten a guy who is ranked 5 places lower then them, oh and as you have said, was once ranked 3. So they have beaten a guy on the slide and on his way out of the rankings. Some have questioned his validity as a top ten fighter as it is.

Hardly, I said current rankings don't come into it.

Where do you put the top 5 fighters in terms of ability. Forget about wins and current rankings.

walshb

Looking at Siver the other night he looked far from special. And I don't think it was all down to Conor.

Stuxnet

Professey Chin wrote: »

Love this pass

Leg drag pass....
****ing poetry in motion

DeVore

Crazy coincidence... I'm coding a ranking system for a game right now. I literally know Kung Fu about ranking systems as a result

It *is* possible for a 5th place player to rise about a 4th placed player by beating a 10th placed player, but only if the 5th and 4th were already very very close to each other, and it depends on the system you are using of course.

The generally accepted system is the Chess ELO system. This is used far and wide now and in many major sports like basketball and baseball.

A 5th beating a 10th is expected, but not a certainty. The 5th player would get a small amount of points, not much but something. He would also escape an inactivity penalty which the fourth player might get (designed to stop the top players from just never competing again... which is what would happen at the top if they weren't allowed to be leapfrogged).

Think about that for a second... if we never allowed 5th to over take 4th unless he beat a higher ranked player/fighter.... and if 4th 3rd 2nd and 1st just couldn't/refused to play/fight then 5th could never move up!

Sorry, I'm kinda deep into this stuff atm.

Exactly and swanson got his ass kicked by frankie which could slide him slighty down which mcgregor kicked ass.

[Deleted User]

walshb wrote: »

Looking at Siver the other night he looked far from special. And I don't think it was all down to Conor.

Cerrone also destroyed Siver but other than that he's managed to get a lot of wins and looked good against Swanson. The aggressive kickboxing style seems to cause him a lot of problems

walshb

riffmongous wrote: »

Cerrone also destroyed Siver but other than that he's managed to get a lot of wins and looked good against Swanson. The aggressive kickboxing style seems to cause him a lot of problems

Agreed. He also gives away a bit of height. Conor uses range very well.

ricero

My knowledge of UFC would be limited but i was always impressed when watching Jose Aldo fighting. What are you guys with great knowledge thinking of this Mcgregor v Aldo fight ? Can Mcgregor stop him or will Aldo be to much ?

Mr. CooL ICE

The only two people to beat him were Joseph Duffy and Artemij Sitenkov. Both have the letter "J" in their first names, as does Jose Aldo. Therefore, Jose will beat him, most likely by first round submission of some sorts.

You heard it here first.

Mr. Loverman

ricero wrote: »

My knowledge of UFC would be limited but i was always impressed when watching Jose Aldo fighting. What are you guys with great knowledge thinking of this Mcgregor v Aldo fight ? Can Mcgregor stop him or will Aldo be to much ?

I would imagine a lot of leg kicks to limit Conor's movement, and a much more aggressive attitude which will limit Conor's control.

But I have no idea what will happen. I wouldn't be surprised if Conor makes him look ordinary.

MrStuffins

walshb wrote: »

Looking at Siver the other night he looked far from special. And I don't think it was all down to Conor.

This is one of the problems with bandwagoners.

Siver wasn't on Conor's level the other night, it's true. It's a combination of Siver not being a top level fighter and Conor being that much better than him.

A bandwagoner will jump in expecting Conor to be the be-all and end-all of fighting. This is not the case. Anyone who has been following the sport will know that 2.5 years ago, Conor was fighting in a hall in Ballymun. Since then he's proven he can step up to the UFC, he has proven he can mix it with talented younger guys, he's gone on to prove that he can beat a Top 10 guy quite easily and that he can handle the big show mentality.

Does any of this require an attitude of criticism because Denis Siver wasn't a Top 3 featherweight the other night? This fight, when looked at in the context of the sport as a whole, the history of the division and Conor's career, was a great success. He has gone from topping his division on the regional (European if you will) scene to now proving that he is a World Class fighter.

The only 2 questions left are:

Is he one of the best of the best (as in Top 5)

Is he good enough to be champ?

We'll find out the latter before the former. I'd have liked to have seen him fight one of Edgar, Swanson, Mendes or Lamas first. But it's not happening like that. Should he beat Aldo, he'll silence all critics (except for some bandwagoners who will criticise him for not winning by inverted spinning wheel kick)