CSF wrote: » That would make sport really boring if every fight had to be had twice before it becomes in some way conclusive. What's the excitement in a fight if we know we're gonna have to have it again anyway? Rematches should be dictated by public demand, not just because someone lost and feel they could do better.
CSF wrote: » Hold on a sec, let me get this straight, so the fight where one party landed absolutely no offence before being unceremoniously KOed at a weight class he'd been fighting at his all his life in a fight he'd been preparing for with a full camp feels unresolved. But the one where the party would have been actually ahead of the scorecards before a great punch effectively ended the fight does not. How does this make sense? Seems like another of these 'twist the argument in any way that does not reflect well on McGregor' type things.
JustShon wrote: » OK, I accept that to an extent. In most sports, as a long as a person or team remains active they're pretty much guaranteed another shot at the person or team who beat them again though. I'm not saying everyone should get the rematch how and when they demand it but at some point down the line.
XsApollo wrote: » If I had to pick out of those two fights which one felt more unresolved than the other, it would be the Aldo fight yes. No I don't hate McGregor I love watching his fights.
CSF wrote: » You haven't actually provided any points refuting the point I made. How can the fight where someone got no offence in be more unresolved than the fight where someone was actually winning? Is a good punch only a lucky punch if it happens in the first 13 seconds? Both McGregor and Diaz caught their opponents with great punches that won them the fight.
CSF wrote: » lougal88 wrote: » Guess which one got their immediate rematch though... You are comparing the 2 like they are the same. Because the public want to pay to see Conor. The public dictate the fights they'll pay to see. If the public want to pay see Conor and he wants his fight to be a rematch then that's what it's going to be. OSP can't get his rematch because nobody cares. Do the public want Aldo to get a rematch? Maybe, but my impression has been that they want Edgar to get a shot more.
lougal88 wrote: » Guess which one got their immediate rematch though... You are comparing the 2 like they are the same.
JustShon wrote: » To me, the McGregor v Aldo fight is unresolved because we didn't really get to see much of it. We haven't really seen that fight, we've seen how that fight ends. Personally I want to see them go a couple of rounds. See how they respond to the full range of each others' techniques. I'd never be so condescending as to call any shot "lucky" as that discredits the one who landed the punch and makes excuses for the one who got punched but I'd be highly surprised if McGregor could replicated the 13 second knockout.
CSF wrote: » We all want epic back and forth 5 rounders, but in the end we have to accept also that fights end the times they end for a reason. We've seen as much of that fight as Aldo was capable to putting in. He was knocked out cold and therefore incapable of putting more into it. That was literally the amount he was capable of contributing to the fight. Arguments of what might have happened if Aldo hadn't been knocked out don't sit well with me. It's almost like what would teams be able to contribute if Barca hadn't scored all those goals.
srm23 wrote: » if edgar or also is injured does conor replace them?
JustShon wrote: » Sure, and I do accept the fight as it is. Again, I make no excuses for Aldo's loss and detract nothing from Conor's epic win on the night. None of that stops me from wanting to see the rematch.
XsApollo wrote: » McGregor had a pretty good showing of what he was capable of in the Diaz fight, It Was a savage fight brilliant to watch. But I would like to see what Aldo was capable of if he didnt get knocked out with the first punch thrown. He gave no account of himself in there. I wanna see what would happen if he didn't get knocked out straight away, I'm not saying McGregor wouldn't knock him out after 3 mins or 10 min, I just wanna see it. That's why I wanna see Aldo v McGregor 2 and I wanna see McGregor win and that's why it feels more unresolved than the Diaz fight to me. .
CSF wrote: » JustShon wrote: » To me, the McGregor v Aldo fight is unresolved because we didn't really get to see much of it. We haven't really seen that fight, we've seen how that fight ends. Personally I want to see them go a couple of rounds. See how they respond to the full range of each others' techniques. I'd never be so condescending as to call any shot "lucky" as that discredits the one who landed the punch and makes excuses for the one who got punched but I'd be highly surprised if McGregor could replicated the 13 second knockout. We all want epic back and forth 5 rounders, but in the end we have to accept also that fights end the times they end for a reason. We've seen as much of that fight as Aldo was capable to putting in. He was knocked out cold and therefore incapable of putting more into it. That was literally the amount he was capable of contributing to the fight. Arguments of what might have happened if Aldo hadn't been knocked out don't sit well with me. It's almost like what would teams be able to contribute if Barca hadn't scored all those goals.
CSF wrote: » Aldo contributed everything he was capable of, unfortunately he was not capable of contributing much because he was knocked out cold. Aldo got beaten like one of the Tyson fighters from the 90s. You can't come out of that with any credit or what ifs. The first punch Conor threw at Aldo ended the fight.
CSF wrote: » I said very clearly that Aldo was capable of more on another night. I don't think fights should happen in the first place if you couldn't make a claim for both fighters winning. On the night he wasn't capable of contributing more because he was knocked out, if the fight continued it would have just been more of Aldo being beaten on the floor. On the night he couldn't have contributed more. Conversations of what would have happened on another night defeat the purpose of having the fight in the first place. That both fighters are capable of beating each other on another night should be a given.
lougal88 wrote: » Ok from now on nobody can talk about what may have happened in a fight if a minor adjustment were to be made. Unless of course the losing fighter was Conor.
CSF wrote: » lougal88 wrote: » Ok from now on nobody can talk about what may have happened in a fight if a minor adjustment were to be made. Unless of course the losing fighter was Conor. I don't think Conor gets any claims about what might have happened on another night either. It's pie in the sky and can be used for anyone. The best you can make for Conor is that he did well up until that point but I don't feel he was capable of more on that night either after he showboated and gassed. I think the best case for a rematch is when someone contributes a lot to a match and loses. Not even sure Conor reaches that but his popularity means he gets it. Aldo definitely does not reach that. He contributed nothing to the match and I don't think it does much for fights if we get rematches en masse just because someone hypothetically could do it on another night. Takes away the excitement.
Texas Jack wrote: » I wouldn't be the most knowledgeable MMA fan but I'm beginning to think this McGregor saga was a contrived way of getting out of this fight- everyone (apart from Diaz) came to the conclusion this hastily arranged rematch was a mistake, a second loss in a few short months would have had huge consequences ....and what if he won? the calls would have been for a 3rd fight, that's over a year of time invested in a non title fight .......nobody really loses face this way I'd be interested to hear you guys thoughts on this?
StringerBell wrote: » Leaving aside that I reject out of hand a lot of your premise. A fight that was over after 13 seconds, before it really began in all honesty due to one fighter KO'ing the other (brilliantly) instantly would leave a lot more questions then a fight where one fighter gave his all, threw everything at his opponent who took it, came back at him and got the stoppage. Do you really disagree with that?
CSF wrote: » Yes where the person who got stopped was winning the fight at the time I'd disagree with it. Where one is being dominated and then stopped I wouldn't disagree with it.
StringerBell wrote: » But it wasn't an injury/cut anything like that which led to the fight being stopped while one was ahead on the scorecards, it was comprehensive, one guy threw everything he had, the other took it and finished him. In the second round too not like a late stoppage or anything. Fair, square and comprehensive. I don't see how that leaves any more questions then the other scenario. I have no issue with Aldo having to go through Edgar to get a rematch either for the record, I am not a fan of these instant rematches at all but I do think there is more to learn from another Aldo/McGregor fight then a Diaz/McGregor fight right now.
