UFCbeatdown88 Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 who will fight anderson if belfort wins hendo nate belfort or who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KickBox92 Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 i think hendos first in line for that title shot, i dont know about the franklin/belfort deal, but im pretty sure hendo has first dibs on that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMCN Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 I don't see how Hendo would be more deserving than Nate. The only time hendo looked convincing was when he knocked out Bisping and the only reason he was able to do that is because Bisping basically walked straight into his fist for 2 rounds. The dude reminds me of Chuck after his prime: just looking for the big one to end the show Nate has looked a lot better and I think also has a better chance to actually do some damage. And Belfort needs to beat some more than Franklin to earn his shot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amateur Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 How can Belfort get a title shot for winning a fight at a catch weight that has no bearing on the Middleweight division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCbeatdown88 Posted August 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 i thought it was a MW fight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
towhatend Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Nope, the fight is being fought in the Franklinweight division, aka a catch weight at 195. I think Marquardt is much more deserving for a shot. Posted this in the reaction to 102 thread but to sum it up: -Hendo immediately got two title shots (albeit different weight classes) coming in from Pride, lost both. -Marquardt has continued to display more impressive victories and all have been at 185 -Marquardt should only have one blemish in the UFC (first fight with Silva) because that Leites fight was garbage. -Marquardt has improved so significantly from his first fight with Silva and their well-rounded styles would make for the more exciting fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PABL0 Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 I would like to see a belfort wandy rematch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodus9mm Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 who will fight anderson if belfort wins hendo nate belfort or who? Belfort doesn't get a shot with Silva if he beats Franklin. My guess is that if (IF) he beats Ace, he'd square off against Nate Marquardt, and the winner of that gets a shot with the champ (Silva or Hendo). Hendo will likely get Silva next. What makes things more interesting is Okami, and if he beats Sonnen, adds a whole new dimension to the growing division. Should be interesting in the next 6 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Nope' date=' the fight is being fought in the Franklinweight division, aka a catch weight at 195. I think Marquardt is much more deserving for a shot. Posted this in the reaction to 102 thread but to sum it up: [b']-Hendo immediately got two title shots (albeit different weight classes) coming in from Pride, lost both.[/b] -Marquardt has continued to display more impressive victories and all have been at 185 -Marquardt should only have one blemish in the UFC (first fight with Silva) because that Leites fight was garbage. -Marquardt has improved so significantly from his first fight with Silva and their well-rounded styles would make for the more exciting fight. Hendo didn't get a title shot. I don't know how many times I've had to clear this up with people. He was unifying 2 belts he already had. Heed why they were titled "champion vs champion" and "PRIDE of a champion". Nate doesnt look much more convincing by KOing a terrible striker with 1 punch. At least Bisping is a decent striker. And Hendo's competition has been stiffer. Franklin in particular. Not taking anything away from Marquardt, but Hendo deserves it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodus9mm Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Hendo didn't get a title shot. I don't know how many times I've had to clear this up with people. He was unifying 2 belts he already had. Heed why they were titled "champion vs champion" and "PRIDE of a champion". Nate doesnt look much more convincing by KOing a terrible striker with 1 punch. At least Bisping is a decent striker. And Hendo's competition has been stiffer. Franklin in particular. Not taking anything away from Marquardt' date=' but Hendo deserves it.[/quote'] Agreed. As much as Nate is back on track, Hendo clearly gets next shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guti Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Belfort doesn't get a shot with Silva if he beats Franklin. My guess is that if (IF) he beats Ace' date=' he'd square off against Nate Marquardt, and the winner of that gets a shot with the champ (Silva or Hendo). Hendo will likely get Silva next. What makes things more interesting is Okami, and if he beats Sonnen, adds a whole new dimension to the growing division. Should be interesting in the next 6 months.[/quote'] problem is silva only has 3 fights left in his contract ... Next fight is against henderson , then a LHW and his last fight will be vitor belford ( if he beats frankling)... Vitor is a bigger name than nate .... If anything dana will set a fight between nate and belford for a title shot at silva ( assuming he beats henderson).... Dana wants silva to leave with a loss in the ufc ... Imagine if silva left undefeated in the ufc , and then went to fight in a different promotion , it will be bad news for dana who claims he has the best fighters on the planet... Silva and fedor not competing in the ufc could hurt the company Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 ^ Belfort is dropping to MW which is why he's fighting Franklin (LHW) at a catch weight ala Wanderlei in prep for his drop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodus9mm Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 problem is silva only has 3 fights left in his contract ... Next fight is against henderson ' date=' then a LHW and his last fight will be vitor belford ( if he beats frankling)... Vitor is a bigger name than nate .... If anything dana will set a fight between nate and belford for a title shot at silva ( assuming he beats henderson).... Dana wants silva to leave with a loss in the ufc ... Imagine if silva left undefeated in the ufc , and then went to fight in a different promotion , it will be bad news for dana who claims he has the best fighters on the planet... Silva and fedor not competing in the ufc could hurt the company[/quote'] To my knowledge, one stipulation in the UFC is that you cannot leave while champion. So if Silva keeps walking over competition, he can't leave till he loses. Can anyone clarify this as accurate or not? If it is true, it's unfortunate, because it mandates that a fighter gets a loss. I'd be curious to know the facts on this. I don't see Silva fighting at LHW anymore. I'm assuming his last 3 fights will all be at MW, but that's just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guti Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 To my knowledge' date=' one stipulation in the UFC is that you cannot leave while champion. So if Silva keeps walking over competition, he can't leave till he loses. Can anyone clarify this as accurate or not? If it is true, it's unfortunate, because it mandates that a fighter gets a loss. I'd be curious to know the facts on this. I don't see Silva fighting at LHW anymore. I'm assuming his last 3 fights will all be at MW, but that's just my opinion.[/quote'] maybe not leave without a loss , but he can vacate his title... It has been said before by a lot of people that silva is thinking about vacating his title... So yea maybe he can not leave with the title but if he vacates it then he can just walk out after his last fight ( last fight on his contract) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodus9mm Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 maybe not leave without a loss ' date=' but he can vacate his title... It has been said before by a lot of people that silva is thinking about vacating his title... So yea maybe he can not leave with the title but if he vacates it then he can just walk out after his last fight ( last fight on his contract)[/quote'] Again, I was quite sure that Dana doesn't allow vacating titles in the contracts. I could be very wrong here though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guti Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Again' date=' I was quite sure that Dana doesn't allow vacating titles in the contracts. I could be very wrong here though.[/quote'] i think you are wrong , i heard andersons manager saying that silva may vacate his title , so who would know better the stipulation of andersons contract than his manager... But then again i have never seen anyone vacate their title... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Didn't Randy retire with the belt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amateur Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Didn't Randy retire with the belt? He was in dispute with the UFC. Different story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Belfort doesn't get a shot with Silva if he beats Franklin. My guess is that if (IF) he beats Ace' date=' he'd square off against Nate Marquardt, and the winner of that gets a shot with the champ (Silva or Hendo). Hendo will likely get Silva next. What makes things more interesting is Okami, and if he beats Sonnen, adds a whole new dimension to the growing division. Should be interesting in the next 6 months.[/quote']Belfort is gonna blast through Ace. As much as I like Franklin, he can be dropped. If you have the speed and power of Vitor, one touch on the button is all you need. The UFC created this roadblock by letting Anderson fight at LHW. He should have been defending his belt the whole time. Hendo didn't get a title shot. I don't know how many times I've had to clear this up with people. He was unifying 2 belts he already had. Heed why they were titled "champion vs champion" and "PRIDE of a champion". Nate doesnt look much more convincing by KOing a terrible striker with 1 punch. At least Bisping is a decent striker. And Hendo's competition has been stiffer. Franklin in particular. Not taking anything away from Marquardt' date=' but Hendo deserves it.[/quote'] Honeslty YES he did get two title shots when he came in. Just because you're unifying the title you already have doesn't mean it wasn't a title shot. If he had won either of those fights then he would have walked away with UFC gold. Therefore, if that was the possible outcome, then yes the UFC belts were on the line. This is the definition of a title shot. Just because you title it differently doesn't mean the belt isn't on the line. As far as I'm concerned you've got two guys ready to go and one already in a fight. If prolonging it is an option....I say let Nate and Dan slug it out then the winner takes on Belfort after he beats Franklin. Then you truly have a number 1 contender instead of three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Belfort is gonna blast through Ace. As much as I like Franklin' date=' he can be dropped. If you have the speed and power of Vitor, one touch on the button is all you need. The UFC created this roadblock by letting Anderson fight at LHW. He should have been defending his belt the whole time. Honeslty YES he did get two title shots when he came in. Just because you're unifying the title you already have doesn't mean it wasn't a title shot. If he had won either of those fights then he would have walked away with UFC gold. Therefore, if that was the possible outcome, then yes the UFC belts were on the line. This is the definition of a title shot. Just because you title it differently doesn't mean the belt isn't on the line. As far as I'm concerned you've got two guys ready to go and one already in a fight. If prolonging it is an option....I say let Nate and Dan slug it out then the winner takes on Belfort after he beats Franklin. Then you truly have a number 1 contender instead of three.[/quote'] So Rampage and Anderson were getting title shots, too? Because they would have walked away with both belts in 1 just as Hendo would have. He was the Pride champion in both weight classes fighting to unify 2 belts he already had to determine the undisputed champions since buying Pride and drafting fighters from there. By your definition of a title shot every champion who defends his belt is getting a title shot because they have the chance to walk away with a belt even though they already hold it ala Dan Henderson. Dan was already champion so it's the same thing. Dan doesn't want to fight anyone but Silva. I think he put an exclamation point on his contendership at 100, 2 events before Marquardt did. Therefore, he deserves the shot before Marquardt imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 So Rampage and Anderson were getting title shots' date=' too? Because they would have walked away with both belts in 1 just as Hendo would have. He was the Pride champion in both weight classes fighting to unify 2 belts he already had to determine the undisputed champions since buying Pride and drafting fighters from there. By your definition of a title shot every champion who defends his belt is getting a title shot because they have the chance to walk away with a belt even though they already hold it ala Dan Henderson. Dan was already champion so it's the same thing. Dan doesn't want to fight anyone but Silva. I think he put an exclamation point on his contendership at 100, 2 events before Marquardt did. Therefore, he deserves the shot before Marquardt imo.[/quote'] Not gonna dispute who should get the title shot first cuz it's all still up in the air. They both deserve it, it's just a matter of "who first"? No. Your not getting what I'm sayin here. For Rampage and Anderson it was a title defense not a title shot. You can't have a shot at a belt when the organization that created it has since gone under....However if Henderson had won he would have had the UFC belt. They were both title shots for Henderson. Anderson and Rampage were merely defending their belts. The PRIDE belts weren't on the line. It wasn't a PRIDE FC title fight, it was a UFC title fight. Thus it was a shot for Hendo and Defense for Anderson and Jackson. The PRIDE belts didn't go anywhere even though he lost both fights. The whole reason the called it "unification" was to see who's champion was better in that division. Only way to do that was to give Hendo a TITLE SHOT. Twisting it around and trying to call it a shot instead of a defense for Anderson and Rampage is ridiculous and we are arguing a moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Not gonna dispute who should get the title shot first cuz it's all still up in the air. They both deserve it' date=' it's just a matter of "who first"?[/quote']Agreed. And personally I think Hendo proved it first and should get the shot first. Both are very deserving I never took anything away from Marquardt. No. Your not getting what I'm sayin here. For Rampage and Anderson it was a title defense not a title shot. You can't have a shot at a belt when the organization that created it has since gone under....However if Henderson had won he would have had the UFC belt. They were both title shots for Henderson. Anderson and Rampage were merely defending their belts. How is it not a defense for Hendo? He had the Pride belt. The fights were to unify the belts so they were both defending their belts. UFC owns Pride now and THEY decided to carry the belts over for an undisputed champion. If Fedor joined the UFC he would have fought Couture to unify the belts' date=' as well. Both were defending their titles whether they left with the gold belt or the silver belt. The PRIDE belts weren't on the line. It wasn't a PRIDE FC title fight, it was a UFC title fight. Thus it was a shot for Hendo and Defense for Anderson and Jackson. The PRIDE belts didn't go anywhere even though he lost both fights. The whole reason the called it "unification" was to see who's champion was better in that division. Only way to do that was to give Hendo a TITLE SHOT. Twisting it around and trying to call it a shot instead of a defense for Anderson and Rampage is ridiculous and we are arguing a moot point. The pride belt was on the line. It was a title unification match meaning BOTH belts were on the line to determine a single champion for each weight division. Is Mir still the interim HW champion? No. Because his belt was up for grabs in that fight as well. I don't think you understand the concept of a title unification match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Agreed. And personally I think Hendo proved it first and should get the shot first. Both are very deserving I never took anything away from Marquardt. How is it not a defense for Hendo? He had the Pride belt. The fights were to unify the belts so they were both defending their belts. UFC owns Pride now and THEY decided to carry the belts over for an undisputed champion. If Fedor joined the UFC he would have fought Couture to unify the belts' date=' as well. Both were defending their titles whether they left with the gold belt or the silver belt. [b']The pride belt was on the line. It was a title unification match meaning BOTH belts were on the line to determine a single champion for each weight division.[/b] Is Mir still the interim HW champion? No. Because his belt was up for grabs in that fight as well. I don't think you understand the concept of a title unification match. This is where you are wrong. The PRIDE belt couldn't have been on the line since PRIDE went under and the UFC put them out of business. You can't fight for a title when the organization that created it went out of business. They brought over the fighters for the unification fights not the titles. Since then have you seen any silver belts in the UFC? The PRIDE belt wasn't held by Anderson after the fight. Nor was it held by Rampage after their fight. Yes Fedor would have gotten a unification shot but that doesn't mean his PRIDE belt was on the line. If the fight happened in the UFC then it was a UFC title match. Just as if it happened in PRIDE it would have been a PRIDE title match. But PRIDE went under and therefore the titles only hold meaning to people with them or the fans that watched them. You don't see Rampage or Anderson coming out with two belts do you? No. Because the only title that was on the line was the UFC title. I'm done with this argument because at this point it's just a matter of opinion. I made my point and am done with this. Not to mention when any of the announcers comment on the fight they call it a title shot for Hendo. Thats just the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 This is where you are wrong. The PRIDE belt couldn't have been on the line since PRIDE went under and the UFC put them out of business. You can't fight for a title when the organization that created it went out of business. They brought over the fighters for the unification fights not the titles. Since then have you seen any silver belts in the UFC? The PRIDE belt wasn't held by Anderson after the fight. Nor was it held by Rampage after their fight. Yes Fedor would have gotten a unification shot but that doesn't mean his PRIDE belt was on the line. If the fight happened in the UFC then it was a UFC title match. Just as if it happened in PRIDE it would have been a PRIDE title match. But PRIDE went under and therefore the titles only hold meaning to people with them or the fans that watched them. You don't see Rampage or Anderson coming out with two belts do you? No. Because the only title that was on the line was the UFC title. I'm done with this argument because at this point it's just a matter of opinion. I made my point and am done with this. Not to mention when any of the announcers comment on the fight they call it a title shot for Hendo. Thats just the way it is. Pride wasn't put out of business they were bought by the UFC. Therefore the UFC owned Pride, it's fighters still under exclusive contract and it's belts and could have done whatever they wanted with them. it's not a matter of opinion it's a matter of fact. lol. It's not my fault if you don't understand the concept of a title unification fight. I specifically remember them showing both belts in the hype up and talking about unifying them. In fact I remember Anderson saying "When I meet Dan Henderson I'll get the chance to unify the belts". In the same way that both UFC HW belts were unified for 1 undisputed champion with Lesnar Vs Mir 2. LOL do you remember the announcers saying "great first round for the Pride champion". Not the former Pride champion. He was still the champion because the UFC owned both belts and were unifying them. In fact, I'll have to watch both fights again to see if they announced Hendo as the Pride champion. I figure they did being as they billed Rampeg Vs Henderson as "Champion Vs Champion". Hmm... Champion Vs Champion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Pride wasn't put out of business they were bought by the UFC. Therefore the UFC owned Pride' date=' it's fighters still under exclusive contract and it's belts and could have done whatever they wanted with them. it's not a matter of opinion it's a matter of fact. lol. It's not my fault if you don't understand the concept of a title unification fight. I specifically remember them showing both belts in the hype up and talking about unifying them. In fact I remember Anderson saying "When I meet Dan Henderson I'll get the chance to unify the belts". In the same way that both UFC HW belts were unified for 1 undisputed champion with Lesnar Vs Mir 2. LOL do you remember the announcers saying "great first round for the Pride champion". Not the former Pride champion. He was still the champion because the UFC owned both belts and were unifying them. In fact, I'll have to watch both fights again to see if they announced Hendo as the Pride champion. I figure they did being as they billed Rampeg Vs Henderson as "Champion Vs Champion". Hmm... Champion Vs Champion...[/quote'] Your original point (and correct me if im wrong) was that the two fights couldn't have been called title fights for Hendo based on the fact that it was a "title unification" fight. So if Rampage and Anderson both had chances to obtain the PRIDE belts...(which you claim up top) Then equally Hendo had the same chance to capture the UFC belt. Which means both were defending and challenging at the same time. Which means both fights can be called "title fights" for both fighters. Therefore Hendo has had two title fights and my original point is proven. As for the merit of the belt, well ok, looking at it from your point of view I may not have given it as much cred as it deserved but still, you don't see those straps anymore do you? When they announce Rampage and Anderson do they call them UFC and Pride champions? No. Did PRIDE put on any more events after the UFC bought them? No. The UFC did put them out when they bought them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Your original point (and correct me if im wrong) was that the two fights couldn't have been called title fights for Hendo based on the fact that it was a "title unification" fight. So if Rampage and Anderson both had chances to obtain the PRIDE belts...(which you claim up top) Then equally Hendo had the same chance to capture the UFC belt. Which means both were defending and challenging at the same time. Which means both fights can be called "title fights" for both fighters. Therefore Hendo has had two title fights and my original point is proven. As for the merit of the belt' date=' well ok, looking at it from your point of view I may not have given it as much cred as it deserved but still, you don't see those straps anymore do you? When they announce Rampage and Anderson do they call them UFC and Pride champions? No. Did PRIDE put on any more events after the UFC bought them? No. The UFC did put them out when they bought them.[/quote'] Title fights and title shots are 2 different things. A title fight could be in defense. Yes, Hendo had the chance to get the belt, but he was also defending his belt in a certain respect because it was a unification match. Granted Silva is not called the pride champion but you're twisting things to your own liking there. He has the bragging rights of being the undisputed champion through gaining that belt. And though he may not have the actual belt, he gained all the bragging rights that came along with it. It's basically like the old 2 masters fighting eachother to become the ultimate master. Neither one is less of a master until proven to be. UFC chose to keep those Pride belts and unify them with the UFC belts. They could have gotten rid of the Pride belts but they didn't. They let Hendo come in with both of his belts and marketed those 2 fights as champion vs champion bouts. So it doesn't matter if Pride held any more events after the UFC bought them out because the UFC decided to keep those belts and put them up for grabs in a unification match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Title fights and title shots are 2 different things. A title fight could be in defense. Yes' date=' Hendo had the chance to get the belt, but he was also defending his belt in a certain respect because it was a unification match. Granted Silva is not called the pride champion but you're twisting things to your own liking there. He has the bragging rights of being the undisputed champion through gaining that belt. And though he may not have the actual belt, he gained all the bragging rights that came along with it. It's basically like the old 2 masters fighting eachother to become the ultimate master. Neither one is less of a master until proven to be. UFC chose to keep those Pride belts and unify them with the UFC belts. They could have gotten rid of the Pride belts but they didn't. They let Hendo come in with both of his belts and marketed those 2 fights as champion vs champion bouts. So it doesn't matter if Pride held any more events after the UFC bought them out because the UFC decided to keep those belts and put them up for grabs in a unification match.[/quote'] Ok....we're straying from the original point here....It doesn't matter whether or not both belts were on the line. It's still a title fight for whoever can walk away with a belt. Pride was put out of business by the UFC and discontinued any shows thereafter. So when Hendo came over he was no longer a champion. They even refer to him as "former" Pride champion. Yes they gave him title shots when he first got there as they should have. But that was my original point. That they were in fact referred to as title shots. Im not twisting anything I'm just stating my opinion. Whether or not that bunches your panties is one thing, but I'm done arguing. No matter which way you look at it he has had two "title shots"!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IcedTeaBagger Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 i believe belfort, win or lose against rich franklin, will fight at LHW and not MW. plus just one win vs a "now past his prime opponent" doesnt put you in title contention. winner of nate hendo should fight anderson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 i believe belfort' date=' win or lose against rich franklin, will fight at LHW and not MW. plus just one win vs a "now past his prime opponent" doesnt put you in title contention. winner of nate hendo should fight anderson[/quote'] Belfort has stated that he wants to compete at MW. That is the weight he was fighting at in Affliction. Nate Hendo would certainly clarify things a little bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Ok....we're straying from the original point here....It doesn't matter whether or not both belts were on the line. It's still a title fight for whoever can walk away with a belt. Pride was put out of business by the UFC and discontinued any shows thereafter. So when Hendo came over he was no longer a champion. They even refer to him as "former" Pride champion. Yes they gave him title shots when he first got there as they should have. But that was my original point. That they were in fact referred to as title shots. Im not twisting anything I'm just stating my opinion. Whether or not that bunches your panties is one thing' date=' but I'm done arguing. No matter which way you look at it he has had two "title shots"!![/quote'] But your whole argument is that Henderson was no longer a champion when the UFC themselves decided he could keep his belts and put them on the line in a title unification bout. They even named the Hendo Rampage event "champion Vs champion". LOL!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 But your whole argument is that Henderson was no longer a champion when the UFC themselves decided he could keep his belts and put them on the line in a title unification bout. They even named the Hendo Rampage event "champion Vs champion". LOL!!! And you're whole point was that it wasn't a title shot for Hendo' date=' even though he was fighting for a belt he didn't have!! That constitutes a title shot in my books. And like I previously said, I may have given less credit to the belt than deserved but that is my opinion. It doesn't matter what the card was called. Like I said do they still announce PRIDE champions? No. IMO...the pride belt didn't change hands in that fight. Dan Henderson is still the last champion of the PRIDE FC MW and LHW divisions. Not Rampage or Anderson. Furthering my point that the only title that was[i'] truly[/i] on the line was the UFC belt. The whole "Champion vs Champion" thing was just the name of an event and a marketing ploy not unlike the others that the UFC have used in hyping fights. Again IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 And you're whole point was that it wasn't a title shot for Hendo' date=' even though he was fighting for a belt he didn't have!! That constitutes a title shot in my books. And like I previously said, I may have given less credit to the belt than deserved but that is my opinion. It doesn't matter what the card was called. Like I said do they still announce PRIDE champions? No. IMO...the pride belt didn't change hands in that fight. Dan Henderson is still the last champion of the PRIDE FC MW and LHW divisions. Not Rampage or Anderson. Furthering my point that the only title that was[i'] truly[/i] on the line was the UFC belt. The whole "Champion vs Champion" thing was just the name of an event and a marketing ploy not unlike the others that the UFC have used in hyping fights. Again IMO. But you're making it out like he got 2 unjustified title shots for no reason when in fact it was a unification bout for 2 belts he already had. Uhm... are there anymore Pride champions? no. The card was billed champ vs champ. period. How are you still arguing that? Funny how you're stating everything as fact and following it up with "imo". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCmmaOorah Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Hendo didn't get a title shot. I don't know how many times I've had to clear this up with people. He was unifying 2 belts he already had. Heed why they were titled "champion vs champion" and "PRIDE of a champion". Nate doesnt look much more convincing by KOing a terrible striker with 1 punch. At least Bisping is a decent striker. And Hendo's competition has been stiffer. Franklin in particular. Not taking anything away from Marquardt' date=' but Hendo deserves it.[/quote'] +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Hendo didn't get a title shot. I don't know how many times I've had to clear this up with people. He was unifying 2 belts he already had. Heed why they were titled "champion vs champion" and "PRIDE of a champion". Nate doesnt look much more convincing by KOing a terrible striker with 1 punch. At least Bisping is a decent striker. And Hendo's competition has been stiffer. Franklin in particular. Not taking anything away from Marquardt' date=' but Hendo deserves it.[/quote'] Not gonna dispute who should get the title shot first cuz it's all still up in the air. They both deserve it' date=' it's just a matter of "who first"?[/b'] No. Your not getting what I'm sayin here. For Rampage and Anderson it was a title defense not a title shot. You can't have a shot at a belt when the organization that created it has since gone under....However if Henderson had won he would have had the UFC belt. They were both title shots for Henderson. Anderson and Rampage were merely defending their belts. The PRIDE belts weren't on the line. It wasn't a PRIDE FC title fight, it was a UFC title fight. Thus it was a shot for Hendo and Defense for Anderson and Jackson. The PRIDE belts didn't go anywhere even though he lost both fights. The whole reason the called it "unification" was to see who's champion was better in that division. Only way to do that was to give Hendo a TITLE SHOT. Twisting it around and trying to call it a shot instead of a defense for Anderson and Rampage is ridiculous and we are arguing a moot point. But you're making it out like he got 2 unjustified title shots for no reason when in fact it was a unification bout for 2 belts he already had. Uhm... are there anymore Pride champions? no. The card was billed champ vs champ. period. How are you still arguing that? Funny how you're stating everything as fact and following it up with "imo". Everythin you have said in this thread is just that.....you're opinion. Just like I have stated mine. I have already said that Hendo deserves his shot (we already agreed upon this) and have in no way stated that he didn't deserve the shots he already got. I dont know why you are still trying to argue with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 It's not my opinion. It's itso facto according to the UFC that it was 2 champions fighting to unify the belts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 It's not my opinion. It's itso facto according to the UFC that it was 2 champions fighting to unify the belts. This doesn't prove your point or discredit mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 I don't see how it couldn't. You're saying he wasn't a champion. The UFC owned Pride and decided to bill it as a champion vs champion unification match. I just don't see how that doesn't discredit your point. lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoToGuy Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt60kHTUji4 ^ Use this link and see. Hendo is reffered to as Pride champion. It was a unification fight. Hendo got a title shot. The rest of the details are said by Joe Rogam himself. There it is from his mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha_Omega Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 "they'll take away both belts. The Pride and the UFC title" /thread Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G__row Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 i think you are wrong ' date=' i heard andersons manager saying that silva may vacate his title , so who would know better the stipulation of andersons contract than his manager... But then again i have never seen anyone vacate their title...[/quote'] He can retire after his contract all he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armbarvictim Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 I don't see how it couldn't. You're saying he wasn't a champion. The UFC owned Pride and decided to bill it as a champion vs champion unification match. I just don't see how that doesn't discredit your point. lol. It was "Former" Pride champion Dan Henderson vs "Current" UFC LHW champion Rampage Jackson. Still Champion vs Champion I'm not disputing that. I've heard him called both, Pride champion and former pride champion. I don't really care what you wanna label it. All I've been doing so far is stating my opinion. Besides, to the majority of fans who haven't been watching that long or haven't seen most of the PRIDE fights it doesn't really matter anyway. The important belt and the one "most" were focusing on in the first place is with Lyoto now anyway. So like I said from the get go, we are arguing a moot point. My original comment was that both of his fights against Anderson and Jackson were in fact title shots. You have since got me arguing multiple different points and the fact remains that we disagree. I call them title shots, you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.