Comments on: Rampage: ‘I don’t want to fight Chuck anymore’

By: ??????????

?????????? — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:24:59 +0000

Rampage is a great fighter,,,,,,He got an really lucky punch in on Chuck, plain and simple, the UFC brought him over building him up like he is UNbeatable, which is not true, he will not hold the belt very much longer, he will not beat chuck again nor need he (kick his ass)as so many people have put it, some of you people have no f@acking clue, of what your talking about, Chuck is a much greater fighter, I think there are many people who can beat rampage, he is a decent wrestler, fair stand up, Randy Coture could stop him, I think Forrest,Jardine,Rashad,Tito,Houston, and some others could give him a hell of a run for his money, he barely beat Marvin Eastman who is a B’ fighter at best……..Rampage got beat by Wanderla Silva by a brutal pounding not just a lucky hit, Wanderla has been beat by Tito, Vitor, and both of them have been beat by Chuck Lidell,

By: kidwell

kidwell — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 16:46:16 +0000

shogun and silva are great but look at cro cop Ufc is a differet beast. The big names aren’t always the victor.

By: kidwell

kidwell — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 16:44:30 +0000

[quote comment=”143316″]Also I think I should mention Keith Jardine’s loss to Houston Alexander. I think that it was the biggest loss in his career since it was against a newbie (to the UFC at least) and happened so quickly at a point where he had the light focussed on him, so how is he now the main event of a PPV after such a devastating loss?

This is the 1st time I have seen two guys who in their last matches were finished in less than 2 minutes of the first round, become the main event of a PPV in there very next fight!!!

Is there anyone that has an opinion on this?[/quote]

I thought chuck should fight shogun

By: Macgyver

Macgyver — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 04:44:18 +0000

Rampage needs to chill out with him beating Chuck twice. Rampage lost twice to Wandy, but in Rampage’s defense I will say he did way more damage to Wandy than Chuck could against Rampage.

By: Machine

Machine — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:15:17 +0000

[quote comment=”143708″][quote comment=”143330″][quote comment=”143316″]Also I think I should mention Keith Jardine’s loss to Houston Alexander. I think that it was the biggest loss in his career since it was against a newbie (to the UFC at least) and happened so quickly at a point where he had the light focussed on him, so how is he now the main event of a PPV after such a devastating loss?

This is the 1st time I have seen two guys who in their last matches were finished in less than 2 minutes of the first round, become the main event of a PPV in there very next fight!!!

Is there anyone that has an opinion on this?[/quote]

Yes, I have an opinion about this & it’s that I totally agree with you. None of it makes logical sense if you ask me. I mean, whats with the UFC & their wanting to “baby” their golden boys back to Championship status. Matt Hughes makes his way back to the title by defeating Chris Lytle? I’ll give him credit for his narrow win over Okami but explain how Rich Franklin beating MacDonald puts him in contender status? Now we have Chuck getting to earn his way back into contention if he wins against Jardine? It all smells of nepotism if you ask me.[/quote]
I have to disagree with you guys on this one. I mean, the main event with the previous losers I agree. However, routes to the title. Franklin was champ, defended it a couple times, and lost. He won two more to get his rematch against top contendars, who else should he have to fight? You don’t think he deserves it yet? Chuck does NOT get it after Jardine, Dana white has said multiple times he will need to wins to get another crack at the belt. Hughes, ok maybe, but he had SOOO many defenses c’mon, love or hate him, his road back to the title should not be that long. Bottom line is, dont matter how many times they have fought, if the number one contendar keeps being the same guy over and over, and the champ has beat him 10 times, I don’t care, rather see the champ face the number one quality contendar 10 times with the same outcome, then someone of a lesser quality that don’t deserve it. This isnt WWE, this is a real sport, we can’t not let it happen jsut cuz we don’t “feel like seeing it agian”. If he is the number one contendar, so be it.[/quote]

Granted, you’ve got a valid point. My beef is not with the amount of fights they win before getting another crack at the belt, it’s who they beat to get there. How does winning a fight against an inferior opponent legitemize a shot at regaining a title? It just makes more sense for an ex-champ looking to regain his title to beat someone in the top 5 in order to re-establish their place amongst the best.

By: Machine

Machine — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:28:38 +0000

[quote comment=”143938″]So one win against a great opponent should get you a title shot?[/quote]

Well, in a fairness, Shogun either would be getting ready to or would have already challenged for the strap in PRIDE. Just because you change organizations doesnt mean you lose your world ranking. However, in general, you are right. One fight should not earn any fighter a title shot unless they have earned it with previous wins that have put them in contention.

In my book, NO ONE outside of the top 5 in each weight class should ever get a crack at any title.

By: Machine

Machine — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:23:42 +0000

[quote comment=”143912″]I am a fan of MMA in general. I don’t care if it is UFC or Pride or if the fighters are black or white. I have been a fan of Chucks longer than Rampage as I had been watching the UFC for much longer. I thought Rampage would beat Chuck in their second encounter even though I had not seen a lot of his fights. What really did it for me was watching how much punishment the man can take especially all the knees and kicks he took of Wandy before he was taken out. When Chuck got beaten by Randy he did not get a quarter of what Rampage got before he went down, and in the last fight one left hook is what it took for him to go down. I am a fan of both of these guys and I think Chuck is still one of the best in the world, but the bottom line is you have to hit Rampage a lot harder and for a lot longer than you would with Chuck to take him out. And if they fought again not only do I think Rampage is more skillful, but if it came to trading punches between these two, do you really think Rampage will go down first. Take a look at the Wandy fight again, it’s not the fact he lost, it is what it took to finally take him out. Unreal. And on top of that, Rampage is a new and improved fighter. That is my opinion on two fighters. It’s not a Pride thing or a UFC thing, it’s an MMA thing.
Making it a Pride and UFC thing is getting pretty tedious, just enjoy the sport and getting to watch all the best fighters in the world.[/quote]

ade: Great post bro’. Now, if we can only convince all the nay-sayers to read it thoroughly, there may still be hope………

By: john

john — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:11:27 +0000

So one win against a great opponent should get you a title shot?

By: john

john — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:10:11 +0000

[quote comment=”143881″]john
Sep 6th, 2007 at 3:30 pm Quote this comment
*** Note that if Rua wins he gets a crack at title, so naturally the same applies to Griffen since Maurico “Shogun” Rua is considered by many as the best period at 205.
(This is my original statement)

His Rebutal (John)
“U really think that Forrest griffin will b next in line for a title shot if he beats Shogun. Forrest isnt even ranked higher than Rashad or bisping”

Michael Bisping has [and never] will be ranked higher than Forrest Griffen. Now moving along, If Rua is the so called shoe in for the title shot if he beats Griffen, why wouldnt the same apply to Griffen if he wins ? Whats nest for Griffen if he doesn’t get the title shot a trilogy with Bonnar ? A fight with Alexander ? makes no sense.[/quote]

Actually I have seen recent Rankings that Bisping is Ranked 9th, Rashad is 10, and Forrest isnt even Ranked in the top 10, so what the hell are you talking about. I cant remember which magazine its in, but when I get home, Ill look through my magazines, and then Ill post the magazine its in.

I do not neccesarily believe that Bisping can beat forrest, I’m just saying that he is ranked higher than Forrest… and thats a FACT!!!!!

By: john

john — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:06:53 +0000

The best way to win a fight is to beat the other fighter until he taps, or his corner throws in the towel, and thats exactly what Rampage did to chuck. I think its way more embarresing than getting Ko’ed

There is nothing better than beating another man into submission.