Truth About Woodley's Title Defenses and GOAT Eligibility

[NotoriousMillions]

Rory seems to have a glaring issue in that he fights at the pace of his opponent. Against Lawler he stood and banged because that is what Lawler does. Against wonderboy he potshotted like wonderboy

When he gets aggressive like against Woodley is when he is at his best

Rory gets hit too much. He's a good striker, but not good enough with how poor his striking defense is.

 

[SeattleFightFan]

? Outside of GSP his best win is a LW, and his next best win is a LW. LOL

And he lost to both GSP and BJ twice.

I like Hughes, but he isn't on Woodley's level. That's just facts.

TS laid out a specific criteria, Hughes' fits that criteria and Woodley doesn't, and yet he has Woodley above Hughes. that's simply not logical. so i asked why.

that's actually a good foundation to a good discussion: 1) criteria, 2) why a fighter does or doesn't fit that criteria, and then 3) conclusion.

you just gave me a vague conclusion; "like OMG fighter A > fighter B!". any jackhole can do that. but it has no substance. your conclusion, without criteria or evaluation, is not the least bit interesting.

if you want to discuss GOAT criteria, be my guest. if it's decent i'll respond. frankly, debating the criteria is much more interesting.

 

[NotoriousMillions]

TS laid out a specific criteria, Hughes' fits that criteria and Woodley doesn't, and yet he has Woodley above Hughes. that's simply not logical. so i asked why.

if you want to discuss GOAT criteria, be my guest. if it's decent i'll respond. frankly, debating the criteria is much more interesting than the "like OMG fighter A > fighter B!" type answers.

I don't judge GOAT criteria based off artificial BS. There is only two criteria GOATs should be judged by, technical skill and technical skill of the opponents. Otherwise you're letting style over substance rule.

 

[mkt]

Rory gets hit too much. He's a good striker, but not good enough with how poor his striking defense is.

That's why I think the Mousasi fight is almost suicidal. For the record, I don't care for Mousasi and think he's a bit overrated on here. But he's a better boxer than Rory and has a height/reach advantage (one of Rory's edges over most WWs). And his size and grappling are probably good enough to keep Rory from using a wrestling game plan like he did vs. Lima. I see Rory taking a bunch of jabs to the nose again...the last thing he needs. If he's going to fight the MW champ, he should wait until he completely clears out the WW division of Bellator. And if he did that, maybe he could go back to the UFC instead.

 

[osudude]

? Outside of GSP his best win is a LW, and his next best win is a LW. LOL

And he lost to both GSP and BJ twice.

I like Hughes, but he isn't on Woodley's level. That's just facts.

"I don't know history"

 

[SeattleFightFan]

I don't judge GOAT criteria based off artificial BS. There is only two criteria GOATs should be judged by, technical skill and technical skill of the opponents. Otherwise you're letting style over substance rule.

see? we just removed lots of drama. you and i will never see eye to eye.

boxing historians decided decades ago that fighters shouldn't be judged across eras, but within their own. what's the point of judging "prime Jack Johnson" versus "prime Marciano" versus "prime Holmes"? there is no point. it's utterly useless, random, and frankly, not based in any fact.

by that line of thinking, Hughes dominated his era for 5-6 years. Woodley is on his way to doing so as well.

but you don't agree with that line of thinking. therefore, let's not waste any more time talking about all that. so let's get back to my first point, which really has nothing to do with any of the above:

1) TS laid out criteria on how to judge GOAT
2) Hughes met that criteria, and Woodley didn't
3) TS had Woodley above Hughes
4) SFF pointed out that TS didn't follow his own logic.

do you disagree with my #4? do you have anything to add to that line of conversation at all? if not, you don't need to answer. cheers.

 

[mkt]

TS laid out a specific criteria, Hughes' fits that criteria and Woodley doesn't, and yet he has Woodley above Hughes. that's simply not logical. so i asked why.

that's actually a good foundation to a good discussion: 1) criteria, 2) why a fighter does or doesn't fit that criteria, and then 3) conclusion.

you just gave me a vague conclusion; "like OMG fighter A > fighter B!". any jackhole can do that. but it has no substance. your conclusion, without criteria or evaluation, is not the least bit interesting.

if you want to discuss GOAT criteria, be my guest. if it's decent i'll respond. frankly, debating the criteria is much more interesting.

Like I said earlier, I was being charitable about Tyron being the 2nd best WW right now. You have some good arguments against it. It's not the main point of my post, so I won't quibble with anyone on it.

 

[SeattleFightFan]

Like I said earlier, I was being charitable about Tyron being the 2nd best WW right now. You have some good arguments against it. It's not the main point of my post, so I won't quibble with anyone on it.

fair enough. i see that now in post #12. i'd missed it earlier my bad, cheers.

 

[Bodil]

26-2 all losses avenged, 9x WW defenses, most top 5 wins in history, MW champ

vs

21-3-1, no loss avenged, 3x WW defenses

really puzzling

 

[NotoriousMillions]

see? we just removed lots of drama. you and i will never see eye to eye.

boxing historians decided decades ago that fighters shouldn't be judged across eras, but within their own. what's the point of judging "prime Jack Johnson" versus "prime Marciano" versus "prime Holmes"? there is no point. it's utterly useless, random, and frankly, not based in any fact.

by that line of thinking, Hughes dominated his era for 5-6 years. Woodley is on his way to doing so as well.

but you don't agree with that line of thinking. therefore, let's not waste any more time talking about all that. so let's get back to my first point, which really has nothing to do with any of the above:

1) TS laid out criteria on how to judge GOAT
2) Hughes met that criteria, and Woodley didn't
3) TS had Woodley above Hughes
4) SFF pointed out that TS didn't follow his own logic.

do you disagree with my #4? do you have anything to add to that line of conversation at all? if not, you don't need to answer. cheers.

I don't care what TS logic was, it's wrong.

Boxing has has had so many more fighters and been a legitimate sport for so much longer, what are you even talking about. MMA just started in fucking 1993, and you wanna talk about guys that started 3 years after that being the GOAT. Fuck, let's talk about about some 5 foot white boys as the GOATs of basketball while we're at it. You are legitimately insane.

You can easily judge people era to era in boxing too, maybe not to an exact point, but a close distance. Fighting is a science. Hughes isn't even in the same league of Woodley. I will never sit there and say something as stupid as accolades determine the greatest, especially during a time when a sport was 10 years old. If you disagree with that, be my guest. I don't want to talk to ignorant people anyways.

 

[knock_you_out]

It's hilarious how one good win, Till, puts Tyron in the GOAT discussion.

 

[Hypetrainofthemonth]

LMAO. Man the people I want to tag right now.

 

[knock_you_out]

Hughes and GSP were pretty dominant in many of their fights. Tyron has not been dominant in ANY of his fights, except against Till. (A quick KO/TKO does not qualify as dominance).

 

[Dirge]

So if Woodley retires now he can never catch Hughes because he choose to retire instead of turning into a punching bag?

?

Hughes at the same age as Woodley had over twice as many fights against some of the best guys in the world

Not sure how a 45-9 record equates to being a punching bag.

Let's see Woodley compete 54 times by the time he is 37

Hughes actually had a win streak almost as long as Woodley 's entire career

 

[90 50]

Like I said earlier, I was being charitable about Tyron being the 2nd best WW right now. You have some good arguments against it. It's not the main point of my post, so I won't quibble with anyone on it.

Depending on criteria, you can look at a lot off WW fighters from all era’s and make very valid claims that Woodley not only needs to surpass Hughes, But Militich , Newton and Anderson’s WW run

 

[det_regnar_på_vår_kärlek]

Woodley is the WW GOAT and has beaten tougher competition than GSP.

 

[mkt]

Woodley is the WW GOAT and has beaten tougher competition than GSP.

You know what they say about there being an idiot (or troll?) in every village...

In case you're serious, you have to do more than assert your opinion. You have no arguments or data to support your claim.

 

[Dirge]

Woodley is the WW GOAT and has beaten tougher competition than GSP.

Funny how all these Woodley fans come running out of the woodwork because Woodley finally got off his ass and finished a fight against a fringe top 10 opponent.

The prior comments pertained to logical arguments for Woodley not being a GOAT contender "yet".

He has a lot of catching up to do. Give he is what 37 and only has 23 pro fights, chances are he will never get into real contention simply due to lack of marquis fights.


The GOAT contenders currently are Fedor and GSP. Silva and Jones are logically excluded due to multiple drug test failures.

What GSP and Fedor both have in common is for their era, they have long strings of dominant wins over top fighters, Fedor less so primarily because Japan threw a lot of cans at him and Heavyweight is inherently a weaker weight class than Welterweight.

Hughes in terms of WW dominance stands out and is close behind GSP for two reasons. He dominated at WW for long stretches of time, had multiple title defenses and has a victory over GSP.

Who exactly has Woodley beaten (and in dominant fashion) that anyone will be talking about in 5 years? Robbie Lawler.... Good win but one good win and a bunch of stinkers does not a GOAT contender make.

 

[Dogo1]

?

Hughes at the same age as Woodley had over twice as many fights against some of the best guys in the world

Not sure how a 45-9 record equates to being a punching bag.

Let's see Woodley compete 54 times by the time he is 37

Hughes actually had a win streak almost as long as Woodley 's entire career

If you don't think he was a punching bag by the end, whatever you do, don't ref CB Dollaways next fight.

 

[cmw43]

Apparently a split draw and majority decision win over Wonderboy, setting the company record for least strikes thrown in a title fight against Maia, and finishing green Darren Till > all of GSP's wins

Hughes won 9 UFC title fights and in most of those he was smashing his opponents including GSP, prime BJ, Sherk, Sakurai and was 45 fights into his mma career at 41-4 before he started to decline.

Woodley has some work to do to get past Hughes title defence record, never mind GSPs.