- Joined
- Dec 30, 2015
- Messages
- 18,460
- Reaction score
- 0
Okay, so ask yourself this Sherdoggers - What is Tyron Woodley's game?
Tyron's game consists of powerful takedowns, with great top-control. This comes alongside a counter-striking approach on the feet, which typically consists of explosive bursts of hooks and straights, with the odd leg kick thrown in to limit movement of his opponent.
Okay, now ask yourself - What is Demian Maia's game?
A limited mix of kicks and punches which are not designed to damage or finish the opponent, but rather to find range and/or distract the opponent to create grappling openings. Maia typically looks for single-leg takedowns or trips if he can get into range. If these don't work, he often settles for pulling guard and attempting a sweep.
So Tyron Woodley completely eliminates Maia's grappling game within the first two rounds or so. Maia attempts double-digit takedown attempts and Woodley is able to stuff them all. Woodley is winning the striking battles by throwing single shots and not exploding at Maia with combinations.
So people criticize Tyron and say "well if you can stuff all the takedowns, why not try and finish Maia?"
I won't lie to your face and claim that Tyron took risks, but I haven't once heard someone say that Demian should have taken more risks.
Tyron didn't do "much", but he was 40-36 up going into the final round. Who's at liberty to take the risks at that point? Tyron didn't take risks, but he was winning lol. Why didn't the man who was losing, go for broke?
Unless you're a blitzer by trade, going for broke is essentially against everyone's gameplan. Why didn't Maia go against his gameplan when it wasn't working? Why didn't his coaches tell him that Woodley was 4-0 up going into the last round? Why didn't he risk getting KO'd by throwing combinations?
Maia went for a takedown with about 20 seconds left, where was the criticism of that tactic? Was that going to win him the fight? No, it wasn't.
Why would the Patriots go for it on 4th down with 7 minutes left, when they are 28-0 up? Play conservative and win the damn game, why risk losing and then you're a laughing stock for the rest of time?
Some people really need to get their bias meter checked.
Tyron's game consists of powerful takedowns, with great top-control. This comes alongside a counter-striking approach on the feet, which typically consists of explosive bursts of hooks and straights, with the odd leg kick thrown in to limit movement of his opponent.
Okay, now ask yourself - What is Demian Maia's game?
A limited mix of kicks and punches which are not designed to damage or finish the opponent, but rather to find range and/or distract the opponent to create grappling openings. Maia typically looks for single-leg takedowns or trips if he can get into range. If these don't work, he often settles for pulling guard and attempting a sweep.
So Tyron Woodley completely eliminates Maia's grappling game within the first two rounds or so. Maia attempts double-digit takedown attempts and Woodley is able to stuff them all. Woodley is winning the striking battles by throwing single shots and not exploding at Maia with combinations.
So people criticize Tyron and say "well if you can stuff all the takedowns, why not try and finish Maia?"
I won't lie to your face and claim that Tyron took risks, but I haven't once heard someone say that Demian should have taken more risks.
Tyron didn't do "much", but he was 40-36 up going into the final round. Who's at liberty to take the risks at that point? Tyron didn't take risks, but he was winning lol. Why didn't the man who was losing, go for broke?
Unless you're a blitzer by trade, going for broke is essentially against everyone's gameplan. Why didn't Maia go against his gameplan when it wasn't working? Why didn't his coaches tell him that Woodley was 4-0 up going into the last round? Why didn't he risk getting KO'd by throwing combinations?
Maia went for a takedown with about 20 seconds left, where was the criticism of that tactic? Was that going to win him the fight? No, it wasn't.
Why would the Patriots go for it on 4th down with 7 minutes left, when they are 28-0 up? Play conservative and win the damn game, why risk losing and then you're a laughing stock for the rest of time?
Some people really need to get their bias meter checked.
Last edited: