Anyone Else Picking Melvin Guillard Because Of..

No. I'm picking guillard because Varner won't take him down.
 
varner's got this IMO

he wil take him down. hope its lightning though

:eek:
 
look guys. i've been a big fan of Varner for a long time. at one point i felt like i was the ONLY one defending him on these boards when he didn't continue against Cerrone. some of you will remember what i'm talking about. i'm not counting him out, i'm not trolling, and i'm betting i've been watching Varner fight longer than some of you have been fans. i simply don't think he can win.

but "he lasted longer than Melvin" is a silly response. he stood and banged with Loe Lauzon...and LOST. this is not a "who can sub who" scenario (IMHO) - Melvin loses by sub to guys who can get him down and sub him. can Varner do that? i don't think so.

if i'm right, that means he's going to be standing a LOT with Melvin. and that is bad news.

the fact Lauzon beat Varner standing but took him a few rounds and the fact that Lauzon subbed Melvin are indeed 2 facts, are not mutually exclusive, and have nothing to do with one another when it comes to a Varner/Guillard bout. Varner likes to mix it up standing, and if it's available he'll take it to the ground, not the other way around. and he ain't no Jeremy Stephens.

i stand by my comment. but sorry i didn't elaborate; i honestly assumed i wouldn't have to.

I don't think you saw the same fight as the rest of us, what we saw was Varner outstrike Lauzon for a bit more than 2 rounds and get tired, then he went for a takedown, made a mistake and got submitted, while Melvin on the other hand got rocked by Lauzon and then submitted. Varner should beat Melvin, he has some of the best takedowns at LW, has better striking and submissions, Melvin's only advantage is that he has more power and is faster, technique wise he isn't as good as Varner.
 
Back
Top