Conor is a kept / protected fighter

Unfortunately, for you and Siver, this is a nightmare matchup for him and available data indicate an easy win for McGregor. Can Siver win? Sure, but the odds are very low.

All I read was "Can Siver win? Sure..."
 
Shortsightedness from an individual named "Jesus Freak"? Hold on whilst I prepare my shocked face..........

It's called sarcasm...we were, after all, Created with a sense of humor.

Next...
 
It's called sarcasm...we were, after all, Created with a sense of humor.

Next...

That was sarcasm? Highly doubtful.

Regardless, it did not come off as sarcastic and was not written (well) to imply sarcasm.
 
Your conspiracy can be obliterated by anyone who has the patience to write in the detail the timing of Conors reign.. Not to say he isn't a protected asset in other ways but now how you imagine.. And in time it will be proven..



Terrified? If only you really knew how much he cannot wait to fight at his natural lightweight.



Exactly this..

I'm surprised you managed to type this whilst swinging so hard on Conor's nuts.
 
Protected? I don't think he is protected as much as he is given special treatment. In my mind he should still be a fight or two away from the title shot but he knows how to play the game and the UFC is capitalizing on it.

The UFC is a business and he puts butts in the seats and now he's reaping the benefits.
 
Poirer is not really an elite feather weight. And I like poirer. But he just isn't there yet. What top guy has Dustin beat??? Yea nobody in the top 5. I'd like to see Connor fight cub or zombie or lamas or somebody of that caliber
 
That was sarcasm? Highly doubtful.

Regardless, it did not come off as sarcastic and was not written (well) to imply sarcasm.

"...was not written well..."

Says the fella who makes the same statement THREE times in THREE different ways within THREE sentences.

1) "That was sarcasm? Highly doubtful."

2) "...it did not come off as sarcastic..."

3) "not written (well) to imply sarcasm."

Pack a lunch next time.
 
"...was not written well..."

Says the fella who makes the same statement THREE times in THREE different ways within THREE sentences.

1) "That was sarcasm? Highly doubtful."

2) "...it did not come off as sarcastic..."

3) "not written (well) to imply sarcasm."

Pack a lunch next time.

You are clearly not worth engaging, and your command of the written language is exceedingly poor (if you cannot see the differences that exist among the above statements then you are either uneducated or willfully blind). Fear not, this will be the last time I address you.
 
Conor is the most protected fighter in the history of the sport. He's a good fighter, don't get me wrong, but he's been kept from fierce competetion and bad matchups in unprecedented fashion. He will be utterly thrashed by Jose Aldo. It's good business, but let's call it what it is.

Fan or not, does anyone actually disagree with this assessment?

Mendes was protected more.
 
Poirer is not really an elite feather weight. And I like poirer. But he just isn't there yet. What top guy has Dustin beat??? Yea nobody in the top 5. I'd like to see Connor fight cub or zombie or lamas or somebody of that caliber

The same KZ who got a title shot off of beating Poirier?

Lamas is the only fighter in recent history to have actually earned a title shot in the way you're suggesting.
 
You are clearly not worth engaging, and your command of the written language is exceedingly poor (if you cannot see the differences that exist among the above statements then you are either uneducated or willfully blind). Fear not, this will be the last time I address you.

I'll take that "W".
 
Back
Top