Conor loss to nate diaz aged poorly

[OldBoy91]

I hate all these "aged poorly" rewrites.

How does this explain him beating Aldo,Alvarez and Mendes??

According to Sherdog;

Fluke. Never that good and had a retarded gameplan. Full camp Mendes would have won.

 

[AmonTobin]

Conor had an amazing run until he fought Nate Diaz, then he gassed out and lost to one of the worst fighters in the entire UFC roster nate diaz. Looking back, that loss really stamped Conors actual skill level in the UFC, which he wasn't super good. He was a B tier fighter at most, he would lose to guys like Khabib most times and guys like Porier are better than him as well. Now we have Conor fighting a "Bellator Tick" who's like 1-3 in the UFC, should be interesting to see a Bellator level fight in the UFC.

Why did it take Khabib 4 rounds to do what Diaz did in 2 rounds?

 

[Lee Danger]

I hate all these "aged poorly" rewrites.

How does this explain him beating Aldo,Alvarez and Mendes??

Alvarez was a legit good performance (or an horrible performance by Eddie)
Aldo was the definition of a fluke
Mendes gassed being on short notice

 

[markg171]

Actually he was #6. Nice try though.

Wow would you look at that. I was right that Nate was in fact #5 in the first fight and #4 in the rematch.

3 years later. There it is.

Nate could have potentially taken advantage of the Conor fights to do something in the sport but instead he sat out for 3 years. He wasn't a contender before or after the fight. Conor's loss to Nate hasn't aged one way or another because Nate didn't do shit afterwards.

Do you really somehow just not understand that Diaz taking off 3 years and still coming back to easily defeat a LW/WW contender in Pettis completely disproves the idea that Diaz aged poorly?

Cause holy fuck it completely destroys that narrative. It's literally why he got the BMF fight against top contender Masvidal.

Diaz aging poorly would him coming back and getting completely destroyed in his next fight.

 

[Lee Danger]

Why did it take Khabib 4 rounds to do what Diaz did in 2 rounds?

Diaz was 3x his size.

 

[AmonTobin]

Diaz was 3x his size.

So no skill involved? Just size? Didn't they both make weight beforehand? Isn't Khabib bigger than Nate?

 

[Lee Danger]

So no skill involved? Just size? Didn't they both make weight beforehand? Isn't Khabib bigger than Nate?

Diaz was 4x his size.

 

[AmonTobin]

Diaz was 4x his size.

Lol. My sarcasm detector didnt pick up. My bad.

 

[Lee Danger]

Lol. My sarcasm detector didnt pick up. My bad.

hahahaha, no problem sir.

 

[blaseblase]

View attachment 1041057View attachment 1041056

Wow would you look at that. I was right that Nate was in fact #5 in the first fight and #4 in the rematch.

Lmao you just exposed the UFC's BS because he was not top 5 right before the fight. How sneaky.

Fighter Rankings | UFC ®

web.archive.org

The wayback machine has been a god send.

 

[JustforBROCK]

I don't think a scenario exists where this loss does age well. IMO that should have been the end of his star power but 'sports' is such now that people still act like he's undefeated and unbeatable.

 

[deadshot138]

I hate all these "aged poorly" rewrites.

How does this explain him beating Aldo,Alvarez and Mendes??

Alvarez was washed at the time
Aldo was shook and rushed into a lucky counter punch
Mendes was undersized and had short notice

 

[ComeChooDaddy]

I hate all these "aged poorly" rewrites.

How does this explain him beating Aldo,Alvarez and Mendes??

Who else?

 

[HHJ]

Who else?

I gave you enough.

 

[Clark Rogers]

Nate was in fact #5 in the first fight, and #4 in the 2nd.

I'd call this revionist history, but you probably weren't even around to know that in the first place.

Oof

 

[Clark Rogers]

Why did it take Khabib 4 rounds to do what Diaz did in 2 rounds?

Diaz clearly > Khabib, lolol

I'll be the first to say, and have said before, that I think Diaz's popularity to ability ratio is skewed, he's got champ/ GOAT level popularity but never really performed to that standard.

BUT, to say he's one of the worst fighters on the roster is objectively false. Dude was always in that 5-10 rank area during his peak.

 

[HHJ]

Why did it take Khabib 4 rounds to do what Diaz did in 2 rounds?

Different style, Different fight,different night.

Or should khabib have let Conor beat his ass for 80pctof the fight instead of gassing him out w wrestling?

 

[TITS]

Metallica fans have aged poorly.

 

[Royce's Gi]

So no skill involved? Just size? Didn't they both make weight beforehand? Isn't Khabib bigger than Nate?

Nate is four times bigger than Kebab

 

[markg171]

Lmao you just exposed the UFC's BS because he was not top 5 right before the fight. How sneaky.

Fighter Rankings | UFC ®

web.archive.org

The wayback machine has been a god send.

Thank you proving that no, you were indeed not around back then.

Yes, Donald Cerrone was #5 as of the Feb 8 2016 rankings, which btw is a whole month before the Diaz/Conor fight we're even discussing so you've got the wrong rankings from the start. He'd also as your wayback capture shows just slid down the rankings from #4 to #5 for some reason. Had you been around at the time you would know that that was because he'd moved up to WW and so was being ranked less at LW now that he'd left LW.

He successfully debuts at WW 2 weeks later and drops even further from LW because of it, thus making Diaz #5.

New Rankings! Cowboy Drops Four Spots Despite Win

Latest UFC rankings update following UFC Fight Night 83: "Cowboy vs Cowboy" mixed martial arts (MMA) event, which took place last Sunday night (Feb. 22. 2016) inside CONSOL Energy Center in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

www.mmamania.com

But please tell me more about your conspiracy theories to make Diaz a top 5 LW before fighting Conor by having Cerrone move up a division months in advance.