How on earth does Condit deserve a title shot?

dont be surprised if diaz is next!! calling it now.
 
nah, maybe if he was winning.

he was losing every second of that fight and got finished because woodley's leg kick was strong enough to make condit do some spinning shit.

Your first sentence made sense, the second started out reasonably but did you say he was injured by a leg kick? seriously? he was injured during the takedown.
 
No need to check, no one has near the same finish rate as Carlos does at 170, at least not anyone with the same number or more fights.

NBK is a walking highlight reel. 30 wins, 28 finishes, 15 KO's, 13 Sub's. I don't know if he will beat the resurgent Lawler, who is looking better than he ever has, but Condit might have the boots to get the job done. Condit is a savage.
 
Reading this thread makes me want to go back to the days I was a jaded sports fan.

This is no "deserving", there is no "earned". There are zero prerequisites for getting title fights....It's not about how many wins you have, or when your last loss was, or how good your competition has been.

There is one, and only one, thing that matters......Does the UFC like you enough to put you in that spot. Any other discussion is irrelevant, and I'm sure the UFC loves fans debating their company as if it's a sport.
 
he doesn't.
But as usual, if the fighter who deserves the title is not a favorite of Dana, he can be bypassed by anyone Dana deem better.
Whether that guy is deserving or not of the title shot.

See Jacare or Johny Hendricks for more information on that!
 
It's better than Cormier/Gus.

At least Condit is coming off a tko win as opposed to a tko loss.
 
people crying about "deserving" this or that. lol

if you're in the top 10, even in a weak ass division, you deserve a title shot. end of debate. A title shot is not a sacred cow that only the truly worthy deserve. The champion needs to fight the best, and it doesn't hurt that its a great matchup and its two guys who have never fought.

Some plebs will only be happy if Hendricks and Lawler fight 15 times because no one can get past them. Or Rousey fights Tate 10 times in a row because there is no one else close to their level.
 
2 wins in his last 5. Beats me. That being said it should be a great fight, as long as Carlos leaves these at home...

OLSblog_post1_pic1_031110.gif

One fight in almost 40 where he performed like that, against a guy who does nothing more than throw temper tantrums if you use strategy.

Yet we still have fucking MORONS like you that still shout this like anyone with brain cells gives a fuck. Sorry Nick lost. Maybe he wouldn't have if he had actually been top 10.
 
Condit just couldn't put any weight on his injured leg, so when he tried to absorb the strike his knee gave out. He spun to grab his injured knee, not because Woodley kicked him so hard.

Woodley didn't do anything intentional to end that fight, he was certainly winning though.

woodley knew condit was hurt off the takedown, that's why he started leg kicking.

that win was 100 % woodley, hit the takedown that caused the injury and finished with strikes.
 
Your first sentence made sense, the second started out reasonably but did you say he was injured by a leg kick? seriously? he was injured during the takedown.

i know it was from the takedown.
 
He doesn't. The fans just bitched and moaned about Hendricks so much they've denied him a title shot he deserves.
 
people crying about "deserving" this or that. lol

if you're in the top 10, even in a weak ass division, you deserve a title shot. end of debate. A title shot is not a sacred cow that only the truly worthy deserve. The champion needs to fight the best, and it doesn't hurt that its a great matchup and its two guys who have never fought.

Some plebs will only be happy if Hendricks and Lawler fight 15 times because no one can get past them. Or Rousey fights Tate 10 times in a row because there is no one else close to their level.

I sort of agree but if that's the case, there shouldn't be rankings.

There's no logical sense in putting Condit against Lawler over Woodley. UFC knows Condit/Lawler is a good fight and they are punishing Woodley most likely for a boring fight against Gastelum or for repeadtedly turning down fights.

I was a pro-wrestling fan growing up and one of the main reasons I switched to MMA was the lack of politics. If you were good and won, the promotion had no say so in the matter. Now it's turning in WWE where if you are boring you get cut and if you say the wrong things, you don't get important fights.

UFC has to decide if they want to be a legit sport or just a sports entertainment product where they book fights for fun. The seem to want to be both and it just doesn't work that way and is the reason why they get criticsized.
 
You have an old school fighter like Lawler that actually believes in staying active and defending the belt. Unlike most top fighters today. Condit doesn't deserve it, but at least we know this won't be Lawler's only title defense over the next year or so. He isn't like Cain or Jones or Aldo or GSP.
 
He probably doesn't deserve it, but he's still becoming the new WW champ!
 
I sort of agree but if that's the case, there shouldn't be rankings.

There's no logical sense in putting Condit against Lawler over Woodley. UFC knows Condit/Lawler is a good fight and they are punishing Woodley most likely for a boring fight against Gastelum or for repeadtedly turning down fights.

I was a pro-wrestling fan growing up and one of the main reasons I switched to MMA was the lack of politics. If you were good and won, the promotion had no say so in the matter. Now it's turning in WWE where if you are boring you get cut and if you say the wrong things, you don't get important fights.

UFC has to decide if they want to be a legit sport or just a sports entertainment product where they book fights for fun. The seem to want to be both and it just doesn't work that way and is the reason why they get criticsized.

But there is logic behind this; its a far more compelling fight than seeing Hendricks or Woodley get the title shot. Coming off a fight of the decade vs rory, UFC wants to put Lawler in another great fight. Hendricks ducked Woodley and sat on the sidelines b/c he thought he should "deserve" the next shot. Hendricks could have already fought Woodley months ago and then had he won, very few people would have complained if he got the call.

Woodley and Hendricks are going nowhere in the division. Woodley has been either hot or cold his entire career. The only reason people are saying he should get a title shot over Condit is b/c he beat Condit a year and a half ago. That's the only reason.

UFC is not and has never nor will ever "turn into the WWE," people have been saying that since I first watched the UFC in 2004. The UFC makes a fight that is sellable and more interesting, but someone gets leap frogged and a few people cry about it. But the majority would rather see Condit vs Lawler than any other fight in the division right now. UFC is doing a great job of making the best fights. That's all I want, the best fights, not who deserves what based on rankings or who the fighter has beaten in the past. Bethe had, on paper, a decent win streak, was undefeated, and most likely "deserved" the title shot. Didn't make it a great fight because of that.
 
He's top 5 and a ton of fans want to see it (i wouldn't really complain about an exciting top 5 guy fighting for the title).

On top of that it's not like there really is a clear cut contender (woodley worst 2 peformances in his entire career have been within his last 3 fights and nobody wants to see Hendricks fight for title again, especially given what he's done his last two fights ). Condit isn't really screwing anyone over

I don't 100 percent agree with the title shot but I don't see the school girl drama in the choice (exciting top 5 fighter is fighting for the belt in a division that's still figuring itself, oh the absolute horror ! :rolleyes: )
 
Back
Top