Imagine the upset if Conor was the one to beat Khabib lol

[old school 2]

I agree rankings can't be the sole criteria. Like you said, we need fresh matchups. There are availability factors at play.

Honestly I don't even blame the UFC for going after the $. When Conor fought Eddie for the belt he was coming off a stoppage loss and then a razor thin majority dec win over Nate. Those were his ONLY fights above 145. Meanwhile both Khabib and Tony had won 7 or 8 in a row, ALL at 155. And both fought the same month as Eddie vs Conor (Khabib on the same card!) Again, they wanted Conor as champ champ and that's fine but you can't tell me that shouldn't have been Tony or Khabib fighting Eddie for that belt if merit was the main factor. And because of stuff like that I view the belts with serious skepticism.

Well, let us hope that both of these fine fighters show up drama free for their next opportunity because they are both running out of time . Khabib will only fight twice more and Tony at 36 years old is also running out of prime.

 

[old school 2]

That's not just Tony, it's anyone who's current win streak is ________. Other guys have lost but then won a ton of fights in a row. Anderson Silva won tons in a row in the UFC, I never thought his sub loss to Ryo Chonan in Japan needed to be mentioned nonstop even though I wasn't a big fan of Silva. I could name numerous others. CURRENT win streaks matter. When Silva was in his prime, that's what people were talking about. Not "Hey he lost on years ago in Japan".

If you've fought or trained you know that a freak arm break from blocking a kick is just that...an anomaly. You can believe otherwise, but I don't think you really do.

I would like to point out the Michael Johnson that beat Tony had won 8 of his last 10 fights. Tony had won 8 of his last 10. At the time MJ was better. The fight proved it. I know you will hate this, but it’s true.

 

[mkess101]

I would like to point out the Michael Johnson that beat Tony had won 8 of his last 10 fights. Tony had won 8 of his last 10. At the time MJ was better. The fight proved it. I know you will hate this, but it’s true.

Actually at the time I don't even disagree. That may shock you I know ha ha. If you watch Tony back then he hadn't really figured out what his style should be. He was way less aggressive with forward pressure. He didn't realize he was 100% a pressure fighter who could win by attrition against pretty much anyone.

Without the arm break would the fight maybe have played out differently? Possibly, but at that point I don't think anyone could say Tony was clearly the better fighter at all. The difference is that Tony figured things out and became a killer while MJ got figured out and regressed to being just okay.

 

[mkess101]

Well, let us hope that both of these fine fighters show up drama free for their next opportunity because they are both running out of time . Khabib will only fight twice more and Tony at 36 years old is also running out of prime.

Man no kidding. And as a fan, the belt really isn't the thing for me. If they stripped Khabib (they wouldn't but if they did) and just gave the belt to Conor or someone else, I'd still just want to see Tony vs Khabib to see the 2 best LW's against each other. The belt doesn't tell me who the best is, my eyes do.

 

[storeybuckle]

All of you Khabib bandwagoners are going to become Conor fans when Conor viciously kos the overrated sambo guy from Dagestan.

I do feel Khabib’s bandwagoners (fans) would jump ship as soon as he loses, whereas Conor’s (as already shown after multiple loses) fans will more than likely continue to stay his fan regardless of loses

I’m a fan of both fighters but feel that a lot Khabib fans seem more fake and only care about his undefeated record

 

[chris dizmon]

All of you Khabib bandwagoners are going to become Conor fans when Conor viciously kos the overrated sambo guy from Dagestan.

Then he will go and KO Mayweather and get even more fans.