Is Frankie Edgar top 10 all time?

[MartinGibson86]

I disagree BJ was at his prime when he met Frankie, but that's besides the point.
Frankie is a fucking legend, and I support him in any top 10 conversation!

BJ had just smashed Diego before the first Frankie fight and took Fitch to a draw after the 2nd.

 

[SeattleFightFan]

Lol I know exactly what his problem is, and I wouldn’t even waste my time with that guy. He has bipolar meltdowns in every thread he posts in, and absolutely lost his shit in the past because I ranked Cruz ahead of Edgar all time. After like 3 pages of his shrieking and whining, I asked (politely, actually) for his top 10 so I could look at it.

He replied and said he didn’t have one. <Lmaoo><45>

Lol, I was like:

So whereas you had the balls to post a top 25 ranking just now—which I respect—this dude has no such balls.
I just ignore his posts when I see them.

Maddening, innit?

 

[SmoothPies]

Why would Holloway be above him? Because he beat an older frankie?

Both won and defended belts three times, but frankie did it at a weight class higher while being smaller, and frankie probably has more notable wins. It's close, though.

It's a good point - they are pretty close. I'll admit Holloway is probably last on that list I just posted.

It's hard for me to not weigh the slide Frankie's had here in the later end of his career. I'm sure by the time Holloway retires he will also be on a similar skid. Him beating an older Frankie isn't a great accomplishment, but it's still something.

I also forgot to put Izzy on that list, he probably belongs somewhere between 11-15.

 

[Shaddows]

BJ had just smashed Diego before the first Frankie fight and took Fitch to a draw after the 2nd.

yes, but again, Fitch was also at the tail-end of his career (he went 1-3 after that tie and only won more because he left the UFC and was fighting lesser talent outside)...

Besides, BJ was also only 2-1 after his bad loss to GSP (which IMO kickstarted the decline)...
Let's not forget that after those two losses to Frankie, BJ went on a 1-7-1 record, with his lone win over (a definitely out of his prime) Hughes.

 

[mkt]

BJ had just smashed Diego before the first Frankie fight and took Fitch to a draw after the 2nd.

Fitch was the last fight where BJ looked good....except maybe the first round vs. Nick Diaz when he wasn't gassed. It was also during Fitch's failed experiment with a vegan diet. Maybe that's one reason a guy who should've been a FW was able to wrestle with him. Later on, a much older Fitch outgrappled Shields, Okami, Daley and Rory.

 

[avenue94]

A lot of people here really over rating how good the heavier divisions are, especially back in the day. A win like Mendes, even on the tail end of his prime, is pretty much better than any win that DC or Big Nog or Silva has.

 

[BFoe]

Fedor lol...you guys...smh



DJ just re-established himself as the arguable best fighter at a weight where guys move at the speed of light.


He's 36.


Fedor was mediocre in sanctioned, drug tested fights.


Frankie>>>>Fedor.

BuT wHeRe dOeS MaRk HuNt FiT iNtO aLL oF tHiS?? <45>
Interesting that you prioritize a division which moves at the speed of light but has a very low finish rate over HW, particularly when we’re talking about a small HW like Fedor who fought in a division with 10 min first rounds, stomps, soccer kicks, etc.—and Fedor still managed to be undefeated for a decade, and set a record for title defenses in a single reign which has never been surpassed in that weight class. Fedor’s got more title defenses and title wins than Frankie. And that’s without even discussing the significance of WAMMA titles, PRIDE GP titles, RINGS tournament titles…
Hell, Frankie has been KOed more in lighter weight classes than Fedor at HW, to this day.
But it’s your ranking bud, you do you.

Maddening, innit?

Like you said in another post, these rankings are somewhat subjective. I like debating them, but as long as someone has criteria that makes sense and a list that makes sense with that criteria, it’s all good.
I have very, very, very little respect for any poster who shits on someone’s ranking but won’t put forth their own. There are posters I debate with all the time that I respect way more than that dude, because they at least have the guts to list their own ranking and stand by it.

 

[avenue94]

It's a good point - they are pretty close. I'll admit Holloway is probably last on that list I just posted.

It's hard for me to not weigh the slide Frankie's had here in the later end of his career. I'm sure by the time Holloway retires he will also be on a similar skid. Him beating an older Frankie isn't a great accomplishment, but it's still something.

I also forgot to put Izzy on that list, he probably belongs somewhere between 11-15.

Why do you weigh losses at the end of the career? I understand from a nostalgia point, but if we're weighing p4p by resume, losses are effectively neutral outside of head to head matchups in my mind.

 

[SmoothPies]

Why do you weigh losses at the end of the career? I understand from a nostalgia point, but if we're weighing p4p by resume, losses are effectively neutral outside of head to head matchups in my mind.

When you say losses are neutral outside of head to head matchups, are you saying that they don't matter in a fighter's legacy when it comes to the GOAT discussion?

If so, I don't agree. I agree that losses at the end of a career (i.e. Frankie, BJ, Silva) shouldn't matter as much as a loss in someone's prime, but losses as a whole do matter.

Otherwise - Werdum might be in the top 5 P4P all time when you look at who he has beaten. Conversely, Khabib wouldn't even be in the top 30 if you don't take losses into consideration.

 

[CashMoney1991]

top 20 at the worst, def. not top 10 he was never a dominant champ and I don't count ties as a title defense, but boy I do love Frankie

 

[pankrat]

Lol I know exactly what his problem is, and I wouldn’t even waste my time with that guy. He has bipolar meltdowns in every thread he posts in, and absolutely lost his shit in the past because I ranked Cruz ahead of Edgar all time. After like 3 pages of his shrieking and whining, I asked (politely, actually) for his top 10 so I could look at it.

He replied and said he didn’t have one. <Lmaoo><45>

Lol, I was like:

So whereas you had the balls to post a top 25 ranking just now—which I respect—this dude has no such balls.
I just ignore his posts when I see them.

"Balls" for posting in a sherdog forum?

Lol think about that. Pretty telling about you

 

[felmmando]

I'd say it depends on how you measure it. If you're going by skills and compare him to his coevals, he certainly is: he had a reasonable claim to being the best fighter in the UFC at his peak. However, the sport has since evolved past him, and his record, like many other greats', has been diminished by fighting on in decline.

 

[pankrat]

I thought it was a decent list, where is he so wrong?

To have Cruz above Johnson is abysmal.

I know the guy anyways and know for a fact that its a dishonest bitch as Ive ever seen one

 

[avenue94]

When you say losses are neutral outside of head to head matchups, are you saying that they don't matter in a fighter's legacy when it comes to the GOAT discussion?

If so, I don't agree. I agree that losses at the end of a career (i.e. Frankie, BJ, Silva) shouldn't matter as much as a loss in someone's prime, but losses as a whole do matter.

Otherwise - Werdum might be in the top 5 P4P all time when you look at who he has beaten. Conversely, Khabib wouldn't even be in the top 30 if you don't take losses into consideration.

Yeah I don't really weigh losses directly. I weigh wins, or lack there of. For example, was Izzy a less great fighter after he jumped up and loss his LHW title shot? That logically wouldn't make sense to me.

To use a crude analogy, wins are worth points in my book, while a loss is just zero points. It's not negative points that make a fighter's resume worse.

 

[avenue94]

I'd say it depends on how you measure it. If you're going by skills and compare him to his coevals, he certainly is: he had a reasonable claim to being the best fighter in the UFC at his peak. However, the sport has since evolved past him, and his record, like many other greats', has been diminished by fighting on in decline.

I don't think the sport evolved that much past him (there are very few fighter who blend wrestling and striking so well), and his game certainly doesn't get enough credit for how influenced the metagame in the sport.

 

[Midget Boxer]

Really? Where would you put Edgar on this list? I think he falls outside the top 20 p4p.

1. Fedor
2. GSP
3. Jones
4. Silva
5. Aldo
6. Mighty Mouse
7. Cruz
8. Khabib
9. Cormier
10. Hendo
11. Volkanovski
12. Matt Hughes
13. Usman
14. Izzy
15. Chuck
16. Stipe
17. Oliveira
    
18. Max Holloway
    
19. Shevchenko
20. Nunes
21. Henry Cejudo
22. Randy
23. Vitor
24. Conor
25. BJ Penn

Yeah this is a good fucking list. Tho I'd take Silva over GSP and have jones #1

 

[fortheo]

Really? Where would you put Edgar on this list? I think he falls outside the top 20 p4p.

1. Fedor
2. GSP
3. Jones
4. Silva
5. Aldo
6. Mighty Mouse
7. Cruz
8. Khabib
9. Cormier
10. Hendo
11. Volkanovski
12. Matt Hughes
13. Usman
14. Izzy
15. Chuck
16. Stipe
17. Oliveira
    
18. Max Holloway
    
19. Shevchenko
20. Nunes
21. Henry Cejudo
22. Randy
23. Vitor
24. Conor
25. BJ Penn

I could make a decent argument for having Frankie over Oliveira, Max, Khabib, and Cruz. Maybe even Izzy too.

 

[SeattleFightFan]

I have very, very, very little respect for any poster who shits on someone’s ranking but won’t put forth their own.

Ditto. 15 years ago, this was common courtesy, if not just common fucking sense. Today it's rare.

 

[DOMMA]

I could make a decent arguement for having Frankie over Oliveira, Max, Khabib, and Cruz. Maybe even Izzy too.

I don't know. I looked at all of these guys and their accomplishments, win streaks, opponents records, and losses and do not feel Edgar beats out any of these guys. Yes, Edgar was great, but he lost key fights in his prime, including a stretch of losing 4 of 5 in his prime. He had 3 title defenses, he beat Penn again fought Maynard (draw) and Maynard again (win) before losing to Benson.

 

[avenue94]

Yes, Edgar was great, but he lost key fights in his prime, including a stretch of losing 4 of 5 in his prime.

He's never loss 4 of 5 in his prime. Not to mention losing three in a row (2 controversial decisions and a copmettive loss) to Bendo and then arguably the GOAT is nothing to be ashamed of.

I wouldn't put Frankie over all the guys listed before but there is a case for some. Such as early prime Oliveria, who Frankie thrashed as a tuneup.