Phil Davis may be the proof of the UFC brand power

[PAPERCLIP30]

Edit: I’m just drunk and was being a dick out of technicality.


I see your point. It’s a fair one.

 

[Superzorro]

You're missing the entire point. Who the hell decides what is a "nobody"? For those that seriously follow MMA, Vadim Nemkov is not a a "nobody", but an excellent fighter.

Similarly, you can very easily argue that Anthony Smith is a "nobody". He was knocked out at 185 by Thiago Santos, not even an elite contender at THAT weight, earlier this year.

Volkan Oezdemir didn't just lose, but was finished and exposed by this particular "nobody". Yet, he is still ranked 5th. And the "nobody", Smith, is 4th.

Phil Davis, a far more skilled fighter with a much longer history of success, barely loses a split decision to a much younger, more skilled "nobody", yet he falls out of the top 10 entirely, and the "nobody" who beat him, Nemkov, isn't ranked, either.

If you don't see that the only difference is "one of these fights happened in the UFC and other happened elsewhere", or that it's the Magic UFC Canvas Theory, I can't make it any clearer.

No, you just don't understand what ranks are. They aren't definitive statements. They're just theories. That's why fights happen to prove whether or not they are correct. Otherwise, we would just look at rankings and numbers to determine the winner of a fight. Vadim Nemkov is considered to be a "nobody" because he has never faced a high ranked opponent before. If you've never faced or beaten a ranked opponent before, it is impossible for you to be ranked.
Your frustration lies in the entire idea of rankings. You don't think they should exist basically, because the logic behind them is flawed, which is a valid point - they don't prove anything. But within this flawed system, to say that Vadim Nemkov or Phil Davis should be ranked higher is simply wrong.

 

[PolarBearPaulVarelans]

No, you just don't understand what ranks are. They aren't definitive statements. They're just theories. That's why fights happen to prove whether or not they are correct. Otherwise, we would just look at rankings and numbers to determine the winner of a fight. Vadim Nemkov is considered to be a "nobody" because he has never faced a high ranked opponent before.

What you keep missing, whether intentionally or otherwise, is that the concept of "nobody" is subjective. And in your case and in the case of Sherdog's divisional rankings, informed by "did he fight in the magic canvas of the UFC or not?"

You only think Smith (whose only good win at 205 is Oezdemir) and Oezdemir are "somebodies" because they're fighting in the UFC as opposed to any other organization.

But within this flawed system, to say that Vadim Nemkov or Phil Davis should be ranked higher is simply wrong.

So Nemkov doesn't deserve to be top 10 after beating the previous #5 guy, Davis?! How do you justify that, shill?

Whereas Anthony Smith, whose only significant victory at 205 is recent "nobody" Oezdemir, is #4 AND Oezdemir is himself #5?

Shameless UFC shills are so transparent.

 

[Superzorro]

What you keep missing, whether intentionally or otherwise, is that the concept of "nobody" is subjective. And in your case and in the case of Sherdog's divisional rankings, informed by "did he fight in the magic canvas of the UFC or not?"

You only think Smith (whose only good win at 205 is Oezdemir) and Oezdemir are "somebodies" because they're fighting in the UFC as opposed to any other organization.



So Nemkov doesn't deserve to be top 10 after beating the previous #5 guy, Davis?! How do you justify that, shill?

Whereas Anthony Smith, whose only significant victory at 205 is recent "nobody" Oezdemir, is #4 AND Oezdemir is himself #5?

Shameless UFC shills are so transparent.

I personally have a hard time ranking Smith and Oezdemir - if they are in my list, its fringe top fifteen. But I do know they would do better in Bellator than they are currently doing in the UFC, and had their careers primarily taken place in Bellator, they would be seen as higher ranked fighters.

No. If Lando Vannata beat Tony Ferguson, he wouldn't suddenly be the number one contender at lightweight. Uriah Hall beating Gegard Mousasi doesn't mean they get to suddenly switch places in the rankings either. Rankings to me are about consistency. This is especially true in the case of Nemkov, considering that he beat the #5 ranked fighter by split decision, and has faced a whopping total of one elite fighter.

 

[PolarBearPaulVarelans]

I personally have a hard time ranking Smith and Oezdemir - if they are in my list, its fringe top fifteen.

So what is your list? You're being very evasive right now, claiming that neither Davis nor Nemkov is top 10, but now apparently Smith and Oezdemir aren't, either. Yet, despite this, the UFC's magic canvas apparently renders all their fighters vastly superior.

Who does that leave for your top 10, then?

But I do know they would do better in Bellator than they are currently doing in the UFC, and had their careers primarily taken place in Bellator,

Oezdemir DID fight in Bellator. And he failed. Oops!

they would be seen as higher ranked fighters

Comical. The only Bellator fighters that receive an iota of respect are the ones that were very successful in the UFC first.

Otherwise, Douglas Lima would be ranked much higher, and Chandler and Patricio Freire would be top 10 in their respective divisions.

No. If Lando Vannata beat Tony Ferguson,

You're comparing Vadim Nemkov to Lando Vannata?!?

Thank you for the perfect illustration of the OP's point.

 

[Broke Lester]

Machida dropped to mw 5 years ago, and Davis actually has a win over Glover. And Machida. If you're talking way back when glover koed Bader sure, he'd outrank him. If we're talking currently, there's no way.

I was talking about the time when they left the UFC, however I do agree that if we are talking about right now they both would outrank Glover. Glover hasn't been the same since Rumble took his soul plus i think he's close to being 40 years old.

 

[GoshiShun17]

Phil is a fine fighter but most of the time he would face elite competition, he would lose.

Rashad came out and dominated him using wrestling of all things, and exposed how far behind Phil was at that level. His next step up in competition was Rumble, and that fight one as one sided BEATING.

His last fight in the UFC was a loss against Bader and was absolutely tedious to watch.

So we know Phil was one full rung down the ladder from the top guys, and would likely go 50/50 against the second tier of top 10 fighters like Bader. Compounding things is he had plenty of stinkers.

The 205 division is generally a barren wasteland and Davis is a competent fighter. Under no circumstances was he then, or now, the level of a 'title picture' guys. The title picture fighters are head-and-shoulders better than Davis.

All facts spoken here. If anything it looks like the OP bought the UFC brand hype and believes that Phil is/was a top contender just because the UFC tried to push him as one. TS is a victim to what he speaks against.

 

[Superzorro]

So what is your list? You're being very evasive right now, claiming that neither Davis nor Nemkov is top 10, but now apparently Smith and Oezdemir aren't, either. Yet, despite this, the UFC's magic canvas apparently renders all their fighters vastly superior.

Who does that leave for your top 10, then?



Oezdemir DID fight in Bellator. And he failed. Oops!



Comical. The only Bellator fighters that receive an iota of respect are the ones that were very successful in the UFC first.

Otherwise, Douglas Lima would be ranked much higher, and Chandler and Patricio Freire would be top 10 in their respective divisions.



You're comparing Vadim Nemkov to Lando Vannata?!?

Thank you for the perfect illustration of the OP's point.

I'm not sure. The LHW division is awfully weak in general. To make a list of fighters that I would consider to be top 10 would be very difficult because of this. Also, Phil Davis is definitely in my top 10. Not sure where I stated he wasn't. Phil Davis, Ryan Bader and maybe King Mo are the only fighters that I would consider to be top 5 - 10 in Bellator. To me, it seems like either you're letting other people on this thread argue for me, or you're arguing with an imaginary person in your head. Where we disagree is with Nemkov suddenly appearing in the top 5 of LHW.

Phil Davis stays in the top 10, drops a few places. Nemkov can actually have a rank, just not in the top ten until he can fight more elite opponents, and prove this wasn't either a fluke or simply a bad style match up for Phil. And lets reiterate the fact that it was a split decision win, that could have easily gone either way.

A whopping total of one loss, before moving on. Where as in the UFC, as much more mature and experienced fighter, he has two losses.

No, if you start your career in Bellator, and have a career of crushing cans, winning the title a few times, losing a few fights that you shouldn't have (i.e. Michael Chandler), there will still be a large sum of fans that think you can beat the number one lightweight in the world, who has shown zero weaknesses, and proven himself to be unstoppable against the elite (i.e. Khabib). Starting in Bellator and either making your career there, or hopping around from lesser org to lesser org actually has its benefits, just ask Ben Askren. Instead of proving you can beat UFC fighters, you can just say you would, about half of the people will believe you.

Now I'm comparing Vadim Nemkov to Lando Vannata, and not the circumstances surrounding them? Ok. Look, I think we should stop here. You write like a whiny child and it's clear that this topic makes you feel some kind of way, so I doubt there's anything that either of us can gain from continuing with this.

 

[Roljo]

Phil is a fine fighter but most of the time he would face elite competition, he would lose.

Rashad came out and dominated him using wrestling of all things, and exposed how far behind Phil was at that level. His next step up in competition was Rumble, and that fight one as one sided BEATING.

His last fight in the UFC was a loss against Bader and was absolutely tedious to watch.

So we know Phil was one full rung down the ladder from the top guys, and would likely go 50/50 against the second tier of top 10 fighters like Bader. Compounding things is he had plenty of stinkers.

The 205 division is generally a barren wasteland and Davis is a competent fighter. Under no circumstances was he then, or now, the level of a 'title picture' guys. The title picture fighters are head-and-shoulders better than Davis.

Oezdemir got a title shot and and Smith is in the title picture, two fighters Davis would play with..

 

[GoshiShun17]

Back when PRIDE was around, or even Strikeforce was around, personally for me was really fighter oriented. What I mean by that is what I was going for were really the fighters, not necessarily where they were fighting at, though PRIDE obviously was better than UFC, the same sentiment of which is also shared by Anderson Silva, the fighter whom the UFC has been trying to advertise as the greatest of all time.

Phil Davis is a top light heavyweight, who could have easily been in the title picture if he didn't decide to leave the UFC for Bellator. He just lost in Bellator to an up and coming Russian fighter in Nemkov, and not a single fuck seems to be given here.

Maybe, at this day and age, the UFC have become so popular nowadays, that everything else feels like a minor league, almost like how some fans might only pay attention to what's going around in NBA or MLB, when it comes to such sports, though it's not really the same in MMA or with UFC, with PRIDE having had better talents, Strikeforce with better heavyweight and arguablly equally tough middleweight divisions, and even now Bellator's WW and MW and LHW and HW,s top fighters likely giving anyone run for their money outside likely Jon Jones, who's just a special fighter.

Maybe in another ten years, maybe UFC will really be like NBAs or MLBs, and people might really buy whatever BS the UFC is trying to sell you, or so called MMA- journalists.

I agree with the overall premise of this thread. But I strongly disagree with 5he example you provided in Phil Davis. I'll admit I haven't followed him much since the UFC released him, but during his time in the UFC he wasn't he was garhage. Yes I'm being harsh but fuck it. He was never that good, definitely not a believable title contender.

A better example is when the UFC merged with the WEC and the WEC lightweights took over. Also the middleweights from strikeforce, although to be fair most of them weren't as battle tested.

 

[whooty]

Davis and Bader would still be top 10, maybe even top 5 LHW.

 

[Organic Damage]

Davis even beat Gus

That wasn't the Mauler's final form though.

Davis is still hampered by the fact he doesn't really have anything if he can't impose his wrestling on you. Against a striker with competent TDD he sure doesn't look like a title contender.

 

[Area809]

The 205 division is generally a barren wasteland and Davis is a competent fighter. Under no circumstances was he then, or now, the level of a 'title picture' guys. The title picture fighters are head-and-shoulders better than Davis.

He beat Machida (former champ), Glover and Gus (title contenders). Come again?

He’s no DC or Jones or even Rumble, but no one else is. You have the upper A level tier, Jones/DC, and then there’s everyone else. He’s in the mix with everyone else.

 

[rjmbrd]

"Bader losing to Tito in 2011 is super relevant, guyz!"

"Gustaffson losing to Davis in 2010 is completely irrelevant, guyz!"

Does it feel good being such a shameless UFC NPC shill, rjmbrd?

Well lets unpack this for a minute, see if we can't suss out the differences here. Lets index it:

- Ryan Bader is 4 years older than Gus
- In 2010, Gus was 23 years old, with 9 career fights

- Phil Davis was Gus's 2nd UFC fight
- Ortiz was Bader's 7th UFC fight

We can stop here, because anyone with a deep knowledge of MMA knows you need to experience fighting at that top level to gauge where a fighter is at. I would consider a 23 year old Gus similar to a 21 year old Max Holloway losing repeatedly early in his UFC run.

Of course we wouldn't consider Max the same fighter today, and we saw him rise to the level of elite over time, just like Gus did.

I would argue that Bader, in his 7th UFC fight, getting tapped by Ortiz, is a different thing. We can then look at sequential events and see he was coming off a torching from Jones (a common opponent with Gus) and goes on to get summarily knocked out by both Machida and Glover (another common opponent)

We can literally watch a highlight reel of Bader getting stopped 5 times in the UFC. Had he fought DC or Gus, it would be 7.

 

[daniel san]

I wouldn't say Pride was very fighter oriented, it was more entertainment oriented. Lots of freakshows, mismatches, spectacles - it was incredibly fun to watch. The UFC is far more of a "sport" than Pride ever was for good and bad but in these last 1-2 years after WME acquisition, I'd say it's getting more and more entertainment oriented. Boring fighters like Davis will have a much harder time fighting their way up to a title shot than someone who is exciting. It has always been like this, but it has become more frequent. Davis is a good fighter but since I don't enjoy watching him fight I don't care if he's gone and with Bellator, haven't watched him fight since he left the UFC.

The UFC clearly has the top guys in most divisions. Naturally there are up and coming fighters fighting in smaller leagues or even great fighters in other orgs, but the best in each division is still with the UFC. Hopefully Bellator can start building up a better roster and not just UFC rejects.

 

[PolarBearPaulVarelans]

You write like a whiny child and it's clear that this topic makes you feel some kind of way, so I doubt there's anything that either of us can gain from continuing with this.

Translation- "I got exposed as a whiny, hypocritical UFC shill who pontificates about rankings but can't even come up with a simple top 10 list of his own, so I'm going to arbitrarily ask for the conversation to end!"

 

[PolarBearPaulVarelans]

Well lets unpack this for a minute, see if we can't suss out the differences here. Lets index it:

- Ryan Bader is 4 years older than Gus
- In 2010, Gus was 23 years old, with 9 career fights

- Phil Davis was Gus's 2nd UFC fight
- Ortiz was Bader's 7th UFC fight

We can stop here, because anyone with a deep knowledge of MMA knows you need to experience fighting at that top level to gauge where a fighter is at. I would consider a 23 year old Gus similar to a 21 year old Max Holloway losing repeatedly early in his UFC run.

Of course we wouldn't consider Max the same fighter today, and we saw him rise to the level of elite over time, just like Gus did.

I would argue that Bader, in his 7th UFC fight, getting tapped by Ortiz, is a different thing. We can then look at sequential events and see he was coming off a torching from Jones (a common opponent with Gus) and goes on to get summarily knocked out by both Machida and Glover (another common opponent)

We can literally watch a highlight reel of Bader getting stopped 5 times in the UFC. Had he fought DC or Gus, it would be 7.

You're actually TRYING to defend that a bout from 2011 (which ended in a fluky manner) is relevant for a fighter who has massively evolved and improved since then, but that a bout from 2010 that went all 3 rounds is completely irrelevant for a different fighter?

Incredible. The OP was more correct than he realized about UFC shills. I guess I didn't realize they were THIS mindless.

 

[blaseblah]

Hopefully Bellator can start building up a better roster and not just UFC rejects.

Actually all of the guys who have gone over to Bellator recently rejected the UFC contract.

 

[rjmbrd]

You're actually TRYING to defend that a bout from 2011 (which ended in a fluky manner) is relevant for a fighter who has massively evolved and improved since then, but that a bout from 2010 that went all 3 rounds is completely irrelevant for a different fighter?

Bader was in his 7th UFC fight, when he lost to Ortiz. I can show you a highlight reel of Bader getting stopped in the UFC a total of FIVE TIMES. He is not now, or has ever been, a top of the food chain fighter.

When Gus lost to Davis, he was only 23, completely green, and having his SECOND UFC fight.

They are different caliber fighters, which is why Bader goes on to be repeatedly stopped.

Incredible. The OP was more correct than he realized about UFC shills. I guess I didn't realize they were THIS mindless.

This is too stupid for a response, but here I go. Rory MacDonald and Moose are world class in their divisions, then and now, and are head and shoulders a better fighter than Bader and Davis ever was, or will be.

The org doesn't matter, this is just plain common sense, it should need to be stated.

 

[Pancake Sprawl]

Phil is a fine fighter but most of the time he would face elite competition, he would lose.

Rashad came out and dominated him using wrestling of all things, and exposed how far behind Phil was at that level. His next step up in competition was Rumble, and that fight one as one sided BEATING.

His last fight in the UFC was a loss against Bader and was absolutely tedious to watch.

So we know Phil was one full rung down the ladder from the top guys, and would likely go 50/50 against the second tier of top 10 fighters like Bader. Compounding things is he had plenty of stinkers.

The 205 division is generally a barren wasteland and Davis is a competent fighter. Under no circumstances was he then, or now, the level of a 'title picture' guys. The title picture fighters are head-and-shoulders better than Davis.

nah, he's a title picture fighter in TODAY'S LHW division.

you don't think he'd be able to outlast 1 rd and smotherfuck guys like Anthony Smith and Oezdamir to a decision? i think he can.

i'm not saying Davis is better than you're giving him credit for, i'm saying the UFC LHW division is A LOT shittier than you think.