Are we just making things up, or do some people rely on actual facts?
MJ is a VERY GOOD fighter?...okay he's fighting in the UFC, of course he is good, but very inconsistent, like Barboza.
Nate is great at judging distance and avoiding to get hit? He gets hit with 3.41 shots per minute.
Nate is clearly better on the ground and has the advantage with size, reach, cardio and "chin" (or call it heart), but lets not pretend like there is no way to beat him.
Of course Conor cannot go the RDA way to win, because he's a different fighter, but he has other tools (footwork, speed, despite the first fight: power and his kicks).
Comparing both, no Conor is not the favourite IMHO, because i see more ways for Nate to get the W than the otherway around...but please don't act like Nate only needs to step inside the octagon and decide how long he wants Conor to stay in the fight.
"Aldo is better in every aspect of mma"
"Conor will put Nates light out within 2 minutes"
"Rockhold will murder Bisping"
"Cormier will "literally" rape Anderson"
Some people will never learn