So is Chad Mendes going to beat Frank Edgar?

Mendes has outstanding top control and has very good defensive wrestling.
Just what has Edgar proved when wrestling those "more accomplished fighters"?
A TD establishing no control? Evidently, that approach was taken very lightly by the Judges in his last fights.
Defending a TD? Defensive "anything" is not a Scoring criteria.
Are you describing edgar's innocuous "bunch punching" and busy, busy striking style?
Even with a momentary knock down of Henderson, The Judging reflected the "not effective" consensus.
I like Frankie very much, but I'm not blind.
His fans fail to ask themselves "why was Edgar rewarded in Penn/Edgar 1 and Maynard/Edgar 2 for the same style that lost him the Henderson fights"?
The Judging criteria has changed. "Effective" is now the key word.
The fact is, Edgar Fans, Edgar lost twice to Ben. And if they fought again, and it was minute by minute the same as their second fight, Edgar would lose again.
Mendes has the ability to be MORE "effective" than Edgar. That is precisely why I would not take Mendes lightly when matched up against Edgar.

I like Chad. But it would be Frankies easiest opponent in a loooong time imo. Frankie would take a clear UD or possibly tko.
 
After Edgar dominates Aldo and Mendes beats Manny, do you think Money Mendes can beat Edgar for the title?

I think Money Mendes is a better wrestler and striker than Edgar. Also I dont want to say Aldo got lucky, but Mendes was clearly winning before the awkward shot and I think Mendes beats Aldo 7/10 times

what fight were you watching? mendes was clearly beating aldo? okay... and no aldo is going to wreck the fuck out of frankie. theres a reason he's fighting manny. because he's not as awesome as you think. the ufc proves this by putting him in there with someone like manny lol
 
"He was winning before getting Koed"

haha nice.

And then, if Edgar beats Aldo, which is a big if, Edgar would outbox and outwrestle him. Edgar did it to better, more powerful wrestler. If he can slam/toss Maynard, he can threw Mendes out of the cage, and i'm not even an edgar fan.

Mendes is a really good wrestler, but the limitation of his game was shown in the Aldo fight. If he can take the guy down, he's planless. He has a decent power, but this is not sufficient against a good striker. Mendes is not a good striker, Edgar is one of the most precise and efficient.
 
After the booking of Mendes last three fights I'm pretty sure he's getting Leonard Garcia after he beats Manny.

As for the potential match up with Edgar I think Frankie takes it.
 
Edgar isn't beating Aldo. And Chad isn't beating Edgar. That's how I see it.
 
I think it is more likely that Edgar loses and Mendes wins then they fight. I would like to see that fight as they are very similar, it will tell us who the best wrestler/boxer is at 145.
 
I like Chad. But it would be Frankies easiest opponent in a loooong time imo. Frankie would take a clear UD or possibly tko.
At this point in Mendes growth as a fighter, I would beg to differ on Chad's being "easy" for anyone, especially Frankie.
Again, based on the pattern of recent Edgar fights, regards style, until that changes, I don't think a "clear" UD is in Edgar's future.
I suppose a TKO is possible, with Frankie's last Maynard fight an example.
 
"He was winning before getting Koed"

haha nice.

And then, if Edgar beats Aldo, which is a big if, Edgar would outbox and outwrestle him. Edgar did it to better, more powerful wrestler. If he can slam/toss Maynard, he can threw Mendes out of the cage, and i'm not even an edgar fan.

Mendes is a really good wrestler, but the limitation of his game was shown in the Aldo fight. If he can take the guy down, he's planless. He has a decent power, but this is not sufficient against a good striker. Mendes is not a good striker, Edgar is one of the most precise and efficient.
I can factually surmise that you are flattering Edgar in ANY of Maynard/Edgar fights regarding their Wrestling.
Please back up your facts. I'll wait, thank you.
 
Mendes has outstanding top control and has very good defensive wrestling.
Just what has Edgar proved when wrestling those "more accomplished fighters"?
A TD establishing no control? Evidently, that approach was taken very lightly by the Judges in his last fights.
Defending a TD? Defensive "anything" is not a Scoring criteria.
Are you describing edgar's innocuous "bunch punching" and busy, busy striking style?
Even with a momentary knock down of Henderson, The Judging reflected the "not effective" consensus.
I like Frankie very much, but I'm not blind.
His fans fail to ask themselves "why was Edgar rewarded in Penn/Edgar 1 and Maynard/Edgar 2 for the same style that lost him the Henderson fights"?
The Judging criteria has changed. "Effective" is now the key word.
The fact is, Edgar Fans, Edgar lost twice to Ben. And if they fought again, and it was minute by minute the same as their second fight, Edgar would lose again.
Mendes has the ability to be MORE "effective" than Edgar. That is precisely why I would not take Mendes lightly when matched up against Edgar.

The judging criteria has not changed, you're just making that up because it fits your argument. "Effective Striking" has always been a criteria for which a fight is judged by. And lol if you think Edgar was "rewarded" decisions in either of the fights you mentioned. They were both close fights but he got the decision based on establishing better ring/octagon control, just like countless decisions in boxing matches that were very close. And as for as Edgar/Henderson 2 goes, considering the consensus of MMA fans including the bosses of Zuffa thought Edgar won the fight, using what the judges decided for one isolated fight to slight Edgar doesn't hold much substantial value considering that the actual scorecards themselves were totally bogus, giving Benson a 2-1 edge in round 4 which was probably Edgar's most dominant round (even Benson fans at the time thought Edgar won r4 before the scorecard pic was released and all 3 of sherdog's round by round writers gave the 4th to Edgar) if memory serves me correct. You can't say that the judges didn't value Edgar's striking as "effective" because the scorecards don't match the moments in the fight when Edgar landed his effective strikes. Judging the fight as a whole and using the judges as an arguing point when the judges score round by round is an invalid approach to the point your trying to make.

And as far as his wrestling goes, he's top 10 all time in td's landed despite basically being a midget for his division with a bunch of his fights being against top notch competition. Does he sometimes seemingly let guys up too easy or not maintain top control? Yes. Does he seem to fight with points and mind and use TD's as more of a device for scoring points rather than advancing towards a finish? Probably. But you can't accomplish what he has in terms of landed impressive TD's without being a very good wrestler. Not even close.
 
After Edgar dominates Aldo and Mendes beats Manny, do you think Money Mendes can beat Edgar for the title?

I think Money Mendes is a better wrestler and striker than Edgar. Also I dont want to say Aldo got lucky, but Mendes was clearly winning before the awkward shot and I think Mendes beats Aldo 7/10 times

Every post you make is just stupid please stop
 
Imho Aldo beats Edgar, but Edgar will always be the number 2 if he stays at FW. I dont see anyone but Aldo beating him
 
After Edgar dominates Aldo and Mendes beats Manny, do you think Money Mendes can beat Edgar for the title?

I think Money Mendes is a better wrestler and striker than Edgar. Also I dont want to say Aldo got lucky, but Mendes was clearly winning before the awkward shot and I think Mendes beats Aldo 7/10 times

Congratulations on a great troll account
 
The judging criteria has not changed, you're just making that up because it fits your argument. "Effective Striking" has always been a criteria for which a fight is judged by. And lol if you think Edgar was "rewarded" decisions in either of the fights you mentioned. They were both close fights but he got the decision based on establishing better ring/octagon control, just like countless decisions in boxing matches that were very close. And as for as Edgar/Henderson 2 goes, considering the consensus of MMA fans including the bosses of Zuffa thought Edgar won the fight, using what the judges decided for one isolated fight to slight Edgar doesn't hold much substantial value considering that the actual scorecards themselves were totally bogus, giving Benson a 2-1 edge in round 4 which was probably Edgar's most dominant round (even Benson fans at the time thought Edgar won r4 before the scorecard pic was released and all 3 of sherdog's round by round writers gave the 4th to Edgar) if memory serves me correct. You can't say that the judges didn't value Edgar's striking as "effective" because the scorecards don't match the moments in the fight when Edgar landed his effective strikes. Judging the fight as a whole and using the judges as an arguing point when the judges score round by round is an invalid approach to the point your trying to make.

And as far as his wrestling goes, he's top 10 all time in td's landed despite basically being a midget for his division with a bunch of his fights being against top notch competition. Does he sometimes seemingly let guys up too easy or not maintain top control? Yes. Does he seem to fight with points and mind and use TD's as more of a device for scoring points rather than advancing towards a finish? Probably. But you can't accomplish what he has in terms of landed impressive TD's without being a very good wrestler. Not even close.
Good post, no matter how out of touch.
You are defending the undeniable and indefensible.
It would help your case if you had made even a moments worth of research. Instead you are just another fanboy in a "winebubble".
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,234,816
Messages
55,309,473
Members
174,732
Latest member
herrsackbauer
Back
Top