Stephen or Rogan, who do you side with?

Emphatically, he did not ruin any narrative.

Exactly. With the exception of the fact that he did....

The man is a documented clown who has a history - going back years - of dropping horrible dilettante MMA insights which make it quite clear he has no insight into the sport beyond watching a couple of episodes of embedded.

Even "if" any of that was true, it has absolutely to bearing on him giving his opinion on this fight, and the hilarious reaction from many like yourself afterwards. You're being babies.

His opinion is as valid as the drunk MMA fan that’s interviewed outside the stadium, but he presents and carries himself as an expert, and his self belief is unshakeable. He is an actor and a clown and he’s very dangerous for the sport of MMA. Excuse him if you want

You're free to think this of him. It's perfectly fine.

The fact is ESPN is definitely going to continue asking him for analysis on MMA, and they will continue to put him on UFC events, specifically for the type of promotion and attention he brings to sports....He's actually really good for MMA despite you and many others needing a safe place to shelter you from him criticizing a poor performance. You're going to have to be big boys going forward if you're going to survive this sport being covered in the mainstream.
 
Rogan because he actually gives a shit
If Rogan gave a shit he would have some sort of reaction when Dana White routinely shits on and fucks over the fighters. He blew this way out of proportion.
 
At one point Rogan was calling Ronda once in a lifetime human being...

Rogan opinions get clouded by his fanboyism
 
I'm siding with mac. 40 seconds isint enough to really judge If there was any improvement however for S.A.S. to call a fighter a quitter is super bad taste.
 
Rogan lacks any objectivity when it comes to analysis. In general, he's not a very level headed and objective person.

He also spent his entire commentating career in an environment where everyone is on the company payroll. He doesn't say things that stray too far from what the UFC wants the narrative to be.

Outside of that environment, sports analysis is actually pretty harsh, and you have characters like Smith who play up the "hater" role, perhaps a little too much at times. But he actually made some solid points after the last event. Personally I thought that cowboy did get a little overwhelmed by the occasion.

You could tell Rogan was taken aback by an actual critical voice. He was like - wtf is this?

But, if they wanna do deal with ESPN, well, you're playing with the grown ups now.
 
I love how everyone sided with Stephen in this thread! Haha
 
If you weren’t such a nobody I’d actually think ESPN was paying you a few dollars to write this bullshit.

MMA has been on Fox for over a decade and everyone’s mom knows who Conor is. It’s mainstream already.

To the point, the majority of major sports coverage is absolutely awful, and MMA has benefited so far from actually having the majority of its insight delivered by people heavily invested in the sport, and a fairly high degree of knowledge, of its techniques, it’s ethos and it’s history. Cockface might bring a greater number of eyes, but he will also - absolutely definitely - bring down the quality of analysis.

I could care less if there’s a higher number of eyes on it, that’s not a bonus to me. I care about the quality of the product and this fuckin douchebag will be detrimental to that.

Nonetheless, thank you, I suppose, for a considered response.

I didn’t realise I hated the people on this board so much until I came back here just now. For the most part they admire Stephen A, because he’s as uneducated and dilettante as they are, and he legitimises their stupidity. You have a considered opinion at least, and I’m thankful for that small mercy.

Exactly. With the exception of the fact that he did....



Even "if" any of that was true, it has absolutely to bearing on him giving his opinion on this fight, and the hilarious reaction from many like yourself afterwards. You're being babies.



You're free to think this of him. It's perfectly fine.

The fact is ESPN is definitely going to continue asking him for analysis on MMA, and they will continue to put him on UFC events, specifically for the type of promotion and attention he brings to sports....He's actually really good for MMA despite you and many others needing a safe place to shelter you from him criticizing a poor performance. You're going to have to be big boys going forward if you're going to survive this sport being covered in the mainstream.
 
critics are welcome. If somebody was to put dana and the co in their place, the sport would have been in much better place today

I'm talking about shitting on fighters, not Dana. Imagine if the entire media came down on fighters who lose as harshly as this forum does. 'Were they EVER good?!? No! Completely overrated garbage! Never beat anyone who wasn't a can! Retire now fuckface!' etc etc.
 
Stephen A. offers an opinion that isn't Dana White's. Let that sink in.
 
People had been saying similar (not as harsh) things about Cowboy for a long time. Cowboy even referenced that popular opinion in UFC media and tried to say how he was going to prove everyone wrong.

Stephen did nothing wrong, nor did he have an original opinion. Joe is just a part of a Conor nutt hugging crew which includes Chael and Ariel.
 
The title of this thread is ridiculous. “Rogan or SAS? Who do you side with?”

How about not making everything about joining one side or the other?
 
If you weren’t such a nobody I’d actually think ESPN was paying you a few dollars to write this bullshit.

MMA has been on Fox for over a decade and everyone’s mom knows who Conor is. It’s mainstream already.

To the point, the majority of major sports coverage is absolutely awful, and MMA has benefited so far from actually having the majority of its insight delivered by people heavily invested in the sport, and a fairly high degree of knowledge, of its techniques, it’s ethos and it’s history. Cockface might bring a greater number of eyes, but he will also - absolutely definitely - bring down the quality of analysis.

I could care less if there’s a higher number of eyes on it, that’s not a bonus to me. I care about the quality of the product and this fuckin douchebag will be detrimental to that.

Nonetheless, thank you, I suppose, for a considered response.

I didn’t realise I hated the people on this board so much until I came back here just now. For the most part they admire Stephen A, because he’s as uneducated and dilettante as they are, and he legitimises their stupidity. You have a considered opinion at least, and I’m thankful for that small mercy.

I've been hardcore into mma since mid 90's. I've been practicing combat sports for more than thirty yrs.
And I enjoyed SAS comments.

I feel you abnormally emotionally invested.
Just relax kid no one hate you here for your opinion, or leave this board it might be too much for you
 
Last edited:
Back
Top