I'm not a big critic or fan of Joe Rogan, but after viewing the Jones-Cormier fight, I do wonder whether his commentating is too subjective in noting which fighter is doing more damage. I just remember him commenting that Jones continual elbows to DC in the clinch were so deadly and ghastly. But he had a far weaker reaction to DC's uppercut in the clinch, as if they were less severe. I am no expert, but I would guess the uppercuts were at least as forceful as the elbows. But it is easy to get wrapped in Rogan's subjective take and possibly get a skewed outlook on fights. Rogan is often called.out for favoring fighters just because he apparently likes them better. But I also find problematic his personal views on which tactics allegedly hurt the most or are most effective. I thought in this case that DC deserved more credit than he received.