People on this forum often claim that MMA athletes are "unskilled" compared to their brethren in NBA or NFL and quite often Brock is used as an example of MMA being inferior. I mean, a 30+ athlete becoming champion within his first 4 fights - that's a damning indictment right? Wrong. Brock in MMA can be likened to guys like Shaq, Wilt Chamberlain or DeAndre Jordan in the NBA (or any defensive block of meat in the NFL): like Shaq, he's a guy with a very limited skillset (wrestling for Brock, postgame for Shaq) whose physical advantages just happen to be so big that he doesn't need anything else - he can just impose what he's good at and most opponents will be helpless. There are guys on the street who are better shooters or handlers than Shaq and there are guys in your local dojo who are better strikers than Brock - but very few who have go physcial advantages like them. If Brock was 40 pounds lighter or Shaq a foot shorter both would have gone nowhere in their sports. Agreed?