The Diaz bros wasted their primes

That thread screams casual. Both Diaz bros fight since they are about 20. By the time they were 30 Nate had 28 fights, Nick 35 or something. Both of them dove into deep waters early with next to no can crushing. Nick's second fight is fucking Chris Lytle. They fought the who's who in their divisions.

By the time they were 30, they were both spent. Exactly like Jon Jones looks spent in recent years - he started early, was insanely good, but 10 years after and 28 fights later he is a pale shadow of himself. Early starters have early primes, late starters have late primes. I thought everybody knew that. The Diaz bros didn't waste their primes, their primes were just earlier.
 
Hard to argue that they didn't. But for Nate, there were management problems. Then again, their relations with other people can be wonky not because of other people, so who knows. But they should've fought more when they got hot.

Also, in retrospect, maybe Nick should've indeed fought Khamzat. You lose to a killer newcomer - you'd get a second chance in everyone's eyes at a lower ranked guy, but you lose to twilight Hobbie, it really sets the ceiling low.

Anyways, it's all very hard to say, but fact at the end of every day for everyone is that all fighters' windows of opportunity are small. There is always more you could've done. Even the biggest name in the sport, Conor, kind of blew it post-Floyd.
 
blaseblah said:
He's only headlined a single card since the Conor fights. I may be a jabroni who goes to work every Monday through Friday, but if I became a star through being a late notice replacement on a card I would have made bigger moves than he has. The guy turned down a title fight for fucks sake.
Click to expand...


Nate was embroiled in a lawsuit with his former management company which kept him sidelined for over a year.

Not that it matters, because he made MILLIONS of dollars from the Conor rematch. He would return to a big win over Pettis, then make MILLIONS headlining Madison Square Garden for one of the most successful PPV events that entire year.

You are saying a guy who is well in the top 1% of all time UFC earners didn't make enough of his career. It is such a stupid thing to say I can't believe I'm typing this.
 
rjmbrd said:
Nate was embroiled in a lawsuit with his former management company which kept him sidelined for over a year.

Not that it matters, because he made MILLIONS of dollars from the Conor rematch. He would return to a big win over Pettis, then make MILLIONS headlining Madison Square Garden for one of the most successful PPV events that entire year.

You are saying a guy who is well in the top 1% of all time UFC earners didn't make enough of his career. It is such a stupid thing to say I can't believe I'm typing this.
Click to expand...

Assuming his lawsuit kept him sidelined for a year, which I doubt, what explains the other 2 years off?
 
Orochimaru 大蛇丸 said:
Nate did a great interview with Ariel a while ago explaining how he got to where he is marketing-wise... he is one of the few guys that understand the pro wrestling side of the sport... the Conor callout and all the shit he did to become a star was planned. He is MUCH smarter than people give him credit for.
Click to expand...


Nate is a self-made multimillionaire among hundreds of guys who will have little to show for their time in the UFC aside from brain damage and physical injuries.

He's smart and thoughtful and made a great life for himself and his family, pretty rare considering how bad the UFC pays people. He's the rare success story that hacked the system.
 
Maybe for them the prime part of their life was no fighting. Your point is valid from a fan perspective but I guess it has just suited their lifestyle to fight when they felt like it. They have made good money and have high acclaim despite their lack of titles etc
 
blaseblah said:
If that's the case what was stopping him from ducking wrestlers and waiting for strikers? My understanding is that the UFC is obligated to offer these guys 3 fights a year. There should have been at least one favorable matchup in the past 6 years. If not he could have called someone out and created fan interest for the fight.

Also if I recall Nate Diaz was offered a title shot against Tyron Woodley at one point. He should have fucking taken that fight, best chance he would ever have to win a title. Low output counter striker who doesn't like pressure and is easily backed against the cage.
Click to expand...

I don't think nick liked to politic and play the game like that. I don't know if thats a fact but that's how it appears to me.

I love nick diaz. But he had holes in his game he never even tried to fix and once fighters figured out those holes everyone exploited them and I think that shit drove nick crazy and made him not want to fight anymore. I don't think he wanted to play chess he wanted to scrap

I think the ufc kinda screwed up in not wanting to pay the man. They could have given him favorable matches that don't really have to do with chasing the title and the ufc would have had a license to print money and had a constant headliner without burning a title fight.

Nick diaz is just one of those asterisk next to his name fighters that maybe coulda been great but a million little things made it not be so. Guy probably needed a good manager and to change camps and for pride not to go outta business when it did.

That said nick hates to fight and doesn't seem to like the press all that much and while him being gone was our loss maybe it was what's best for him
 
Last edited:
blaseblah said:
Assuming his lawsuit kept him sidelined for a year, which I doubt, what explains the other 2 years off?
Click to expand...


It was dismissed roughly 2 years after Nate fought Conor in the rematch

https://www.espn.com/mma/story/_/id...r-agency-dismissed-lack-personal-jurisdiction


We don't have to guess, its public information.

Since a third Conor bout wasn't possible at the time, and Nate was now a self made multimillionaire and star, he got to pick his return fight and timing, which he did, and was a success. His next step was to sell out the most important venue in combat sports and have one of the most successful PPV events of that entire year.
 
rjmbrd said:
Nate is a self-made multimillionaire among hundreds of guys who will have little to show for their time in the UFC aside from brain damage and physical injuries.

He's smart and thoughtful and made a great life for himself and his family, pretty rare considering how bad the UFC pays people. He's the rare success story that hacked the system.
Click to expand...

He lucked into it. If RDA doesnt get injured and Conor chooses someone else to fight, Nate never becomes a star. I give him full credit for what he did in that fight but he's largely squandered the opportunities since then.
 
rjmbrd said:
It was dismissed roughly 2 years after Nate fought Conor in the rematch

https://www.espn.com/mma/story/_/id...r-agency-dismissed-lack-personal-jurisdiction


We don't have to guess, its public information.

Since a third Conor bout wasn't possible at the time, and Nate was now a self made multimillionaire and star, he got to pick his return fight and timing, which he did, and was a success. His next step was to sell out the most important venue in combat sports and have one of the most successful PPV events of that entire year.
Click to expand...

You're not addressing my question. Nate Diaz sat out for 3 years of his athletic prime. At no point was a lawsuit preventing him from competing.
 
blaseblah said:
He lucked into it. If RDA doesnt get injured and Conor chooses someone else to fight, Nate never becomes a star. I give him full credit for what he did in that fight but he's largely squandered the opportunities since then.
Click to expand...
You could take anyone's career and say they "lucked into" something

Conor "lucked into" beating Aldo at the end of an all time long reign
Ronda "lucked into" being one of the first women and beating up a shitty division
Brock "lucked into" beating small, old man, Randy Couture for the title

It's a pet peeve of mine when people try to diminish someone's accomplishments and says they just got lucky, people say that about every successful person ever
 
The assumption that a fighter makes more money by fighting regularly is not necessarily true...it depends on the fighter and the circumstances. Sometimes waiting for the right opportunities can be worthwhile.

If Nick takes fights (and loses) after GSP...does he get that lucrative PPV headlining fight with Silva where he earned points on top of his salary?

Nate could have fought after Conor...but he took time off, came back to a PPV co-main against Pettis and parlayed that win into a lucrative MSG headliner vs. Jorge 2.5 months later that also paid points on top of his salary. Maybe that doesn't happen if he took 'regular' fights during that time off if he does not win.
 
blaseblah said:
You're not addressing my question. Nate Diaz sat out for 3 years of his athletic prime. At no point was a lawsuit preventing him from competing.
Click to expand...

Absolutely nobody is in their "athletic prime" in their 30s.
 
they cant win fights. the more thy fight the more people realize this fact. so they leave because most people forget they arent that good and instead remember they mean mug the camera so they must be great.
 
Nick hates fighting. Didn’t we hear that all week?

I enjoyed his career. So many fun moments, so many good fights. He had his shot though. GSP was the major roadblock for a lot of talented fighters who might’ve been champion. You can’t say he didn’t try.

Nate upset the money train and became a huge name. In a lot of ways, he was more successful than his brother, although not as talented.
 
Personally, I never thought much of Nick Diaz, he was so thoroughly dominated by GSP after the fight buildup, it was clear he was never going to be a top talent. They had occasional wins over great style match ups but for the most part neither he or his brother are excellent fighters.
 
Orochimaru 大蛇丸 said:
You could take anyone's career and say they "lucked into" something

Conor "lucked into" beating Aldo at the end of an all time long reign
Ronda "lucked into" being one of the first women and beating up a shitty division
Brock "lucked into" beating small, old man, Randy Couture for the title

It's a pet peeve of mine when people try to diminish someone's accomplishments and says they just got lucky, people say that about every successful person ever
Click to expand...

Awful comparison. Conor had knocked out everyone he'd fought in the UFC except the iron chinned Max. Ronda had a 100% finish rate with 9/12 wins by armbar. That's not luck. That's skill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,902
Messages
55,453,755
Members
174,785
Latest member
ljae89

Share this page

Back
Top