Media Till tells O'Malley to accept his loss

[Chillez]

He's trying his best to replicate conor, in many ways

He will never be Conor he needs to give it up.

 

[shoorik1987]

Yep, 3 times more experienced than O'Malley..

O'malley is a 3 x bigger POS though.

 

[WendalClark17]

It was a fluke win. No wonder Sean is disappointed. Seems his haters are acting like bitches, not Sean. Kicking a man when he's down is typical bitch behavior.

I'll bite. How is breaking a guys leg with a leg kick a fluke win? Okay, he may not have broken O'Malley's leg ... but judging by the crying in pain/carried off on stretcher aspect it looked like his leg was broken worse than Anderson's was against The Chris

 

[WendalClark17]

Give O’Malley a top 10 and let him accept that. Nothing but top matches. See how fast he retires.

Give him two more top 10's and then when he's on a 0-3 run let him go to Bellator so he can actually contend for a belt

 

[Anaconda99]

Very good points -- I wish so much wasn't thought of with regard to win/loss records. It is certainly relevant, but not nearly as much as other factors. Wins and losses shouldn't define a fighter's legacy in my opinion given that there are so many other dynamics to consider that supercede it.

Have to diaagree as far as skills yes wins and loses dont tell the full story but the wins and loses are the end result of the the training and everything else. Wins and loses have to define fighters legacy or else it just becomes what people wanna watch, and total opinion. Most want to see striking so they will easily discount skills on the ground or favor a more fun fighter over a more solid but maybe less paced fighters.

 

[NicholasJBasile]

Have to diaagree as far as skills yes wins and loses dont tell the full story but the wins and loses are the end result of the the training and everything else. Wins and loses have to define fighters legacy or else it just becomes what people wanna watch, and total opinion. Most want to see striking so they will easily discount skills on the ground or favor a more fun fighter over a more solid but maybe less paced fighters.

You make valid points and I don't disagree. I reckon the point I was making when I posted was a bit more nuanced, or perhaps I'm just a moron that tried to argue that wins and losses don't matter lol Anyway thanks for treading lightly on me and being cordial with your dissension. Wins and losses are ultimately an important and objective metric when trying to discuss legacies (controversial decisions aside).

 

[Anaconda99]

You make valid points and I don't disagree. I reckon the point I was making when I posted was a bit more nuanced, or perhaps I'm just a moron that tried to argue that wins and losses don't matter lol Anyway thanks for treading lightly on me and being cordial with your dissension. Wins and losses are ultimately an important and objective metric when trying to discuss legacies (controversial decisions aside).

Hey, we can disagree but i dont think we are far off. I also totally get your point many people see just wins and loses. Be it a guy going on a streak against solid but not world class fighters and people hype them up to be championship level doesnt mean they cant get better just that at that point they are not there yet.

Just like certain fighters going on a losing streak and people wanna write them off even though they are fighting the best, damage is real though so its a little bit weird your skills can get better but your body also takes damage over a career and reflexes start to decrease. I agree wins and loses are not everything but they matter most imo for deciding legacy, there are a lot of very talented fighters who just cant put it together for one reason or another. Its a important metric but i i think too that thats one metric. Titles, defenses but also skills and even heart.

 

[SamboPunch]

O'Malley should listen to Till, he has experience in losing..

lmao not only is that hilarious but it's completely true and probably the reason he was saying it

 

[NicholasJBasile]

Hey, we can disagree but i dont think we are far off. I also totally get your point many people see just wins and loses. Be it a guy going on a streak against solid but not world class fighters and people hype them up to be championship level doesnt mean they cant get better just that at that point they are not there yet.

Just like certain fighters going on a losing streak and people wanna write them off even though they are fighting the best, damage is real though so its a little bit weird your skills can get better but your body also takes damage over a career and reflexes start to decrease. I agree wins and loses are not everything but they matter most imo for deciding legacy, there are a lot of very talented fighters who just cant put it together for one reason or another. Its a important metric but i i think too that thats one metric. Titles, defenses but also skills and even heart.

I know what you mean about taking damage but improving -- I reckon it's similar to those that may improve their sense of hearing, feel, and smell after losing their vision haha

 

[Coconutwater]

Yep, 3 times more experienced than O'Malley..

It’s the surrounding drama around the losses that make Till qualified to lecture about losing, he was expected to make a huge splash. It’s no knock on him, just saying...