- Joined
- Mar 25, 2023
- Messages
- 2,516
- Reaction score
- 2,979
You’re not wrong but you’re not entirely right. Everyone is conditioned to look at a number
TJ Dillashaw beating Joe Soto clearly does much more for his legacy than beating John Lineker, becuase they slapped title defense on it.
GSP and Jose and Anderson and all them fighting for a belt so soon after joining the UFC is just a matter of factly thing, it’s not fair to people ten years later who had to build themselves up but it wouldn’t be fair to the legacies of these older fighters to say “well the younger fighter could probably do it too so let’s penalise you for becoming champ quick“
I mean I’d argue GSP doesn’t even fall into this category, he became champ in his 8th ufc fight, losing the first time to Matt hughes at 23. He had to beat Karo, Trigg, Sherk, Penn, and maybe some other notable guy I can’t think of
To me, it’s who you beat and how. If you beat someone 30-27 completely dominant every round without slowing down, is that better than beating the same person 48-47 in a close fought battle?
It’s not number of defenses, cause you can just fight people who aren’t even elite and rack up defenses, that’s the case for quite a few DJ defenses, the guys barely had to win any fights to get the shot, they stood no chance, then they went on losing streaks afterwards, like Borg and Elliott
Its quality of opponents you’ve beaten and how, how close, did you finish them, were you down before the finish, etcetera
someone said “ defenses is what matters cause that’s what people see in the future” You’re telling me people can’t take a look at your record in the future on Wikipedia or something?
TJ Dillashaw beating Joe Soto clearly does much more for his legacy than beating John Lineker, becuase they slapped title defense on it.
GSP and Jose and Anderson and all them fighting for a belt so soon after joining the UFC is just a matter of factly thing, it’s not fair to people ten years later who had to build themselves up but it wouldn’t be fair to the legacies of these older fighters to say “well the younger fighter could probably do it too so let’s penalise you for becoming champ quick“
I mean I’d argue GSP doesn’t even fall into this category, he became champ in his 8th ufc fight, losing the first time to Matt hughes at 23. He had to beat Karo, Trigg, Sherk, Penn, and maybe some other notable guy I can’t think of
To me, it’s who you beat and how. If you beat someone 30-27 completely dominant every round without slowing down, is that better than beating the same person 48-47 in a close fought battle?
It’s not number of defenses, cause you can just fight people who aren’t even elite and rack up defenses, that’s the case for quite a few DJ defenses, the guys barely had to win any fights to get the shot, they stood no chance, then they went on losing streaks afterwards, like Borg and Elliott
Its quality of opponents you’ve beaten and how, how close, did you finish them, were you down before the finish, etcetera
someone said “ defenses is what matters cause that’s what people see in the future” You’re telling me people can’t take a look at your record in the future on Wikipedia or something?
