UFC 166 main card and prelims fighters

LUDELOW

LUDELOW

Brown Belt
@Brown
Joined
May 15, 2011
Messages
4,900
Reaction score
7
John Dodson vs Darrell Montague on the main card??
and
Nate Marquardt vs. Hector Lombard on the prelims??

somebody had a melt down putting this card together:mad:
 
LUDELOW said:
John Dodson vs Darrell Montague on the main card??
and
Nate Marquardt vs. Hector Lombard on the prelims??

somebody had a melt down putting this card together:mad:
Click to expand...

Dodson should be on the main card over a guy who's lost two in a row and one of the biggest dissapointments in recent UFC history
 
LUDELOW said:
John Dodson vs Darrell Montague on the main card??
and
Nate Marquardt vs. Hector Lombard on the prelims??

somebody had a melt down putting this card together:mad:
Click to expand...

Dude Dodson v Montague is a much better fight than Marquardt v Lombard what are you talking about. If Dodson v Montague was on the prelims I would honestly have not bought the PPV.
 
Both fights are PPV worthy. I don't see the complaints. It's not like you aren't going to get to see both fights. Lombard/Marquardt is a great way to end the prelims.
 
Dodson/Montague is two top 10 fighters and could determine the next title shot.

Nate/Lombard isnt nearly as important in their div.

Fans cry that lower weight fights dont get main card spots and when they do what do mma fans do? they complain that they got a main card spot.
 
Skydome said:
Dodson should be on the main card over a guy who's lost two in a row and one of the biggest dissapointments in recent UFC history
Click to expand...

He didn't lose two in a row...
 
Both are PPV worthy but Nate Marquardt dropped two in a row and Lombard has been pretty underwhelming in the UFC so far.

I think Dodson-Montague is the better fight anyway.
 
Nate Marquardt vs Hector Lombard sounds like an awesome fight but their jobs are on the line and I could see them both stalling and the fight being horrible to watch.
 
A top #3 Flyweight over a top #15 Welterweight, you got problems.
 
Lombard really isn't all that entertaining to watch. He can KO guys but if he doesn't, his fights suck
 
Wayweary said:
Why didn't you check before coming back at me with that? lol
Click to expand...

I'm talking about Nate. Hence why I said a guy whos lost two in a row(Nate) and one of the biggest dissapointments in recent UFC history(Lombard)
 
arkridge said:
Assuming he's speaking of Hector Lombard, he had the Palhares win in between the Boetsch and Okami loses. Never two in a row.
Click to expand...

He said one guy has dropped two (Nate) in a row and one is one of the biggest disappointments in the UFC (Lombard).
 
Yeah, better watch two Top 20 WW than two Top 10 FLW, right?
 
Skydome said:
I'm talking about Nate. Hence why I said a guy whos lost two in a row(Nate) and one of the biggest dissapointments in recent UFC history(Lombard)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just edited my last post to reflect that when I realized. Your phrasing makes it sound like you are talking about Dodson and one other dude who lost two in a row and is a big disappointment, which I took to be Lombard.
 
Zerwas1 said:
A top #3 Flyweight over a top #15 Welterweight, you got problems.
Click to expand...

He's only top 3 because that division is really weak.


I agree TS. Nate vs Hector is worth my money where as Dodson vs whoever, isn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,998
Messages
55,460,218
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top