[quote]dhickey wrote:
ZEB wrote:
slimjim wrote:
brock and dana are laughing all the way to the bank on this one.
Dana is laughing especially hard since the UFC by one estimate (Forbes Magazine) is now worth in the neighborhood of 1 billion dollars. I guess it pays handsomely to underpay the best fighters in the world, at least for now.
is this the only tune you know?[/quote]
No, but I know it better than the others.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
ZEB wrote:
A company being worth $10B doesn’t guarentee anyone is walking away with any cash just yet. That’s how investments work. You delay immediate gratification with the hope of that investment paying off in the future.
I just thought we might as well start with some accurate assumptions for your arbitrary swag.[/quote]
First of all I don’t hate the UFC, I just hate the way Dana and company underpay their fighters. Secondly according to one source (MSNBC) the UFC is doing rather well:
“The privately-held UFC says its revenues for 2008 were $275 million”
Is the UFC worth 1 Billion dollars? As you and I both know a company is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it. With that said, paying about 3.65 times gross revenue is a little steep, but has been done many, many times. Therefore, the UFC could certainly be worth 1 Billion dollars. But, even it’s only worth twice the 275 million in revenue it brought in in 2008 the value is 550 million or at least in that neighborhood. I’d say that’s a pretty good neighborhood to be in wouldn’t you? A company that is that wealthy should certainly pay their top stars a minimum of 1 million dollars per fight (which would still be far less than other sports stars of the same caliber) and also raise the pay on the many other fighters who help make the UFC the success that it is.
For example they pay great lip service to stars like Anderson Silva. “the greatest pound for pound fighter in the world, bla, bla, bla. But when it comes down to the rubber hitting the road what did they pay “the greatest pound for pound fighter” for defeating rival Rich Franklin”
Here you go:
Silva: $120,000($60,000 base; $60,000 win bonus)
Franklin: $45,000
This is an insult! Not just for Silva but Franklin as well.
What does the greatest Golfer make? The greatest Baseball player per year? Just Go through the list of “the greatest” from each sport and tell me if paying a guy like Anderson Silva 120-k and another 60-k if he wins is any way to treat the best of the best. As I pointed out once before Ali made about 10 times more than that for one fight back in 1972! That’s 37 years ago! The UFC is a disgrace when it comes to the way their pay their fighters- PERIOD!
In addition to this the UFC actually owns a fighters image. One reason Mayhem Miller would not sign with the UFC is that he would have to give up hosting his “Bully Beatdown” TV series. And of course it doesn’t end there:
There was a time long ago when a fighter could pick up extra money by having a sponsors name on their fight shorts, hat’s etc. not anymore, at least not without paying the UFC a huge fee up front. That means that the fighter who could have picked up perhaps half that amount is now lucky to even get travel money for their sponsorship.
"clothing sponsors interested in sponsoring a fighter would be required to pay a fee of $100,000 to the UFC.
Fighters need a way to maximize their income, and the UFC is restricting their ability to do that. Itâ??s bad policy on the part of the UFC, but it doesnâ??t hurt them nearly as much as it hurts the fighters. The UFCâ??s ability to do business will not be seriously damaged by its policy about sponsorships. The fighterâ??s ability to maintain a substantial livelihood, on the other hand, will."
http://mmaopinion.com/2009/06/25/ufc-continues-to-tighten-up-sponsor-restrictions/
Want more?
Check to see how much the UFC fighters are paid for their image in the popular UFC video game. NADA-ZIP-ZERO-NOTHING!!
They used to talk about how Don King was a theif for taking so much from a fighters purse. Well, King could take lessons from Dana White and the Ferrita brothers, they’ve hit an all time low.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Not to rain on your ufc hater parade any more than I already have, but let’s take a look at the forbes article you have hanging on your wall.
Your copy may be worn out so I will summarize:
Forbes does not estimate the UFC to be worth $1B. The UFC does. Important distinction?
Forbes quote dollars the UFC “generates”. This includes PPV $ they only get a portion of and ticket reciepts they only get a portion of. Important distinction?
Forbes writes:
“The price, if they could get it, would be rich in comparison with the $1.4 billion market value for publicly traded World Wrestling Entertainment (nyse: WWE - news - people ), which has almost double the revenue.”
Now, I have not taken a peek at their (WWE)10k, but I am going to guess their reported revenue does not include revenue they generated for other companies and only revenue they actually took in. I would guess the SEC would prefer it this way.
As we discussed, none of this really gives us any insight into the numbers that really matter or who is walking away with too much cash by your standards. A company being worth $10B doesn’t guarentee anyone is walking away with any cash just yet. That’s how investments work. You delay immediate gratification with the hope of that investment paying off in the future.
I just thought we might as well start with some accurate assumptions for your arbitrary swag.[/quote]
Listen dick, I know you’ve spent enough time on the politics forum to know that facts aren’t exactly a part of Zeb’s arguing strategy. Why even bother?
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Not to rain on your ufc hater parade any more than I already have, but let’s take a look at the forbes article you have hanging on your wall.
Your copy may be worn out so I will summarize:
Forbes does not estimate the UFC to be worth $1B. The UFC does. Important distinction?
Forbes quote dollars the UFC “generates”. This includes PPV $ they only get a portion of and ticket reciepts they only get a portion of. Important distinction?
Forbes writes:
“The price, if they could get it, would be rich in comparison with the $1.4 billion market value for publicly traded World Wrestling Entertainment (nyse: WWE - news - people ), which has almost double the revenue.”
Now, I have not taken a peek at their (WWE)10k, but I am going to guess their reported revenue does not include revenue they generated for other companies and only revenue they actually took in. I would guess the SEC would prefer it this way.
As we discussed, none of this really gives us any insight into the numbers that really matter or who is walking away with too much cash by your standards. A company being worth $10B doesn’t guarentee anyone is walking away with any cash just yet. That’s how investments work. You delay immediate gratification with the hope of that investment paying off in the future.
I just thought we might as well start with some accurate assumptions for your arbitrary swag.
Listen dick, I know you’ve spent enough time on the politics forum to know that facts aren’t exactly a part of Zeb’s arguing strategy. Why even bother?[/quote]
Sometimes I just can’t help myself. I would say it’s a character flaw.
For example, I just can’t help pointing out time after time after time that the salaries he posts over and over and over again are just the reported income to the athletic commission and not the total compensation they get for that fight or for being an employee of the UFC.
I often ask myself who is really the idiot. Zeb for posting the same inaccurate shit time after time, or me for commenting on it time after time.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
dhickey wrote:
ZEB wrote:
A company being worth $10B doesn’t guarentee anyone is walking away with any cash just yet. That’s how investments work. You delay immediate gratification with the hope of that investment paying off in the future.
I just thought we might as well start with some accurate assumptions for your arbitrary swag.
First of all I don’t hate the UFC, I just hate the way Dana and company underpay their fighters. Secondly according to one source (MSNBC) the UFC is doing rather well:
“The privately-held UFC says its revenues for 2008 were $275 million”
Is the UFC worth 1 Billion dollars? As you and I both know a company is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it. With that said, paying about 3.65 times gross revenue is a little steep, but has been done many, many times.
Therefore, the UFC could certainly be worth 1 Billion dollars. But, even it’s only worth twice the 275 million in revenue it brought in in 2008 the value is 550 million or at least in that neighborhood. I’d say that’s a pretty good neighborhood to be in wouldn’t you?
A company that is that wealthy should certainly pay their top stars a minimum of 1 million dollars per fight (which would still be far less than other sports stars of the same caliber) and also raise the pay on the many other fighters who help make the UFC the success that it is.
For example they pay great lip service to stars like Anderson Silva. “the greatest pound for pound fighter in the world, bla, bla, bla. But when it comes down to the rubber hitting the road what did they pay “the greatest pound for pound fighter” for defeating rival Rich Franklin”
Here you go:
Silva: $120,000($60,000 base; $60,000 win bonus)
Franklin: $45,000
This is an insult! Not just for Silva but Franklin as well.
What does the greatest Golfer make? The greatest Baseball player per year? Just Go through the list of “the greatest” from each sport and tell me if paying a guy like Anderson Silva 120-k and another 60-k if he wins is any way to treat the best of the best.
As I pointed out once before Ali made about 10 times more than that for one fight back in 1972! That’s 37 years ago! The UFC is a disgrace when it comes to the way their pay their fighters- PERIOD!
In addition to this the UFC actually owns a fighters image. One reason Mayhem Miller would not sign with the UFC is that he would have to give up hosting his “Bully Beatdown” TV series. And of course it doesn’t end there:
There was a time long ago when a fighter could pick up extra money by having a sponsors name on their fight shorts, hat’s etc. not anymore, at least not without paying the UFC a huge fee up front. That means that the fighter who could have picked up perhaps half that amount is now lucky to even get travel money for their sponsorship.
"clothing sponsors interested in sponsoring a fighter would be required to pay a fee of $100,000 to the UFC.
Fighters need a way to maximize their income, and the UFC is restricting their ability to do that. Itâ??s bad policy on the part of the UFC, but it doesnâ??t hurt them nearly as much as it hurts the fighters. The UFCâ??s ability to do business will not be seriously damaged by its policy about sponsorships. The fighterâ??s ability to maintain a substantial livelihood, on the other hand, will."
http://mmaopinion.com/2009/06/25/ufc-continues-to-tighten-up-sponsor-restrictions/
Want more?
Check to see how much the UFC fighters are paid for their image in the popular UFC video game. NADA-ZIP-ZERO-NOTHING!!
They used to talk about how Don King was a theif for taking so much from a fighters purse. Well, King could take lessons from Dana White and the Ferrita brothers, they’ve hit an all time low.
[/quote]
Not much worth commenting on here. I will just point out that I am making about 15% more salary than I was 4 years ago, while company revenues have more than doubled. Guess where that money is going? Reinvested. Better products to sell (more commission and easier selling), better marketing (more commission and easier selling), a stable job in a down economy, more help, etc.
This is not a novel concept and is practiced the world over. As the UFC grows, fighters will compensated more and also derive indirect benefits from the growth. No reinvestment, no growth.
You seem to think that the UFC has hit some sort of expense cap and any additional revenue is being taken out of the company by the truck load and deposited in one of three personal accounts. Not the best investment stratagy, especially with 12x quarterly revenue valuation being assumed here.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Not much worth commenting on here. I will just point out that I am making about 15% more salary than I was 4 years ago, while company revenues have more than doubled. Guess where that money is going? Reinvested. Better products to sell (more commission and easier selling), better marketing (more commission and easier selling), a stable job in a down economy, more help, etc.
This is not a novel concept and is practiced the world over. As the UFC grows, fighters will compensated more and also derive indirect benefits from the growth. No reinvestment, no growth.
You seem to think that the UFC has hit some sort of expense cap and any additional revenue is being taken out of the company by the truck load and deposited in one of three personal accounts. Not the best investment stratagy, especially with 12x quarterly revenue valuation being assumed here.
[/quote]
Yup. The UFC has a shitload of growing to do. And just wait until the Bob Arums and Golden Boys of the world get their hands on some up and comers…they’ll get paid their due, trust me.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Not to rain on your ufc hater parade any more than I already have, but let’s take a look at the forbes article you have hanging on your wall.
Your copy may be worn out so I will summarize:
Forbes does not estimate the UFC to be worth $1B. The UFC does. Important distinction?
Forbes quote dollars the UFC “generates”. This includes PPV $ they only get a portion of and ticket reciepts they only get a portion of. Important distinction?
Forbes writes:
“The price, if they could get it, would be rich in comparison with the $1.4 billion market value for publicly traded World Wrestling Entertainment (nyse: WWE - news - people ), which has almost double the revenue.”
Now, I have not taken a peek at their (WWE)10k, but I am going to guess their reported revenue does not include revenue they generated for other companies and only revenue they actually took in. I would guess the SEC would prefer it this way.
As we discussed, none of this really gives us any insight into the numbers that really matter or who is walking away with too much cash by your standards. A company being worth $10B doesn’t guarentee anyone is walking away with any cash just yet. That’s how investments work. You delay immediate gratification with the hope of that investment paying off in the future.
I just thought we might as well start with some accurate assumptions for your arbitrary swag.
Listen dick, I know you’ve spent enough time on the politics forum to know that facts aren’t exactly a part of Zeb’s arguing strategy. Why even bother?
Sometimes I just can’t help myself. I would say it’s a character flaw.
For example, I just can’t help pointing out time after time after time that the salaries he posts over and over and over again are just the reported income to the athletic commission and not the total compensation they get for that fight or for being an employee of the UFC.
I often ask myself who is really the idiot. Zeb for posting the same inaccurate shit time after time, or me for commenting on it time after time.[/quote]
For the record, I have a pretty lengthy post above and none of it is inaccurate, as it is backed up by the latest available facts.
I’d say that if you had actual facts, then post them with a good reliable source as I have. It’s easy to say that some fighters have “secret” deals with Dana White. Do they? If so how many? What is the value of these secret deals? Do you know? Does anyone know? Do they actually exist? Do they exist for just an elite few?
At this point all we have to evaluate is what is reported. If I’m wrong please correct where I’ve erred, otherwise I have to assume that I am correct.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
ZEB wrote:
dhickey wrote:
ZEB wrote:
A company being worth $10B doesn’t guarentee anyone is walking away with any cash just yet. That’s how investments work. You delay immediate gratification with the hope of that investment paying off in the future.
I just thought we might as well start with some accurate assumptions for your arbitrary swag.
First of all I don’t hate the UFC, I just hate the way Dana and company underpay their fighters. Secondly according to one source (MSNBC) the UFC is doing rather well:
“The privately-held UFC says its revenues for 2008 were $275 million”
Is the UFC worth 1 Billion dollars? As you and I both know a company is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it. With that said, paying about 3.65 times gross revenue is a little steep, but has been done many, many times.
Therefore, the UFC could certainly be worth 1 Billion dollars. But, even it’s only worth twice the 275 million in revenue it brought in in 2008 the value is 550 million or at least in that neighborhood. I’d say that’s a pretty good neighborhood to be in wouldn’t you?
A company that is that wealthy should certainly pay their top stars a minimum of 1 million dollars per fight (which would still be far less than other sports stars of the same caliber) and also raise the pay on the many other fighters who help make the UFC the success that it is.
For example they pay great lip service to stars like Anderson Silva. “the greatest pound for pound fighter in the world, bla, bla, bla. But when it comes down to the rubber hitting the road what did they pay “the greatest pound for pound fighter” for defeating rival Rich Franklin”
Here you go:
Silva: $120,000($60,000 base; $60,000 win bonus)
Franklin: $45,000
This is an insult! Not just for Silva but Franklin as well.
What does the greatest Golfer make? The greatest Baseball player per year? Just Go through the list of “the greatest” from each sport and tell me if paying a guy like Anderson Silva 120-k and another 60-k if he wins is any way to treat the best of the best.
As I pointed out once before Ali made about 10 times more than that for one fight back in 1972! That’s 37 years ago! The UFC is a disgrace when it comes to the way their pay their fighters- PERIOD!
In addition to this the UFC actually owns a fighters image. One reason Mayhem Miller would not sign with the UFC is that he would have to give up hosting his “Bully Beatdown” TV series. And of course it doesn’t end there:
There was a time long ago when a fighter could pick up extra money by having a sponsors name on their fight shorts, hat’s etc. not anymore, at least not without paying the UFC a huge fee up front. That means that the fighter who could have picked up perhaps half that amount is now lucky to even get travel money for their sponsorship.
"clothing sponsors interested in sponsoring a fighter would be required to pay a fee of $100,000 to the UFC.
Fighters need a way to maximize their income, and the UFC is restricting their ability to do that. It�¢??s bad policy on the part of the UFC, but it doesn�¢??t hurt them nearly as much as it hurts the fighters. The UFC�¢??s ability to do business will not be seriously damaged by its policy about sponsorships. The fighter�¢??s ability to maintain a substantial livelihood, on the other hand, will."
http://mmaopinion.com/2009/06/25/ufc-continues-to-tighten-up-sponsor-restrictions/
Want more?
Check to see how much the UFC fighters are paid for their image in the popular UFC video game. NADA-ZIP-ZERO-NOTHING!!
They used to talk about how Don King was a theif for taking so much from a fighters purse. Well, King could take lessons from Dana White and the Ferrita brothers, they’ve hit an all time low.
Not much worth commenting on here. [/quote]
Nonsense there is a great deal that you could comment on. You offer no retort because you have none.
How do you respond to:
Paying who they tout as the best mma pound for pound fighter in the world a a base of 60-K with a win bonus of 60-K?
Legally owning each fighters image and using them on the UFC game and giving the fighters NOTHING for this?
Preventing UFC fighters from wearing any sort of promotion on their fight gear unless the UFC first gets 100-K?
The actual value of the UFC being 1 billion or at the very least 500 million, yet the fighters are still underpaid.
Why Mayhem Miller won’t sign with the UFC because he’d actually have to give up hosting his TV series “Bully Beatdown” as the UFC would not allow him that income.
You could comment on all of those facts and more, yet you’ve chosen not to and I think that is more telling than any half hearted defense that you might try to launch.
Your constant assertion that the UFC is pouring all of its money back into its business is tiresome and untrue. They grossed 275 million last year. Do you really think that this is still in the start-up phase?
Seriously, they past that long ago, they are doing well and bragging about it to various business magazines (as I pointed out in my previous post). It’s time for them to step up and do the right thing and pay their fighters fairly for their blood, sweat and tears.
Frank Shamrock once said that UFC stands for “U Fight Cheap”.
He’s not the only one who has been at odds with Dana White and company there have been many who have spoken out about the low pay in the UFC, here is just one more:
“Huerta is one of a growing number of Zuffa-contracted fighter who feel that there is a disconnection between the companyâ??s success and the way fighters are compensated. Huertaâ??s disillusionment with the UFC began when he did press tours for his employer in Miami, Houston, Los Angeles, and London and received a $50 per diem for his troubles.”
http://www.cagepotato.com/2008/07/31/roger-huerta-is-not-happy-with-the-ufc/
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Listen dick, I know you’ve spent enough time on the politics forum to know that facts aren’t exactly a part of Zeb’s arguing strategy. Why even bother?[/quote]
The good part about a forum is that you too have the opportunity to jump in and refute any or all of the facts that I’ve posted. Instead you choose to sit on the side-lines and throw tomatoes, which by the way is (from what I’ve seen on T Nation) in keeping with your true character.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Listen dick, I know you’ve spent enough time on the politics forum to know that facts aren’t exactly a part of Zeb’s arguing strategy. Why even bother?
The good part about a forum is that you too have the opportunity to jump in and refute any or all of the facts that I’ve posted. Instead you choose to sit on the side-lines and throw tomatoes, which by the way is (from what I’ve seen on T Nation) in keeping with your true character.[/quote]
Douchebags like you aren’t worth arguing with.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Listen dick, I know you’ve spent enough time on the politics forum to know that facts aren’t exactly a part of Zeb’s arguing strategy. Why even bother?
The good part about a forum is that you too have the opportunity to jump in and refute any or all of the facts that I’ve posted. Instead you choose to sit on the side-lines and throw tomatoes, which by the way is (from what I’ve seen on T Nation) in keeping with your true character.
Douchebags like you aren’t worth arguing with. [/quote]
Hey good comeback, when you’re not up to the debate, throw out an insult and walk away. Just more character issues, nothing new here.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
ZEB wrote:
still more physical than skillful.
I would say that his skill exceeds his great physicaly capacity.
[/quote]
I wholeheartedly disagree with that statement. Either you are totally underestimating/overlooking just how great his physical capacity is, or you are meaning effectiveness when you say skill, and not technical skill.
Otherwise you’re basically saying that he’s the most skillful fighter to ever step into the Octagon, because he’s definitely has the most physical capacity.
You said before that you admit that his skills aren’t at the level of Fedor, GSP, Anderson Silva, and Penn, yet the above statement would make them superior to all of those fighters.
Which is it?
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
ZEB wrote:
still more physical than skillful.
I would say that his skill exceeds his great physicaly capacity.
I wholeheartedly disagree with that statement. Either you are totally underestimating/overlooking just how great his physical capacity is, or you are meaning effectiveness when you say skill, and not technical skill.
Otherwise you’re basically saying that he’s the most skillful fighter to ever step into the Octagon, because he’s definitely has the most physical capacity.
You said before that you admit that his skills aren’t at the level of Fedor, GSP, Anderson Silva, and Penn, yet the above statement would make them superior to all of those fighters.
Which is it? [/quote]
You are comparing his size and power to other mma fighters, that’s not what I was doing. I am looking at all of Lesnars assets and I feel that he has great skill along with great size and power. I think that winning an NCAA Division I title and going 105-6 in doing it speaks for itself relative to skill. You just don’t do that by being big and strong, great skill is also a must. Especially in light of the fact that he’s beaten bigger guys on the wrestling mat. Therefore, while I think his size and strength are indeed a huge benefit I feel that his skill is still his best attribute.
Keep in mind there are other large powerful fighters that have not achieved Lesnars results. That should tell you that there is great skill involved.
Let’s take for example the Frank Mir fight:
Was it 20 to 30 pounds of beef that Lesnar had over Frank Mir which totally caused him to achieve such a dominant victory? I don’t think so, while it helped that wasn’t what did it. Look at his ground technique, he gave Frank Mir no room to move. His balance and skill in moving on the ground is what really helped him achieve such a dominant victory. The extra power helped, but had he been 30 pounds lighter he still would have beaten him.
Not unlike Matt Hughes in his prime. Hughes, with no more weight than his opponent, took down and beat some very skillful BJJ guys, like BJ Penn for example. Lesnar did it the same way that Hughes did. They both used their wrestling ability to nullify their opponents superior Jiu-Jitsu skills.
Keep in mind that Matt Hughes finished in the top 10 in the NCAA finals, which is a great accomplishment, but Brock Lesnar finished first.
He’s a great mix of size, power, agility, speed and SKILL.If he brings his striking ability up to his (top) ground game he may very well stay on top for a long time to come.
Zeb, reading your posts gives me a headache. You can’t honestly believe that Lesnar has more skill than size/strength/speed. There’s just no way. Anyone with two eyes in their head and a brain behind those eyes can see Lesnar wins due more to his massive physical advantage then with technical proficiency. It’s just that simple.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Listen dick, I know you’ve spent enough time on the politics forum to know that facts aren’t exactly a part of Zeb’s arguing strategy. Why even bother?
The good part about a forum is that you too have the opportunity to jump in and refute any or all of the facts that I’ve posted. Instead you choose to sit on the side-lines and throw tomatoes, which by the way is (from what I’ve seen on T Nation) in keeping with your true character.
Douchebags like you aren’t worth arguing with.
Hey good comeback, when you’re not up to the debate, throw out an insult and walk away. Just more character issues, nothing new here.
Character issues? Really? [/quote]
It’s clearly a character issue when you can’t separate the political threads from the Combat threads. You are in love with extreme liberalism and everything it stands for we get it irish, pro homosexual, pro abortion, anti-God and pro welfare for those who just don’t want to work.
All I’m saying is that a good man would be able to these things on the political thread. Every time you attack me off topic on the Combat threads you add nothing to the thread and disrespect every poster who comes here to talk combat sports, and that shows a lack of character and restraint. If you’re going to act like a little boy irish go play somewhere else.
You’re one odd little dude.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Zeb, reading your posts gives me a headache. You can’t honestly believe that Lesnar has more skill than size/strength/speed. There’s just no way. Anyone with two eyes in their head and a brain behind those eyes can see Lesnar wins due more to his massive physical advantage then with technical proficiency. It’s just that simple.[/quote]
That’s certainly the easier thing to see, so people see it. But if you go back and watch his performance against the few opponents that he’s fought in the UFC and the many wrestling matches that he had in college you’ll see that there is a very good mix of the two. As I’ve said you don’t get to the top of two sports (College Wrestling and mma) by shear size and power alone, if that were the case we’d all be talking about Bob Sapp right now. Hope your headache goes away.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
The only poster I disrespect constantly is you, and you deserve it.[/quote]
I would actually worry if a person like you respected me, that would mean that I’m doing something wrong.
By the way you’ve got one more post on the Combat forum that has nothing to do with combat (how many is that now?) That means that because of your blind, mindless hate for me (and my political views) you’ve also disrespected everyone who posts on this thread. That’s one reason why I question your character and maturity level. The other reasons are obvious for all to see.
I’ll try it one more time, keep the political arguments to the political threads. No one cares that you hate me and your constant whining about it only makes you look like a self-obsessed, sophomoric child.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
I would actually worry if a person like you respected me, that would mean that I’m doing something wrong.
By the way you’ve got one more post on the Combat forum that has nothing to do with combat (how many is that now?) That means that because of your blind, mindless hate for me (and my political views) you’ve also disrespected everyone who posts on this thread. That’s one reason why I question your character and maturity level. The other reasons are obvious for all to see.
I’ll try it one more time, keep the political arguments to the political threads. No one cares that you hate me and your constant whining about it only makes you look like a self-obsessed, sophomoric child.
Fuck yourself.
How’s that for “non-combat related?”[/quote]
Hey that was impressive, thank you for proving my assertions. You’re good for something after all.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
Zeb, reading your posts gives me a headache. You can’t honestly believe that Lesnar has more skill than size/strength/speed. There’s just no way. Anyone with two eyes in their head and a brain behind those eyes can see Lesnar wins due more to his massive physical advantage then with technical proficiency. It’s just that simple.
That’s certainly the easier thing to see, so people see it. But if you go back and watch his performance against the few opponents that he’s fought in the UFC and the many wrestling matches that he had in college you’ll see that there is a very good mix of the two. As I’ve said you don’t get to the top of two sports (College Wrestling and mma) by shear size and power alone, if that were the case we’d all be talking about Bob Sapp right now. Hope your headache goes away.[/quote]
As much as I’ve bagged on the guy I’ll be the first to admit that Lesnar has improved by leaps and bounds. Don’t think anyone would argue that or that he has skill. But, you told someone [Sento I think] that you believe his skill surpasses his physical attributes, and that’s just not true. He wins with superior strength and some skill, not with superior skill and some strength. I took some excedrin man, I’m good.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
Zeb, reading your posts gives me a headache. You can’t honestly believe that Lesnar has more skill than size/strength/speed. There’s just no way. Anyone with two eyes in their head and a brain behind those eyes can see Lesnar wins due more to his massive physical advantage then with technical proficiency. It’s just that simple.
That’s certainly the easier thing to see, so people see it. But if you go back and watch his performance against the few opponents that he’s fought in the UFC and the many wrestling matches that he had in college you’ll see that there is a very good mix of the two. As I’ve said you don’t get to the top of two sports (College Wrestling and mma) by shear size and power alone, if that were the case we’d all be talking about Bob Sapp right now. Hope your headache goes away.[/quote]
As much as I’ve bagged on the guy I’ll be the first to admit that Lesnar has improved by leaps and bounds. Don’t think anyone would argue that or that he has skill. But, you told someone [Sento I think] that you believe his skill surpasses his physical attributes, and that’s just not true. He wins with superior strength and some skill, not with superior skill and some strength. I took some excedrin man, I’m good.