thedarkwingduck2k11
Well-known member
7. @Holeydel
Kevin Randleman shouldn’t be anywhere near the UFC HOF
It’s said that you shouldn’t speak ill of the dead. Sadly for Kevin Randleman all that changes today. Kevin Randleman shouldn’t be anywhere near the UFC HOF never mind be inducted and I’m also of the opinion his inclusion was nothing more than a sympathy vote. Had The Monster never passed away, he wouldn’t be inducted. For a start his record was shit: Record 17-16 (4-3 UFC, 4-7 Pride)
Brick: ‘But a lot of those loses were against top competition!’ Sure, Randleman may have copped losses against some of the elite fighters of the time, Randy and Chuck for example, but let’s juxtapose that with some of the W’s on his record: Bobish 0-0, Neto 0-1, Smith 7-11, Foster 3-3, Ohara 0-1, Yamamoto 4-10, Kocamis 8-6. He crushed a lot of cans and sometimes those cans, Roger Gracie 2-0, crushed Randlleman. Elite fighters with .500 records do so from fighting the best, BJ Penn 16-14 for example, not from padding a record fighting cans to even up the score.
cmvideo: ‘Three words for you pal, Mirco Cro Cop.’ Yep, easily Randleman’s best win and no one expected that knockout. For good reason too, cos Randleman is shit. If there was ever a lucky win, that was it. What was supposed to happen in that fight is exactly what happened 9 months later when they rematched, Randleman gets finished within a minute and the balance of the universe was restored. Cro Cop even subbed him. Who the hell does Cro Cop ever sub?
Webble: ‘Ah, but you’re ignoring those wins against Pete Williams 10-2 and Pedro Rizzo 9-0!’ Wins? Those?? Those are prime examples of laying on top of someone for 15 minutes with no idea of what to do next. In fact 8 of Kevin’s wins came from decision cos the dude had no idea what to do once he got the fight to the ground. Yeah of course, he could do some ground and pound against the cans but anyone will any ground skill easily nullified these shots. The issue at the time was there was no stand up due to inactivity within the rules, so Randleman would completely shut down the fight helping popularise the phrase lay and pray. Remember that time you got excited about going back and rewatching a Randleman win not named Cro Cop? Me neither. It’s why the Bas Rutten title loss isn’t debatable for me. If you lay on top of someone for near on 21 minutes and still get out struck 56-181 by someone underneath you by, you have to ask yourself if you should have made a Plan B.
Goodcat: ‘I think you’re reading too much into the wrong thing here, he’s in the HOF Pioneer Wing’ Okay, a pioneer of bloomin’ what I ask you? Cos there’s these two wrestlers long before inducted into the HOF Pioneer Wing called Dan Severn and Mark Coleman, the mentor of Randleman himself. Those are the wrestling pioneers mma. In Randleman we have a pure wrestler offering up nothing else – acceptable in Dan Severns day but not by Randleman’s era, which is why he often for sparked out by other fighters with wrestling backgrounds such as Chuck and Erikson. Randleman wasn’t a pioneer, he was just another high level wrestler who found himself relying on his one solid skill set to eke out a decision.
Brick, Webble, cmvideo, Goodcat: ‘Some great points, 10, 10, 10, 10...’
webble: Ok so my first thought was ‘ah but it was the pioneer wing’ and that was your closing argument so we got on the same page at the end. I do agree with you in that there seems to be too many inductees and also some are put in too quickly. I think you also have to take into account the era in which they competed, you aren’t comparing like for like, but then there were fewer fighters back then so maybe he didn’t stand out. I cant decide on this one 6/10
GoodCat: I think your write up and explanations are good, but I honestly don't see this as an unpopular opinion. I agree with him only being in because he passed away. Kinda like Mask from Tapout. I'm not sure if I should take points off since I don't think it's that unpopular or not, but I don't think I'll punish you for it. 7/10
Brick: I didn’t really have a problem with his entry into the pioneer wing and I think most people didn’t either, so I think you hit on an unpopular opinion here. But I think I was under the impression that it’s sort of the UFC’s version of the “seniors” NFL HOF inductees, which are basically borderline candidates who didn’t make it in when really eligible but got a mercy vote later in life. But looking at the other folks in the pioneer division, this is not that and I agree Randleman did not belong next to some of those names. You could have used the juicing argument but failed to do so; I know most of his peers juiced, but I don’t know that any went so far as the disgrace of submitted a 100% fake urine sample, lol. Your argument is pretty well constructed, so while I’m not about to go on the warpath on this issue, I’m definitely more moved in your direction that before I read the take. 7/10.
cmvideo75: I like this argument too. I don't think I've ever heard someone argue against Randleman before lol. There are some pretty sketchy fighters in the MMA HoF IMO but that is because the history isn't that long and I guess they feel like that have build a roster of 'legends'? His status is definitely inflated because of the era he fought in and his 'pioneer' status. My only argument against here is that I'm not sure many people care.7/10
Total:27
8. @MMAFTM13
MMA is not barbaric and dangerous, and fighters are not uneducated
One of the biggest unpopular opinions of MMA is the misconception and ignorance of how barbaric, more dangerous compared to boxing and how uneducated the fighters are amongst the non-fans of the sport, to the casual fans of the sport or the ill-informed boxing fans. This couldn’t be further from the truth.
I guess MMA was once barbaric in a sense, when it was first starting out before rounds were introduced, before commissions were regulated, rules were implemented where it lacked standardized rules, which made the sport appear barbaric. but times have changed, The sports evolved significantly from their early, more brutal beginnings to a high amount of technical skill on display. In boxing that is one discipline that you have to master. In MMA there are several and you have to be versed in at least half of them to succeed. That misconception that MMA is simply barbaric and fighters are unintelligent ignores the extensive training, skill and professionalism involved, and it’s importance to recognize that fighters are dedicated athletes committed to their craft.
Boxing fans have suggested that although both sports are dangerous, they concluded that MMA is more unsafe but the data and statistics suggests otherwise. Since 2000, there’s been 45 reported deaths in professional boxing fights. 84 related deaths with one death every 5000 bouts. In every sanctioned pro MMA fights since then there’s been 10. Zero deaths in the UFC. Why? It’s probably because in boxing you get dropped, hurt and given an 8-count to recover, but you’re not really recovering and this process can lead to repeated head trauma where you’re just taking more unnecessary head shots, leading to potential complications to the brain rather immediately or later on in life.
In MMA you get hurt, maybe take 1-2 more shots then the referees intervene promptly once a fighter is in danger, potentially reducing the risk of serious harm. Unlike boxing, where fighters can be knocked down and remain vulnerable while being counted. I think these fickle fans think that just because MMA fighters take kicks, knees, elbows to the head that’s it’s more dangerous than boxing, but they don’t understand that the referee saves them quicker than boxing. You can get choked unconscious but you’re awakened very quickly. Same for any bone breaks from juijitsu but it’s up to the egotistical fighter to tap out sooner to prevent that from happening.
Another unpopular opinion is how uneducated they think they are, but a lot of MMA athletes are highly educated, disciplined individuals that possess impressive academic and professional backgrounds. Rich Franklin, a former Middleweight World Champion was a high school math teacher, with both a Bachelor's and Master's degree. Former UFC fighter Rosi Sexton earned a Ph.D. in theoretical computer science. Former UFC Interim Heavyweight Champion Shane Carwin earned a Bachelor of Science in mechanical engineering and a degree in environmental technology. Additionally, fighters have gone on to become lawyers, doctors, engineers and professionals in various fields. The list goes on.
In conclusion, these unpopular opinions of MMA is often misunderstood by those who aren't familiar with the sport, leading to misconceptions about its brutality and fighters lack of intelligence. In reality, MMA fighters are highly trained athletes with a deep understanding of various disciplines, safety protocols and strategic techniques, making the sport as disciplined and just as regulated as boxing, if not more so, making it widely accepted and favoured by your typical MMA fan and the media.
webble: Hmmm I think this would be a better argument if your title was slightly different, it IS dangerous so I think you’re wrong there but the other two points are bob on so since you got 2/3rds of your argument correct you get 2/3rds of the points rounded up that’s 7/10
GoodCat: So, here's my dilemma. Is this topic supposed to be unpopular opinions within MMA? Or just unpopular opinions about MMA in general? My interpretation of the category is unpopular opinions within MMA. So this one kinda misses the mark for me. I mean, this is a whole website catered to MMA fans. So no one is going to think this is an unpopular opinion here. I won't absolutely destroy this one, because your write up is good and well thought out. But I can't really give it a high score. 5/10
Brick: Man, I think you are about 10 years too late on this one. I don’t think your opinion is unpopular at all anymore, in fact it’s probably the mainstream. The “human cockfighting” position is far more rare now than ever. Compared to 10-15 years ago, the number of conversations I overhear about the upcoming/past UFC even from random people at a bar or poker table has increased dramatically. I used to show up at work with a suit and a shiner and when I explained why, they looked at me like I was crazy, now it seems like every time you turn around you are talking to someone who has trained or currently does. After being ignored for years, it’s routinely covered on ESPN and other sports networks. This is not a difficult argument to make anymore and isn’t really all that unpopular of an opinion. 3.5/10.
cmvideo75: A pretty good one. I think among the general public this is the popular opinion for sure so it is a good one to argue against. But we are all MMA fans here and I think we all know better, even though there is absolutely an element of barbarism and definitely some uneducated fighters. So while I agree with the OP, the other side does have some valid points to their argument too. But I did love the Bisping clip that was included. Nice add on to match your argument.7/10
Total: 22.5
Kevin Randleman shouldn’t be anywhere near the UFC HOF
It’s said that you shouldn’t speak ill of the dead. Sadly for Kevin Randleman all that changes today. Kevin Randleman shouldn’t be anywhere near the UFC HOF never mind be inducted and I’m also of the opinion his inclusion was nothing more than a sympathy vote. Had The Monster never passed away, he wouldn’t be inducted. For a start his record was shit: Record 17-16 (4-3 UFC, 4-7 Pride)
Brick: ‘But a lot of those loses were against top competition!’ Sure, Randleman may have copped losses against some of the elite fighters of the time, Randy and Chuck for example, but let’s juxtapose that with some of the W’s on his record: Bobish 0-0, Neto 0-1, Smith 7-11, Foster 3-3, Ohara 0-1, Yamamoto 4-10, Kocamis 8-6. He crushed a lot of cans and sometimes those cans, Roger Gracie 2-0, crushed Randlleman. Elite fighters with .500 records do so from fighting the best, BJ Penn 16-14 for example, not from padding a record fighting cans to even up the score.
cmvideo: ‘Three words for you pal, Mirco Cro Cop.’ Yep, easily Randleman’s best win and no one expected that knockout. For good reason too, cos Randleman is shit. If there was ever a lucky win, that was it. What was supposed to happen in that fight is exactly what happened 9 months later when they rematched, Randleman gets finished within a minute and the balance of the universe was restored. Cro Cop even subbed him. Who the hell does Cro Cop ever sub?
Webble: ‘Ah, but you’re ignoring those wins against Pete Williams 10-2 and Pedro Rizzo 9-0!’ Wins? Those?? Those are prime examples of laying on top of someone for 15 minutes with no idea of what to do next. In fact 8 of Kevin’s wins came from decision cos the dude had no idea what to do once he got the fight to the ground. Yeah of course, he could do some ground and pound against the cans but anyone will any ground skill easily nullified these shots. The issue at the time was there was no stand up due to inactivity within the rules, so Randleman would completely shut down the fight helping popularise the phrase lay and pray. Remember that time you got excited about going back and rewatching a Randleman win not named Cro Cop? Me neither. It’s why the Bas Rutten title loss isn’t debatable for me. If you lay on top of someone for near on 21 minutes and still get out struck 56-181 by someone underneath you by, you have to ask yourself if you should have made a Plan B.
Goodcat: ‘I think you’re reading too much into the wrong thing here, he’s in the HOF Pioneer Wing’ Okay, a pioneer of bloomin’ what I ask you? Cos there’s these two wrestlers long before inducted into the HOF Pioneer Wing called Dan Severn and Mark Coleman, the mentor of Randleman himself. Those are the wrestling pioneers mma. In Randleman we have a pure wrestler offering up nothing else – acceptable in Dan Severns day but not by Randleman’s era, which is why he often for sparked out by other fighters with wrestling backgrounds such as Chuck and Erikson. Randleman wasn’t a pioneer, he was just another high level wrestler who found himself relying on his one solid skill set to eke out a decision.
Brick, Webble, cmvideo, Goodcat: ‘Some great points, 10, 10, 10, 10...’
webble: Ok so my first thought was ‘ah but it was the pioneer wing’ and that was your closing argument so we got on the same page at the end. I do agree with you in that there seems to be too many inductees and also some are put in too quickly. I think you also have to take into account the era in which they competed, you aren’t comparing like for like, but then there were fewer fighters back then so maybe he didn’t stand out. I cant decide on this one 6/10
GoodCat: I think your write up and explanations are good, but I honestly don't see this as an unpopular opinion. I agree with him only being in because he passed away. Kinda like Mask from Tapout. I'm not sure if I should take points off since I don't think it's that unpopular or not, but I don't think I'll punish you for it. 7/10
Brick: I didn’t really have a problem with his entry into the pioneer wing and I think most people didn’t either, so I think you hit on an unpopular opinion here. But I think I was under the impression that it’s sort of the UFC’s version of the “seniors” NFL HOF inductees, which are basically borderline candidates who didn’t make it in when really eligible but got a mercy vote later in life. But looking at the other folks in the pioneer division, this is not that and I agree Randleman did not belong next to some of those names. You could have used the juicing argument but failed to do so; I know most of his peers juiced, but I don’t know that any went so far as the disgrace of submitted a 100% fake urine sample, lol. Your argument is pretty well constructed, so while I’m not about to go on the warpath on this issue, I’m definitely more moved in your direction that before I read the take. 7/10.
cmvideo75: I like this argument too. I don't think I've ever heard someone argue against Randleman before lol. There are some pretty sketchy fighters in the MMA HoF IMO but that is because the history isn't that long and I guess they feel like that have build a roster of 'legends'? His status is definitely inflated because of the era he fought in and his 'pioneer' status. My only argument against here is that I'm not sure many people care.7/10
Total:27
8. @MMAFTM13
MMA is not barbaric and dangerous, and fighters are not uneducated
One of the biggest unpopular opinions of MMA is the misconception and ignorance of how barbaric, more dangerous compared to boxing and how uneducated the fighters are amongst the non-fans of the sport, to the casual fans of the sport or the ill-informed boxing fans. This couldn’t be further from the truth.
I guess MMA was once barbaric in a sense, when it was first starting out before rounds were introduced, before commissions were regulated, rules were implemented where it lacked standardized rules, which made the sport appear barbaric. but times have changed, The sports evolved significantly from their early, more brutal beginnings to a high amount of technical skill on display. In boxing that is one discipline that you have to master. In MMA there are several and you have to be versed in at least half of them to succeed. That misconception that MMA is simply barbaric and fighters are unintelligent ignores the extensive training, skill and professionalism involved, and it’s importance to recognize that fighters are dedicated athletes committed to their craft.
Boxing fans have suggested that although both sports are dangerous, they concluded that MMA is more unsafe but the data and statistics suggests otherwise. Since 2000, there’s been 45 reported deaths in professional boxing fights. 84 related deaths with one death every 5000 bouts. In every sanctioned pro MMA fights since then there’s been 10. Zero deaths in the UFC. Why? It’s probably because in boxing you get dropped, hurt and given an 8-count to recover, but you’re not really recovering and this process can lead to repeated head trauma where you’re just taking more unnecessary head shots, leading to potential complications to the brain rather immediately or later on in life.
In MMA you get hurt, maybe take 1-2 more shots then the referees intervene promptly once a fighter is in danger, potentially reducing the risk of serious harm. Unlike boxing, where fighters can be knocked down and remain vulnerable while being counted. I think these fickle fans think that just because MMA fighters take kicks, knees, elbows to the head that’s it’s more dangerous than boxing, but they don’t understand that the referee saves them quicker than boxing. You can get choked unconscious but you’re awakened very quickly. Same for any bone breaks from juijitsu but it’s up to the egotistical fighter to tap out sooner to prevent that from happening.
Another unpopular opinion is how uneducated they think they are, but a lot of MMA athletes are highly educated, disciplined individuals that possess impressive academic and professional backgrounds. Rich Franklin, a former Middleweight World Champion was a high school math teacher, with both a Bachelor's and Master's degree. Former UFC fighter Rosi Sexton earned a Ph.D. in theoretical computer science. Former UFC Interim Heavyweight Champion Shane Carwin earned a Bachelor of Science in mechanical engineering and a degree in environmental technology. Additionally, fighters have gone on to become lawyers, doctors, engineers and professionals in various fields. The list goes on.
In conclusion, these unpopular opinions of MMA is often misunderstood by those who aren't familiar with the sport, leading to misconceptions about its brutality and fighters lack of intelligence. In reality, MMA fighters are highly trained athletes with a deep understanding of various disciplines, safety protocols and strategic techniques, making the sport as disciplined and just as regulated as boxing, if not more so, making it widely accepted and favoured by your typical MMA fan and the media.
GoodCat: So, here's my dilemma. Is this topic supposed to be unpopular opinions within MMA? Or just unpopular opinions about MMA in general? My interpretation of the category is unpopular opinions within MMA. So this one kinda misses the mark for me. I mean, this is a whole website catered to MMA fans. So no one is going to think this is an unpopular opinion here. I won't absolutely destroy this one, because your write up is good and well thought out. But I can't really give it a high score. 5/10
Brick: Man, I think you are about 10 years too late on this one. I don’t think your opinion is unpopular at all anymore, in fact it’s probably the mainstream. The “human cockfighting” position is far more rare now than ever. Compared to 10-15 years ago, the number of conversations I overhear about the upcoming/past UFC even from random people at a bar or poker table has increased dramatically. I used to show up at work with a suit and a shiner and when I explained why, they looked at me like I was crazy, now it seems like every time you turn around you are talking to someone who has trained or currently does. After being ignored for years, it’s routinely covered on ESPN and other sports networks. This is not a difficult argument to make anymore and isn’t really all that unpopular of an opinion. 3.5/10.
cmvideo75: A pretty good one. I think among the general public this is the popular opinion for sure so it is a good one to argue against. But we are all MMA fans here and I think we all know better, even though there is absolutely an element of barbarism and definitely some uneducated fighters. So while I agree with the OP, the other side does have some valid points to their argument too. But I did love the Bisping clip that was included. Nice add on to match your argument.7/10
Total: 22.5
