It's do or die for Babalu and Lambert

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » UFC Forum » It's do or die for Babalu and Lambert
richieb19
2/15/07 11:26:38PM
"...they both need a win if they want to stay in the UFC." ~ Joe Rogan

Why get rid of either one? Why in the world would you rid your organisation of a world class fighter who is recognizable by most MMA fans? They always seem to do this to fighters that lose a few fights, when in the end what most Pride fans enjoy more than anything is a recognizable roster. The UFC instead tosses out people that arent on a winning streak and replaces them with no-names set up to lose against reality show fighters so they can gain populatity amongst new fans. Please, don't get me wrong I'm not trying to turn this into a Pride Vs. UFC thread, I just don't want to see either Babalu or Lambert leave the UFC.


Reignofterror
2/16/07 12:15:24AM
I totally agree, Babalu is an important asset to the UFC LHW division to etleast remain sturdy without having repetitive matches (eg: Tito vs Chuck 4). The way I see it is the UFC needs all the talent they can get in the LHW division and thats one of the many areas that needs growth. Pronto.
richieb19
2/16/07 12:16:36AM

Posted by Reignofterror

I totally agree, Babalu is an important asset to the UFC LHW division to etleast remain sturdy without having repetitive matches (eg: Tito vs Chuck 4). The way I see it is the UFC needs all the talent they can get in the LHW division and thats one of the many areas that needs growth. Pronto.

Lambert is also a fantastic fighter who should be promoted by the UFC, not let go.
xthe_scottx
2/16/07 12:34:49AM
I agree. Both Sobral and Lambert are fighters that always try to deliver a great fight and a 2 or 3 loss streak doesn't mean they should be let go. Just look what happened with Franca. He lost two in a row in the UFC and now he almost at a title shot. Also, I don't see how it's win or lose for both of them when Lamberts last loss was Rashad Evens and Sobrals last loss was Liddell.
hippysmacker
2/16/07 4:05:16AM

Posted by richieb19

"...they both need a win if they want to stay in the UFC." ~ Joe Rogan

Why get rid of either one? Why in the world would you rid your organisation of a world class fighter who is recognizable by most MMA fans? They always seem to do this to fighters that lose a few fights, when in the end what most Pride fans enjoy more than anything is a recognizable roster. The UFC instead tosses out people that arent on a winning streak and replaces them with no-names set up to lose against reality show fighters so they can gain populatity amongst new fans. Please, don't get me wrong I'm not trying to turn this into a Pride Vs. UFC thread, I just don't want to see either Babalu or Lambert leave the UFC.





I saw Rogan say that too. I think this is either just promotional hype or a chance to promote the WEC( probably for Lambert). We have to remember that the UFC bought them now and actually kept some of the better fighter's on the WFA contract's there(Uriah Faber and Mayhem MIller). Anyway, I don't see them letting go of anyone who doesn't seemingly lose the will to fight( Loiseau) , or someone who makes outrageous contract demands(Vera) . They have too many shows planned for this year, for this to makes sense. Babalu is definately a A-level fighter IMO.. Lambert's a B-level to me, but could be A if he slimmed down a little and moved to 185. I would agree with you if I beleived the statement was true, but I don't.
crimethinc
2/16/07 6:14:50AM
We need another event to go by because it seems like we keep circling aound the same topics. So I've said this before, but I'm going to repeat myself.

I think the biggest staying factor is there performance within the octagon. If a 10-0 fighter signs a three fight deal with the UFC and loses two of those three fights, it probably won't take a lot of debate to send his paycheck to the next up and comer. Even if his record is a still impressive 11-2 his performance in the UFC is what the UFC remembers. Right now with the huge popularity of the sport drawing a lot of casual fans we have to remember that the majority of UFC fans right now aren't Pride fans, they aren't IFL fans, they aren't even really MMA fans, they are UFC fans and these people won't order the PPVs or buy tickets to see fighters that they've only seen do poorly.

But people act like when your UFC contract is up your MMA career is over. These guys sign on to 3 or 5 fight deals and when there obligation is complete they look for other contracts and other fights be it in the UFC or elsewhere. Look at Babalu, he fought 3 fights for UFC in 2002. He went 1 for 3 beating Sinosic and losing to Randleman and Liddell. After that he went on a 7 fight win streak in other orgs. signed a new 5 fight UFC deal and cleaned up 3 more wins before losing to Chuck in a LHW title match.

This fight is the conclusion of the 5 fight contracts for both Lambert and Babalu. Both going 3-1 on these fights. Is this the last time we see either of them in the UFC for a while, possibly. Is this the last time we see either of them in the octagon ever again. Most likely not.
madmarck
2/16/07 7:50:15AM
I think Babalu by far is the #2 guy in the UFC LHW division. The only problem is. If he faces a top fighter like Tito or Rampage then he is pretty much set up for a rematch with Chuck. Again.
IT sucks. I think Babalu should have fought a really big name before he fought Chuck. Now he basicaly gotta wait till Chuck Retires or loses before he gets a title shot.
richieb19
2/16/07 9:48:56AM

Posted by crimethinc

We need another event to go by because it seems like we keep circling aound the same topics. So I've said this before, but I'm going to repeat myself.

I think the biggest staying factor is there performance within the octagon. If a 10-0 fighter signs a three fight deal with the UFC and loses two of those three fights, it probably won't take a lot of debate to send his paycheck to the next up and comer. Even if his record is a still impressive 11-2 his performance in the UFC is what the UFC remembers. Right now with the huge popularity of the sport drawing a lot of casual fans we have to remember that the majority of UFC fans right now aren't Pride fans, they aren't IFL fans, they aren't even really MMA fans, they are UFC fans and these people won't order the PPVs or buy tickets to see fighters that they've only seen do poorly.

But people act like when your UFC contract is up your MMA career is over. These guys sign on to 3 or 5 fight deals and when there obligation is complete they look for other contracts and other fights be it in the UFC or elsewhere. Look at Babalu, he fought 3 fights for UFC in 2002. He went 1 for 3 beating Sinosic and losing to Randleman and Liddell. After that he went on a 7 fight win streak in other orgs. signed a new 5 fight UFC deal and cleaned up 3 more wins before losing to Chuck in a LHW title match.

This fight is the conclusion of the 5 fight contracts for both Lambert and Babalu. Both going 3-1 on these fights. Is this the last time we see either of them in the UFC for a while, possibly. Is this the last time we see either of them in the octagon ever again. Most likely not.


Like I said, I'm not trying to compare the two organizations persay, I'm just mentioning that the UFC would build much larger fan bases if people actually got to know some names in the UFC aside from Chuck Liddell. I concider myself a pretty hardcore MMA fan, yet every new event the UFC promotes I see and abundance of names I've never heard of before. I'm not trying to say that bringing in new talent is a bad idea, it's nessessary, but the UFC is now constantly bringing in people with perfect records or that have not much more outside of a freestyle wrestling background, and just as soon letting them go.

In the case of Jason Lambert and Renato Sobral, I just don't understand the idea behind even concidering letting one go, they both put on a great show, and they both still have a very good chance at becoming UFC LHW champion at some point in their career.

Are you implying that people won't tune in to watch an event if a fighter is on a minor losing streak? Sergei and Alistair have both lost 2 in a row, and you can bet your ass I'm gonna watch, and even if they lose I will want to see them again, because I've seen them fight long enough in Pride to know who they are and what they are capable of.
Trapt1nw0nder
2/16/07 10:14:26AM
i saw the show too...i dought they would let either go,maybe Lambert if he lost they would still have him fight but not broadcasted

but sobral i dought they will cut him from aired TV win or lose...(which i dought he will lose)
fedorwins1
2/16/07 10:54:02AM

Posted by madmarck

I think Babalu by far is the #2 guy in the UFC LHW division. The only problem is. If he faces a top fighter like Tito or Rampage then he is pretty much set up for a rematch with Chuck. Again.
IT sucks. I think Babalu should have fought a really big name before he fought Chuck. Now he basicaly gotta wait till Chuck Retires or loses before he gets a title shot.



I agree that Babalu is right now #2 in the UFC LHW division, that will change soon though when he faces Tito or Rampage. I don't see why the UFC would let him go Pride doesn't let go of one of their top 5 fighters in a division(except CC) and Lambert is very talented and top 10 in the UFC LHW division also.
AchillesHeel
2/16/07 11:44:12AM

Posted by richieb19

"...they both need a win if they want to stay in the UFC." ~ Joe Rogan


I'm looking forward to this fight, and I have to admit that this is part of the reason.


Why get rid of either one? Why in the world would you rid your organisation of a world class fighter who is recognizable by most MMA fans?

I think the theory is that they're establishing a baseline of success. This will make every fighter eager to win matches, regardless of their place in the hierarchy. It's a psychological trick, if you will, to motivate the fighters. Now, whether it actually works, and whether it could backfire, are still open questions.

Personally, I'm with you. I think fighters' pay structure and the general sense of whether or not a fighter will be offered a title fight are probably enough to motivate guys. I think you also have to assume (and demand) a certain amount of self-motivation; if a guy doesn't want to win every fight regardless, maybe he's not "UFC material."

I also think there's a risk of ditching too many quality fighters. For instance, I noticed that a lot of "fans" of the UFC have recently decided that B.J. Penn ain't all that, because he's lost two fights in a row. I don't mind fans voicing their opinion (if nothing else, it's another motivator for the fighters), but I was deathly afraid that the UFC might listen to the uneducated masses and start to think that Penn wasn't worth keeping anymore. Losing to two of the best fighters in the world - and almost winning both fights, to boot - would be worth a pay raise in my book.
crimethinc
2/16/07 12:10:37PM

Posted by richieb19

I concider myself a pretty hardcore MMA fan,

Are you implying that people won't tune in to watch an event if a fighter is on a minor losing streak? Sergei and Alistair have both lost 2 in a row, and you can bet your ass I'm gonna watch, and even if they lose I will want to see them again, because I've seen them fight long enough in Pride to know who they are and what they are capable of.



You consider yourself a hardcore MMA fan. Which is exactly what I was getting at. Right now the hardcore MMA fans aren't the cash card for the UFC . With the popularity of MMA right now, what percentage of PPVs and ticket sales are generated by "hardcore" MMA fans. Maybe 25%. Maybe a little more, but most certainly less then half. I watched the PPV in December at a friend's brother's house with about 10 guys and with the exception of my friend and myself, no one there knew any of the fighters besides Chuck and Tito. These are the guys watching MMA nowadays. Do you think these guys watch Pride or any other organizations? I could talk about Fedor, easily the best MMA fighter in the world right now, and these people would have no idea what I'm talking about. A fighter can come in with an outstanding record in other orgs. lose 3 fights in a row for the UFC and these same guys will only see him as a loser. Names sell fights, that's why so many cards are stacked with TUF guys. People know them.

I thought I explained it well enough in my first post but I guess not. Win or lose this fight is not the come all end all of MMA or even UFC for these guys. This fight is completing the contractual obligations of both fighters to the UFC. Guys come and go all the time. They aren't being fired from the organization. This isn't going to be the last time we see either of these guys. This all came from Joe Rogan anyhow which means it's only speculation. Does he have the knowledge to make this prediction, absolutely. But does he have the position to make this decision, not at all. It's up to the fighters and Dana White just when these guys will return to the octagon regardless as to what Joe Rogan or anyone else has to say.
scoozna
2/16/07 2:30:41PM
I agree with you - besides being starved for MMA on TV, it's the only way they can develop depth in their divisions. Bringing in new talent is fine. However, as fighters reach the top of the division, the competition gets tougher (that's good) and they start having losses (that's expected - or at least it ought to be)..
richieb19
2/16/07 3:57:54PM

Posted by crimethinc


Posted by richieb19

I concider myself a pretty hardcore MMA fan,

Are you implying that people won't tune in to watch an event if a fighter is on a minor losing streak? Sergei and Alistair have both lost 2 in a row, and you can bet your ass I'm gonna watch, and even if they lose I will want to see them again, because I've seen them fight long enough in Pride to know who they are and what they are capable of.



You consider yourself a hardcore MMA fan. Which is exactly what I was getting at. Right now the hardcore MMA fans aren't the cash card for the UFC . With the popularity of MMA right now, what percentage of PPVs and ticket sales are generated by "hardcore" MMA fans. Maybe 25%. Maybe a little more, but most certainly less then half. I watched the PPV in December at a friend's brother's house with about 10 guys and with the exception of my friend and myself, no one there knew any of the fighters besides Chuck and Tito. These are the guys watching MMA nowadays. Do you think these guys watch Pride or any other organizations? I could talk about Fedor, easily the best MMA fighter in the world right now, and these people would have no idea what I'm talking about. A fighter can come in with an outstanding record in other orgs. lose 3 fights in a row for the UFC and these same guys will only see him as a loser. Names sell fights, that's why so many cards are stacked with TUF guys. People know them.

I thought I explained it well enough in my first post but I guess not. Win or lose this fight is not the come all end all of MMA or even UFC for these guys. This fight is completing the contractual obligations of both fighters to the UFC. Guys come and go all the time. They aren't being fired from the organization. This isn't going to be the last time we see either of these guys. This all came from Joe Rogan anyhow which means it's only speculation. Does he have the knowledge to make this prediction, absolutely. But does he have the position to make this decision, not at all. It's up to the fighters and Dana White just when these guys will return to the octagon regardless as to what Joe Rogan or anyone else has to say.


I completely understand what you mean, but I think youre wrong. I agree that most end fans don't want to pay for a card with people theyve only seen as losers, and it doesnt matter how good Sobral andLambert actually are, most people wouldnt know it if they didnt see it for themselves in the UFC. However I think an established roster is still a better idea, take as an example Evan Tanner, who most fans new and experienced alike knew. If he won or if he lost, it mattered very little because people knew he was tough and entertaining, and would pay to see him fight again regardless. Or better yet Ken Shamrock, who was on a losing streak in the UFC yet still managed to sell more than any TUF fighter could dream of. Also if you think the whole arguement is that the regular UFC fans don't want to tune in to see a loser, then why do they still promote Chris Leben? He went 0-2 on the reality show and lost badly twice now.
JunCTion
2/17/07 2:07:33AM

Posted by xthe_scottx

I agree. Both Sobral and Lambert are fighters that always try to deliver a great fight and a 2 or 3 loss streak doesn't mean they should be let go. Just look what happened with Franca. He lost two in a row in the UFC and now he almost at a title shot. Also, I don't see how it's win or lose for both of them when Lamberts last loss was Rashad Evens and Sobrals last loss was Liddell.



its not like they lost to lesser fighters and they could both probably take care of most of the other ighters in that weight class, especially babalu. randy lost 2 to chuck, tito lost 2 to chuck, rampage id gonna lose 2 to chuck (not to change the subject but what happens if herring loses his next fight? & diaz lost a few and now he gets a shot at gomi)
richieb19
2/17/07 2:10:56AM

Posted by JunCTion


Posted by xthe_scottx

I agree. Both Sobral and Lambert are fighters that always try to deliver a great fight and a 2 or 3 loss streak doesn't mean they should be let go. Just look what happened with Franca. He lost two in a row in the UFC and now he almost at a title shot. Also, I don't see how it's win or lose for both of them when Lamberts last loss was Rashad Evens and Sobrals last loss was Liddell.



its not like they lost to lesser fighters and they could both probably take care of most of the other ighters in that weight class, especially babalu. randy lost 2 to chuck, tito lost 2 to chuck, rampage id gonna lose 2 to chuck (not to change the subject but what happens if herring loses his next fight? & diaz lost a few and now he gets a shot at gomi)

Not to go off-topic, but Lambert seems to be in Babalu's shadow in this converation, but to those who didn't know Lambert was a HW and LHW champ (at the same time in WEC?), and he hits very hard, he also has plenty of potential, and may very well surprize many of you in this upcoming bout...

Either way, I don't want either to leave...
JunCTion
2/17/07 2:18:48AM

Posted by richieb19


Posted by JunCTion


Posted by xthe_scottx

I agree. Both Sobral and Lambert are fighters that always try to deliver a great fight and a 2 or 3 loss streak doesn't mean they should be let go. Just look what happened with Franca. He lost two in a row in the UFC and now he almost at a title shot. Also, I don't see how it's win or lose for both of them when Lamberts last loss was Rashad Evens and Sobrals last loss was Liddell.



its not like they lost to lesser fighters and they could both probably take care of most of the other ighters in that weight class, especially babalu. randy lost 2 to chuck, tito lost 2 to chuck, rampage id gonna lose 2 to chuck (not to change the subject but what happens if herring loses his next fight? & diaz lost a few and now he gets a shot at gomi)

Not to go off-topic, but Lambert seems to be in Babalu's shadow in this converation, but to those who didn't know Lambert was a HW and LHW champ (at the same time in WEC?), and he hits very hard, he also has plenty of potential, and may very well surprize many of you in this upcoming bout...

Either way, I don't want either to leave...



thanks, i didnt know that and i don't mean to put lambert in the shadow, im just biased cause ive always liked babalu
crimethinc
2/17/07 6:39:57AM

Posted by richieb19

I completely understand what you mean, but I think youre wrong. I agree that most end fans don't want to pay for a card with people theyve only seen as losers, and it doesnt matter how good Sobral andLambert actually are, most people wouldnt know it if they didnt see it for themselves in the UFC. However I think an established roster is still a better idea, take as an example Evan Tanner, who most fans new and experienced alike knew. If he won or if he lost, it mattered very little because people knew he was tough and entertaining, and would pay to see him fight again regardless. Or better yet Ken Shamrock, who was on a losing streak in the UFC yet still managed to sell more than any TUF fighter could dream of. Also if you think the whole arguement is that the regular UFC fans don't want to tune in to see a loser, then why do they still promote Chris Leben? He went 0-2 on the reality show and lost badly twice now.



I understand what you mean as well, and I kind of think we are on the same page we're just coming across as argumentative with each other. It's all about name recognition and who people remember. Of course people are going to tune in to see Ken Shamrock. To most people he epitomizes MMA and has been there from the beginning. He's more well known in UFC in America then Royce Gracie. But if you ask people about Renato Sobral and Jason Lambert you may get some puzzled looks. Not so much with Babalu but I think definitely with Lambert. It's hard for me too make my point since you are including Babalu and Lambert together. I know Rogan mentioned both names, but my argument tends to apply more directly with Lambert who hasn't fought as many "A" fighters in the UFC as Babalu. I'm not taking anything away from Lambert, he's a good fighter and has performed well in the octagon but I don't think Jason "The Punisher" Lambert is going to weigh-in much on wether or not the average fan decides to watch an event.

I was trying to refer to non-TUF guys because of course everyone knows Chris Leben. That is one of my biggest fears about TUF. For the sake of TV ratings I'm afraid they might start to bring in bigger personalities then quality fighters. For example, Ross Pointon. A really likeable guy and one of my favorite "Characters" on the show. But he came into TUF with, I think, a 4-6 record. Then you've got guys like Danny Abbadi who are a joke. He had like a 2-1 record and you didn't even know he was on the show until he started nursing Hamill and talking trash about his fight. People remember Chris Leben as a character from the show. Even non-fans. I don't watch survivor but I can still tell you a few of the cast members because they were well-publicized. So when you hear a guys name for 12 weeks you tend to remember him and win or lose fans feel like they know something about the sport if they can recognize the fighters. You can have a conversation with a lot more people about a guy whose been on TV for 3 months then a guy who has had 3 televised fights.

As for non-TUF guys the average fans only exposure to them is through the UFC. Not Pride, not KOTC, not anything. So if they lose in the UFC the average fan has only seen them lose. They know nothing else about the guy except that he lost his fight and they probably won't even remember him as anything more as the guy who lost to so and so. (I'm not personally calling any of these guys losers, except maybe Danny Abbadi.)
richieb19
2/17/07 11:55:35AM

Posted by crimethinc


Posted by richieb19

I completely understand what you mean, but I think youre wrong. I agree that most end fans don't want to pay for a card with people theyve only seen as losers, and it doesnt matter how good Sobral andLambert actually are, most people wouldnt know it if they didnt see it for themselves in the UFC. However I think an established roster is still a better idea, take as an example Evan Tanner, who most fans new and experienced alike knew. If he won or if he lost, it mattered very little because people knew he was tough and entertaining, and would pay to see him fight again regardless. Or better yet Ken Shamrock, who was on a losing streak in the UFC yet still managed to sell more than any TUF fighter could dream of. Also if you think the whole arguement is that the regular UFC fans don't want to tune in to see a loser, then why do they still promote Chris Leben? He went 0-2 on the reality show and lost badly twice now.



I understand what you mean as well, and I kind of think we are on the same page we're just coming across as argumentative with each other. It's all about name recognition and who people remember. Of course people are going to tune in to see Ken Shamrock. To most people he epitomizes MMA and has been there from the beginning. He's more well known in UFC in America then Royce Gracie. But if you ask people about Renato Sobral and Jason Lambert you may get some puzzled looks. Not so much with Babalu but I think definitely with Lambert. It's hard for me too make my point since you are including Babalu and Lambert together. I know Rogan mentioned both names, but my argument tends to apply more directly with Lambert who hasn't fought as many "A" fighters in the UFC as Babalu. I'm not taking anything away from Lambert, he's a good fighter and has performed well in the octagon but I don't think Jason "The Punisher" Lambert is going to weigh-in much on wether or not the average fan decides to watch an event.

I was trying to refer to non-TUF guys because of course everyone knows Chris Leben. That is one of my biggest fears about TUF. For the sake of TV ratings I'm afraid they might start to bring in bigger personalities then quality fighters. For example, Ross Pointon. A really likeable guy and one of my favorite "Characters" on the show. But he came into TUF with, I think, a 4-6 record. Then you've got guys like Danny Abbadi who are a joke. He had like a 2-1 record and you didn't even know he was on the show until he started nursing Hamill and talking trash about his fight. People remember Chris Leben as a character from the show. Even non-fans. I don't watch survivor but I can still tell you a few of the cast members because they were well-publicized. So when you hear a guys name for 12 weeks you tend to remember him and win or lose fans feel like they know something about the sport if they can recognize the fighters. You can have a conversation with a lot more people about a guy whose been on TV for 3 months then a guy who has had 3 televised fights.

As for non-TUF guys the average fans only exposure to them is through the UFC. Not Pride, not KOTC, not anything. So if they lose in the UFC the average fan has only seen them lose. They know nothing else about the guy except that he lost his fight and they probably won't even remember him as anything more as the guy who lost to so and so. (I'm not personally calling any of these guys losers, except maybe Danny Abbadi.)


Very good points, and I completely agree. I would have to say though, that my biggest fear with TUF is not that they popularize interesting characters before quality fighters, but the method in which they do it. Take for example UFC 69, there is probably just 5 fighters that I've never even heard of before, and for a card having 9 bouts, thats not good.
JunCTion
2/17/07 2:54:17PM
imo if you lose a couple of fights to top tier fighters, but put up a good fight, you shouldn't be thrown aside, because you weren't picked to win in the 1st place.
if you lose to chuck it shouldn't count heavily against you because your piers also lost to chuck. i like vitor and i know he lost to chuck, tito & randy, but that still leaves he 4th on the list in that class. but he's gone. why? if randy loses to tim, then what? if forest loses again then what. if babalu, tito lose to chuck again, then what.
but, if your a tuf guy or an unfamiliar and lose a couple of fights to other tuf guys and no names, then good ridense.
richieb19
3/4/07 10:26:54PM
As sad as it is to see Babalu lose, it's better him than Lambert if this really was true to start with, as hes more marketable and more well known. As for Lambert being underrated, and no joke... I hate to say I told you so...
Related Topics