Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST

Paul Heyman backs Brock Lesnar as UFC Hall of Famer, doubts return to octagon

Print  
Do you think Brock Lesnar should be inducted into the Hall Of Fame?
Yes 19 37%
No 32 63%
  Page 2 of 4     1     2     3     4  
Posted By Message

ghandikush

MMA Sensei

ghandikush Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,376
Career:118-71
Joined:Jul 2011
Chips:
213
Lesnar beat Herring Couture Mur and Carwin. He fought mir 2 times, and fought the Reem. Of coarse he deserves HOF, and a lot fucking more than Forrest Griffin or Shamrock. He did more in 3 years than those two did in their CAREERS.

Bunch of Brock haters can now explain to me how no time defending Forrest or others deserve to be HOF material though...... Sylvia accomplished less in two title reigns that spanned 5 defenses....

Post #16   9/9/12 10:05:17AM   

warglory

Heavyweight Champ

warglory Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:535-344
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
776
I voted yes after careful deliberation. The reason I voted yes, is because Lesnar was responsible for bringing in the current hw era. When he arrived, he showed the world you didn't have to be an oversized brawler to qualify for the hw division, you could be a well tuned athlete, with speed, agility and a strong pedigree. We never had that before in the hw division, and all of a sudden, whether you hated the man or admired him, he lit a fire under the division's ass. He was the one that gave Mir his current role as hw contender, by forcing the man to fine tune his body to become a REAL heavyweight. The wins he had, were all in dramatic fashion, and the losses were never a let down. We were always guaranteed fireworks in a Brock Lesnar fight, one way or another.

I think his role as a pro wrestler before, and after, is in the backs of many folks' minds, and I don't think that is fair. If Jon Jones all of a sudden walked away from the sport today, there isn't a doubt in my mind that he would become a hall of famer. Well Lesnar did the same thing as Jones did in his division, only there were contenders out there willing to step up the division's game in order to compete with Lesnar, the uber athlete. He changed the face of the game, and no matter how many fights he had, that counts for a ton.

Post #17   9/9/12 10:16:00AM   

NE-1

MMA Regular

NE-1 Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:199
Career:1,332-913
Joined:Apr 2007
Camp: GSPeed on your face
Chips:
96
Kimbo attracted a lot of viewers to the ufc too....

Last edited 9/9/12 11:40AM server time by NE-1
Edit note/reason: n/a

Post #18   9/9/12 10:42:00AM   

Aether

Heavyweight Champ

Aether Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,068
Career:946-505
Joined:Apr 2007
Chips:
1,039
People generally get into the HOF for any given sport for a couple of reasons:

1. Being exceptionally good and/or setting tons of records
2. Being an important part of the sport's history

Number 2 is where Mask, Ken Shamrock and Forrest Griffin come in. Griffin/Bonnar was a landmark in MMA history and Shamrock was one of the first big names in the sport and competed in a large number of the UFC's earliest events. You simply can't talk about the history of the UFC without talking about these guys.

Lesnar is just another guy who won a belt and lost it pretty soon afterwards. If you throw every person who headlined a big PPV or held a belt it kind of defeats the purpose of having a Hall of Fame.

Post #19   9/9/12 10:49:08AM   

JoeWarren33

MMA Sensei

JoeWarren33 Avatar
10
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,899
Career:2,250-1,376
Joined:Apr 2009
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
267
If Brock deserves to be in the hall of fame (ufc) then why isn't Tank Abbott in the HOF? I think Tank has more doing then Brock does. Brock doesnt even deserve to be in the WWE hall of fame. lol

Post #20   9/9/12 11:01:38AM   

ghandikush

MMA Sensei

ghandikush Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,376
Career:118-71
Joined:Jul 2011
Chips:
213

Posted by Aether

People generally get into the HOF for any given sport for a couple of reasons:

1. Being exceptionally good and/or setting tons of records
2. Being an important part of the sport's history

Number 2 is where Mask, Ken Shamrock and Forrest Griffin come in. Griffin/Bonnar was a landmark in MMA history and Shamrock was one of the first big names in the sport and competed in a large number of the UFC's earliest events. You simply can't talk about the history of the UFC without talking about these guys.

Lesnar is just another guy who won a belt and lost it pretty soon afterwards. If you throw every person who headlined a big PPV or held a belt it kind of defeats the purpose of having a Hall of Fame.



Really? two title defenses is about as many as any other heavyweight and as many as randy ever had at HW. Tim and JDS are the only ones bound to break his streak.

Post #21   9/9/12 11:34:48AM   

mojo

Learning to Sprawl

mojo Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:33
Career:278-163
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: WEYBURN TOP TEAM
Chips:
12
I think there should be a longer wait time between the end of a fighter's career and an induction into the HOF. Lets remember this is still a relatively young sport. They should wait a few years and see if the fighters are still remembered or if the impact they had on the UFC is still significant. In 50 years we dont want to look back at the HOF and see someone who went 5-3 in there when there will be dozens of fighters with more impressive resumes and it may become watered down...On the flip side, thus far, Brock has had one of the biggest impacts on the UFC and could make a claim to be in, we forget this is the "UFC" Hall of Fame, not the "MMA" Hall of Fame because i guarantee you we will never see Fedor's name in there.

Post #22   9/9/12 11:48:31AM   

Coolhand37

MMA Regular

Coolhand37 Avatar
3


 
 
 


 
 
Posts:57
Career:1,421-1,480
Joined:Apr 2008
Camp: Brazilian Beatdown
Chips:
8
I think your misguided bro! Everyone that hates on Brock is a douche too! he was cheated in his first Mir fight so that loss doesn't even count to me. We all know Allistar was hopped up on PED's with a 12 to 1 ratio and his urine had to be flown from Holland or where the fuck ever......that bout should have been a no contest......we all know that!!! we all know Allister cheated even the ufc still they won't reverse the decision to a no contest!! his only real loss came from Cain and he Couldn't defend his title for 13 months after that fight after only one round with Brock and he lost to Dos Santos even quicker. Brock is a destroyer!!!
He submitted Shane Carwinin who went the full three with Dos Santos.
his real record in God's eye is 6 and 1 with 1 no contest and that's the dam truth.
UFC hall of famer winning the championship in 4 pro fights hell yes!!! defending it a record two times hell yes!!!
will he return.....from nothing he came.....and from nothing he will return......may you shit your pants and eat your words when Brock comes back!!
also Allistar bled more in his victory over Brock more than he had in six years and that was with a jab bro. and the foot that knocked brock out was fucked up ttoo after the fight so hahaha!!

Post #23   9/9/12 12:23:57PM   

mojo

Learning to Sprawl

mojo Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:33
Career:278-163
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: WEYBURN TOP TEAM
Chips:
12
I dont believe at any time that i bashed Brock and i also mentioned that he could make a claim for it. My point was that they are too quick to label fighters Hall of Fame material. Unfortunatly for you "God's eye" records do not go in the record books, 5-3 does and that is a very beatable record.

Post #24   9/9/12 12:35:36PM   

ghandikush

MMA Sensei

ghandikush Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,376
Career:118-71
Joined:Jul 2011
Chips:
213

Posted by mojo

I dont believe at any time that i bashed Brock and i also mentioned that he could make a claim for it. My point was that they are too quick to label fighters Hall of Fame material. Unfortunatly for you "God's eye" records do not go in the record books, 5-3 does and that is a very beatable record.



Whats all this record nonsense? When has a record ever mattered in the sport? Give me a bunch of 20-0's and I'll give you a bunch of 30-10's that could whoop their asses.

Post #25   9/9/12 1:50:18PM   

prophecy033

REBEL WITH A CAUSE

prophecy033 Avatar
8
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:9,598
Career:2,114-1,232
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: Project Mayhem
Chips:
1,530

Posted by mojo

I dont believe at any time that i bashed Brock and i also mentioned that he could make a claim for it. My point was that they are too quick to label fighters Hall of Fame material. Unfortunatly for you "God's eye" records do not go in the record books, 5-3 does and that is a very beatable record.

I'm not sure I hear much talk about fighters being HOF material until its been announced he's gonna be honored. Now a fighter getting labeled as Championship material is a different story

_______________________________________

Post #26   9/9/12 2:06:04PM   

infestructure

NOW KITH

infestructure Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,917
Career:734-445
Joined:Jan 2012
Camp: Project Mayhem
Chips:
635

Posted by Coolhand37

I think your misguided bro! Everyone that hates on Brock is a douche too! he was cheated in his first Mir fight so that loss doesn't even count to me. We all know Allistar was hopped up on PED's with a 12 to 1 ratio and his urine had to be flown from Holland or where the fuck ever......that bout should have been a no contest......we all know that!!! we all know Allister cheated even the ufc still they won't reverse the decision to a no contest!! his only real loss came from Cain and he Couldn't defend his title for 13 months after that fight after only one round with Brock and he lost to Dos Santos even quicker. Brock is a destroyer!!!
He submitted Shane Carwinin who went the full three with Dos Santos.
his real record in God's eye is 6 and 1 with 1 no contest and that's the dam truth.
UFC hall of famer winning the championship in 4 pro fights hell yes!!! defending it a record two times hell yes!!!
will he return.....from nothing he came.....and from nothing he will return......may you shit your pants and eat your words when Brock comes back!!
also Allistar bled more in his victory over Brock more than he had in six years and that was with a jab bro. and the foot that knocked brock out was fucked up ttoo after the fight so hahaha!!



*sigh*

Man, is it just me, or do a whole lot of (brown-nosing) people with no posts start posting when the subject of Brock comes up?

I will not say Brock isn't famous, but I will say he got an unfair leg up, and had he gone through the conventional MMA route, he would have been chewed up and spat out a long time ago.
I don't know where you got Reem bleeding more and hurting his foot. Are you that blinded by your man-crush you can't see the truth?

Post #27   9/9/12 5:39:45PM   

infestructure

NOW KITH

infestructure Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,917
Career:734-445
Joined:Jan 2012
Camp: Project Mayhem
Chips:
635
Here's an article from MMA Junkie that puts things in perspective nicely


Despite obstacles overcome, Brock Lesnar's career not worthy of UFC Hall of Fame
by Ben Fowlkes on Sep 09, 2012 at 3:45 pm ET
It's gotten to the point where, as soon as I see Brock Lesnar's name in the same sentence as the words "Hall of Fame," I know I'm about to have a stupid argument that will only get me worked up over nothing. I know it, and yet I can't help myself. I keep taking the bait, keep having the argument, and then in the end I wonder why I bothered to debate whether a man who doesn't care what we think of him is deserving of an honor that doesn't even really exist in this sport.

You'd think I'd know better by now, and yet here I am again.

This time, it was the phrasing that got me. When I read the story by Danny Acosta on Saturday that quoted Lesnar's old pro wrestling running buddy Paul Heyman as saying "of course" Lesnar was worthy of a spot the UFC Hall of Fame after a 5-3 run in a four-year career, I had to stop and read it again.

Of course? That's what you say about a guy who won a handful of fights and then quit so he could return to the world of scripted combat, where the punches are pulled and the submission holds are just for show? I realize Heyman and Lesnar are boys, but can't we get a little perspective here?

I don't want to beat up on Heyman, because I like the guy, and not just because I've personally seen him rock a three-piece suit in a gym full of sweaty dudes and somehow not look ridiculous doing it. He's one of those weirdly charismatic people who, even when I don't agree with him, I still enjoy listening to. It's just that, his case for Lesnar is especially weak. It's the kind of argument only a friend could make, and also the kind that only a friend would accept.

When you boil it down, what Heyman is saying is that Lesnar deserves a place among the greats because of who he fought rather than how he fared against them.

"Five and three?" Heyman said of Lesnar's record. "But look at the five – and look at the three."

Don't mind if I do, Paul. First there's Min-Soo Kim, who also sports losses to Bob Sapp and an over-the-hill Don Frye on his record. Then there's Heath Herring, who, by that point, had been winning one and losing the next like it was part of some schedule he felt compelled to keep. There's also Randy Couture, who had no business fighting at heavyweight, and Frank Mir, who won one and lost one against Lesnar, but somehow only seems to get credit for the latter. Finally, there's Shane Carwin, who might have beaten Lesnar if he'd had better cardio or been smarter about how he used it.

That wraps up his victories as a professional fighter. You add in two first-round TKO losses, and you have his entire body of work. Five and three. A career that spanned just over four years. That's his case for a spot on the wall next to guys like Matt Hughes and Chuck Liddell? Sorry, but I don't see it.

That's not to say that Lesnar's time in the UFC wasn't remarkable, for several reasons. He jumped into this sport and sprinted straight for the top. It's impressive how quickly he became a champion and how willing he was to take on far more experienced opponents time after time. But I'm not sure if simply accepting those fights is itself a Hall of Fame-worthy act, as Heyman seemed to imply. Shouldn't that be expected at this level, especially when you're making Brock Lesnar money just to step in the cage?

And sure, we can point to his struggles with diverticulitis and say that kept us from finding out how great he really could have been. Mickey Mantle had that drain pipe cover, and Lesnar has his intestinal ailments. Still, once we start talking like that we're well off into the land of hypotheticals, the same territory occupied by all the boxers and pro wrestlers who love to tell us how they totally would have gone into MMA and been awesome at it if only it had been around when they were younger.

For some reason, when it comes to Lesnar, people seem to want to lower the bar. It's never just "look at what he accomplished." It's always "look at what he accomplished, given the circumstances." People point to his lack of experience or his illness or the quality of competition he faced as if they want him to receive some sort of mitigating factors award. It's like those friends we all have who still claim that, while they got an unspectacular score on the SATs, they did it hungover, so that should count for something.

Lesnar fans also love to talk about what he did for the sport and for the UFC simply by hanging around and generating so much interest and attention. The fact that he did this exclusively for his personal gain doesn't get mentioned. Suddenly the unintended consequences of his own career are justification for treating him like one of the greats.

Again though, the maddening thing about this argument is that it doesn't even matter. MMA does not have a real Hall of Fame. Not yet. Instead we have the UFC's list of its favorite employees. The company honors who it likes, excludes who it doesn't, and at times wholly ignores important chunks of its own history. That's fine. That's the UFC's right as a private company. We just shouldn't make the mistake of thinking of the UFC Hall of Fame as if it's a real thing that matters.

And yet, every time I allow myself to get pulled into this argument, I know I'm contributing to it. By debating Lesnar's Hall of Fame worthiness, I'm accepting the flawed premise of the question itself. I'm also doing it for no good reason, since Lesnar clearly doesn't care what the MMA world thinks of him, and since it's not as if I'm going to convince someone like Heyman that his friend had a good and interesting and noteworthy MMA career, though not a great one.

Even if I could, so what? Who cares about the difference between good and great? If MMA had an actual Hall of Fame, you could argue that inducting unworthy or unproven fighters cheapens the honor for those who truly earned it, but you can't even make that case if there is no Hall of Fame to begin with. It's a pointless conversation, but one that I can't seem to stop myself from having when I hear people performing the necessary rhetorical gymnastics that make Lesnar's fame into a species of accomplishment.

I guess the problem is, I want words to mean things. I want someone like Liddell or Couture or Hughes to know, when we point at them and say "Hall of Famer," that we are referring to a real thing that they have really earned. I don't want it to be the athletic version of an honorary degree or an Employee of the Month award. I want it to be something that matters, because I think they deserve it.

But then, that's my problem. It's not Lesnar's and it's not Heyman's. They can throw around whatever words they want to describe his brief, though memorable career as a professional mixed martial arts fighter. I don't have to agree, but I do have to learn how to stop having this discussion, at least for now. Maybe we can pick it up again in the future, when the honor we're arguing about actually exists.

Post #28   9/9/12 6:54:18PM   

bjj1605

Heavyweight Champ

bjj1605 Avatar
7
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,228
Career:1,598-933
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: Dark Horse
Chips:
682

Posted by Coolhand37

he was cheated in his first Mir fight so that loss doesn't even count to me. We all know Allistar was hopped up on PED's with a 12 to 1 ratio and his urine had to be flown from Holland or where the fuck ever......that bout should have been a no contest......we all know that!!!



For someone who's supposedly so great, you certainly have to make a lot of excuses for him. I'm not sure how you think he got "cheated" against Mir. He illegally hit Mir in the back of the head over and over. The ref warned him and restarted, as the rules dictate. Then the amateur (Brock Lesnar) got tapped out by a much more experienced ground fighter.


Posted by Coolhand37

we all know Allister cheated even the ufc still they won't reverse the decision to a no contest!! his only real loss came from Cain and he Couldn't defend his title for 13 months after that fight after only one round with Brock and he lost to Dos Santos even quicker. Brock is a destroyer!!!
He submitted Shane Carwinin who went the full three with Dos Santos.
his real record in God's eye is 6 and 1 with 1 no contest and that's the dam truth.



No, bro...it's a damn lie based on strange and distorted MMA math. Brock is 5-3 and the reason he retired is because he didn't want to end up going 5-10. He realized that he can't hang with the top guys and that it wouldn't make any sense (financially or career-wise) for him to go back to fighting lower level guys.

There is no way Brock is coming back to MMA. He is terrified of getting hit in the face and he has a nice cushy job in the male entertainment industry.


Posted by warglory

I voted yes after careful deliberation. The reason I voted yes, is because Lesnar was responsible for bringing in the current hw era. When he arrived, he showed the world you didn't have to be an oversized brawler to qualify for the hw division, you could be a well tuned athlete, with speed, agility and a strong pedigree. We never had that before in the hw division....



I read it a bit differently. Brock changed things....I agree with you on that much.

Before Brock Lesnar, there was the impression that to be a champion "mixed MARTIAL ARTIST" you actually had to be a martial artist.

Brock showed the world that being a UFC champion took very little skill. Being a gigantic neanderthal who's only real skill was in wrestling was enough. Thank god Shane Carwin (to some extent), Cain Velasquez, and Overeem showed up to save the integrity of the sport.

I agree with what someone said earlier. If Brock had been forced to go through the normal channels, instead of being leapfrogged into a title shot, he would have been exposed as an amateur that much sooner.



Posted by ghandikush

Lesnar beat Herring Couture Mur and Carwin. He fought mir 2 times, and fought the Reem. Of coarse he deserves HOF.......





I literally read the begging of your post and I was thinking, 'This guy knows what he's talking about. No way Brock deserves HoF.' Then I realized that you accurately described his record and somehow think that deserves to be in the HoF.

Brock will be remembered for what he did. He will always be a former champ.

The WWE fan boys and casual MMA fans will always remember him as the guy who finally dethroned Chuck Liddell to win the HW title.

But he does not deserve to be in the HoF.

Last edited 9/9/12 8:38PM server time by bjj1605
Edit note/reason: n/a
3 total post edits

Post #29   9/9/12 8:35:39PM   

ghandikush

MMA Sensei

ghandikush Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,376
Career:118-71
Joined:Jul 2011
Chips:
213

Posted by bjj1605


Posted by ghandikush

Lesnar beat Herring Couture Mur and Carwin. He fought mir 2 times, and fought the Reem. Of coarse he deserves HOF.......





I literally read the begging of your post and I was thinking, 'This guy knows what he's talking about. No way Brock deserves HoF.' Then I realized that you accurately described his record and somehow think that deserves to be in the HoF.

Brock will be remembered for what he did. He will always be a former champ.

The WWE fan boys and casual MMA fans will always remember him as the guy who finally dethroned Chuck Liddell to win the HW title.

But he does not deserve to be in the HoF.



He beat Couture firstly, secondly he's done more than Big Nog in the UFC but you hardcore fanboys probably want Big Nog to be UFC HOF correct?

Post #30   9/9/12 10:08:33PM   
 
  Page 2 of 4     1     2     3     4