Posted 9/7/11 2:28:00PM
in almost 20 years, mma has gone from completely underground all the way to a household name...it all started with guys like Shamrick,Gracie,Severn...and everyone else down the time line..
but i think there was a turning point, somewhere around 4-5 years ago...where slowly, and methodically, everyone was getting better...sort of..finetuning themselves as mixed martial artists. weve seen more decisions in TODAYS mma than weve ever seen over the past 2 decades...why, because gameplans and skill wins fights...not a pair of balls and an ego trip
i applaud the ufc hall of fame inductees for their contributions to the sport of mma, and their reign as world class atheltes
but that was then, and now, i could take probably 3 of those fighters...put them back in their prime, and they would be able to compete, if not be contenders
-matt hughes(inconsistent, but still dangerous)
-randy couture(he was dangerous in his late 40s, imagine a well trained and 25 years old randy couture...fuck haha)
-mark coleman(his wrestling would at least give him gatekeeper status)
the rest just dont do it for me, yes, even royce...
if anyone reading this is confused, ill explain
royce gracie defeated ron van clief...lets say ron has a son...like 28 years old...accomplished wrestler at arizona state, blue belt in jiu jitsu, pretty much a balanced fighter, been training mma for about 3 years...lets say...4-2 as a pro
you with me? haha
lets take 1993-4's royce gracie in his entirety...and then lkets take ron van cliefs son from idk, 6 months ago...with his skills knowledge of the sport, against royces, in their respective times
who would win?
some, well, most of you will say royce, because of who he is, whats hes done yesterday, and his bbj rank
i say van clief jr.
hes gonna take a boxing approach, pick his spots, bounce in from the outside, still feeling him out...with nothing more than a few butt scoots and an awkward stance from royce
round 2 i see him pressing into the cage, sensing royces urgency to get the fight down...you see...royce has seen tapes on jr in todays mma...and jr has seen tapes on royce, from ufc 1
now back in round 2...jr gets pull down into gaurd..notices his mistake, and pops back up, lets him stand, and flicks out another jab
round 3 stays the same, i wouldnt rule out a triangle if jr gets overanxious on a takedown, but i see it 30-27 all across maybe one judge with 29-28
so what does that say about royce gracie legacy...or his ufc legacy rather...
that a young fighter with an average wrestling pedigree, and a 4-2 record in todays challenging mma...would win an 8 man tournament against the best fighters in the world...back in 1993, or 4, or 5
my point is this-i love all the greats, the sport wouldnt be what it is without them...but i just wonder if they set the bar too low for todays stars to just...leap the fuck over, and never look back
in 10 years, i may do this entire segment again, based on anderson silva of the 2010s, vs. ron van clief the 3rd from 2027
the sport will never stop growing, and neither will its competitors.
(this was not ufc talk, just used the HOF as an example)
Posted 2/4/07 2:44:00AM
I understand what you're saying, but it's the equivalent of using MMAth, it just doesn't make sense when you delve into it. Yes, if Van Clief were younger, or his son in your scenario, and had a more diverse skill set, he would have likely beaten Royce, but you also have to factor in Royce training to the same degree. I think if Royce was conditioned by today's standards, he'd be closer to Demian Maia in terms of comparability, and there's no question that Maia would beat a well rounded striker like Van Clief, or his 4-2 son.
Or perhaps Royce, being a traditionalist wouldn't adapt at all based on his faith in Gracie Jiu Jitsu, but if he were just starting out in a world with amazing grapplers, he wouldn't have a choice.
It's hard to be revisionist with fighters. You say Matt Hughes would survive today, well that's only because Matt Hughes has learned a ton over the years, and the same goes for Randy Couture. Mark Coleman failed to make a mark after leaving the UFC, because of his inability to adapt, and that was nearly 10 years ago.
Posted 3/19/09 8:18:00AM
different era of any sport have different levels of athleat you still need to respect those who built the sport they were the best then and need to be respected for it
Posted 9/7/11 2:28:00PM
Posted 10/13/10 10:40:00PM
I see where you are going armbar. I think you are on to something. 10 years from now MMA will be nothing like it is today. Everyone will be as rounded as a Jon Jones. There will be more fighters who can strike like Anderson Silva. I don't think we will have too many long tenured champions. No more than we have today, anyhow.
Having said that though, I think the skill gap between some of the best back in the day is comparable, if not smaller than the gap between some of the champions and contenders of today. These guys definitely deserve their spot in the MMA history books though. Just my opinion.
Posted 9/17/07 10:04:00PM
Hall of Fame is not always about the best athletes in the sport; it is also about who has the largest impact on the sport. Does Charles Lewis not deserve his spot in the HOF?
Posted 9/7/11 2:28:00PM
well...in the MMA hall of fame, yeah...but to9 put him in the ufc hof doesnt make sense and IMO he wouldnt of gottin HOF so early, but he died, so they gave it to him sooner to remember him...like the same way WWE did for eddie guerero, he was on his way, but he wouldnt have gotten it f0or a while
i understand that they are pioneers and that they set the way and all that crap...but it just boggles my mind to think that the guys i grew up admiring and watching...probably wouldnt stand a chance against todays elite
im not trashing them...i just wanted to see what people thought about it