I know, I know…UFC 124 is just two days away, who wants to talk about something that happened a whole five days ago? Also, I won’t answer that, because it’s clearly a rhetorical question. But seriously…I want to talk about the TUF 12 Finale, my friends. If you haven’t mentally moved on already due to all the GSP vs. Kos hype, check out my thoughts on last weekend’s finale to yet another season of “The Ultimate Fighter”.
And yes, I just answered a rhetorical question. My own rhetorical question, at that. Let’s just move on.
Brookins, Johnson give reason for optimism
I was among the many who had started to become a bit disappointed by what was a steadily-declining talent level of “The Ultimate Fighter” casts. However, while it’s hard to truly assess the entire field of this season’s cast already, the finalists themselves compare favorably to any other duo from previous seasons.
That’s not to say that these two will go on to dominate in the UFC, of course. If anything, there has been a definite shift from having experienced veterans winning “The Ultimate Fighter” to putting on more of a prospect-oriented show. Part of the reason that the decision to cut Efrain Escudero was so puzzling was because of this change: if you know you’re throwing prospects into the UFC instead of fighters who are already established veterans, shouldn’t you give them a chance to develop properly?
Regardless of how Johnson will fare in the deep waters of the lightweight division, as well as Brookins in what I expect will be a career at 145 pounds, they have shown that they are extremely talented competitors. Not only that, but in a sport where we have seen how big of a difference hard work and a humble attitude can make, these two are willing to learn and don’t have the big heads that many of their predecessors had. It’ll be exciting to see how their careers go from this point on.
Is strategy really to blame?
This isn’t really just a point about last Saturday’s event, but it seems as good a time as any to bring it up, since it’s been a hot topic for awhile now: is strategy really the culprit for so many of the lackluster fights we’ve been seeing?
In the past, Greg Jackson and other “cerebral” trainers and fighters have been cited as a reason for what is perceived to be a growing number of underwhelming fights. The idea, I suppose, is that fighters who do a lot of strategizing are just fighting to win decisions, rather than going out there and letting it all hang out during entertaining fights that the fans will enjoy.
Now, I won’t deny that all-out brawls are entertaining, but look at it from the fighter’s perspective. How many fighters who put on memorable brawls or had highlight reel knockouts (or submissions) from going for broke are now no longer employed by the UFC? Clearly, winning should be priority number one for any professional athlete, and especially one who will literally be in physical danger if he decides to let up for the sake of entertainment. To even question whether winning should be a fighter’s top priority is ridiculous.
Furthermore, is using a good strategy really to blame? Should we use that blanket accusation, or narrow it down a bit? After all, not all strategies are the same. If your strategy is to counter leg kicks with hard right hands, or to use low kicks to set up a high kick later in the fight for a knockout, that’s going to make for a pretty good fight. If your strategy is to lean against your opponent against the cage for two full rounds to “wear him down” in the hopes of overwhelming him in the third round and at least having a decision victory to fall back on, maybe that’s not so compelling.
I would say that as much as anything, the high talent level of fighters in general is sometimes making for slower-paced, methodical fights. Take Demian Maia’s fight with Kendall Grove, for example. Though Maia has looked a bit conservative lately, it was clear that Grove was just doing a good job of, well, surviving throughout a lot of the fight. For that matter, Maia’s improving striking kept Grove from being able to put him away in the standup portions of the bout. What followed was a lackluster fight.
You can’t discount the effects of increasing pressure to perform, too. Fighters are getting cut for losing two bouts in a row, and now they’re getting cut for not being exciting enough, too. If fighters knew that a loss or two wouldn’t end their UFC career and take food off their family’s tables, maybe they’d take more chances, huh?
Garza’s scary KO of Paixao marred by poor sportsmanship
Anytime someone is nailed by a flying knee while shooting for a takedown, it makes for an exciting moment. If you’re looking for someone to downplay the timing, reflexes, quickness and skill it would take to land such a technique at a moment’s notice, I’m not the guy to do it. So Pablo Garza’s KO of Fredson Paixao was already going to have people talking, no matter what.
However, for me and at least a decent number of others, the completely unnecessary follow-up hammerfist (along with another attempted one that struck referee Steve Mazzagatti instead) stole the spotlight from the impressive technique that began the whole sequence. I’ll remember that KO now for not only the fact that Paixao was down for about four minutes, but for the awful sportsmanship shown by Garza after the knee struck Paixao.
Save your arguments, please. I’ve heard them all. “Things happen quickly in there!” Yes, and yet Robbie Lawler was able to stop himself on the very same night from landing any extra blows on an unconscious Matt Lindland. There are plenty of other examples, too. You’re telling me that the same guy who just timed a flying knee on a takedown attempt at a millisecond’s notice couldn’t react to a guy falling down and going limp in time to stop himself?
What about “you don’t stop until the referee steps in”? Right, so the fighters shouldn’t have any responsibility for not acting like dickbags, because the referee did a poor job or was out of position? This is another poor argument that is just used when the previous one is countered. If your opponent is clearly tapping or is clearly knocked out, release the hold or stop hitting him. It’s pretty easy. Don’t give me a story about how Murilo Bustamante or Royce Gracie was screwed years ago because the ref didn’t see a tap, either. I also don’t want to hear that guys often are KO’ed and then “come back out of it.” When they do come back out of it, it’s because they got punched again, so if anything, that’s an argument against continuing to hit an unconscious opponent.
You want to talk about things that are dangerous for MMA? There’s nothing more dangerous than some fighter deciding that he needs to frantically get two or three extra shots in on a clearly-unconscious opponent, only to have that opponent end up being seriously injured. Fans talk all the time about how some fighter making a stupid comment in the media or a horrible fight card is going to hurt the sport, but an injury based upon a fighter feeling the need to continue assaulting an unconscious opponent could literally put the entire sport in danger.
Garza seemed legitimately concerned for Paixao after the fight, and I’m not saying he’s a horrible person. He’s part of a sport where landing extra shots after someone is completely out is readily accepted, and a “go til the ref stops it” mentality is as much a part of the sport as touching gloves to start a fight is. That’s why the rule needs to change, and fights such as Garza’s should be reviewed clearly. If there’s a chance that the fighter was deliberately getting in extra shots, he needs to be suspended and fined. MMA fighters can learn to adapt to changing rules when they fight in different promotions and are capable of reacting to situations in a split second, so surely they can learn to adjust to not being allowed to pummel prone opponents until being tackled by the ref.
Tags: Demian Maia, Fredson Paixao, Jonathan Brookins, Kendall Grove, Michael Johnson, Pablo Garza, The Ultimate Fighter, The Ultimate Fighter 12, The Ultimate Fighter St. Pierre vs. Koscheck