That kind of puts them in a catch-22. If they set a special set of rules for Nick Diaz only, people will criticize them for it and other fighters would be pissed (plus it will only encourage his behavior). If they had just refused to work with him or sign him, then people would have criticized them for it in a huge way. Even if they anticipate him being this way, they can't win any which way they go.

I assume they did what they thought was the best thing, treated him like an adult, and he failed. I don't see how their course of action should have been something else. Giving him his own set of rules is a long-term mistake.

They've already given special rules to guys. Cro Cop, for instance, regularly skipped media obligations.

They're going to need to include clauses in contracts that allows them to fine fighters a percentage of their purse for failing to meet expectations with the media.

Again, I'm not absolving Nick here. But they've thrown away a big money maker main event because Nick Diaz behaved in a way that was totally in line with his prior behavior.

Let's say I loan my car to a friend who I know has a history of drinking and driving. Said friend drinks, drives, and crashes the car. Now, obviously the friend ****ed up, and I should be able to expect my friend to act like an adult. But, you don't think I have some responsibility for loaning my vehicle to someone who I know has a history of being unable to handle things properly?

I wasn't aware of Cro Cop getting special considerations.

Which of the three situations do you think is the best scenario, and what would you choose if you were the UFC?

A: Regularly treat problem fighters with kid gloves and let them do what they want
B: Never sign or deal with problem fighters
C: Treat problem fighters exactly like everyone else

You seem to lean towards A, which I think is a mistake. I lean towards C. It's basically a difference in opinion at this point imo, though, and decent arguments exist for both positions.

ya danny those fights are alright but what about a really exciting one?

I don't think blanket policies work best for them, nor do I think those are the only options.

They need to institute an ability to fine guys for this. I think they're hesitant to include that language into contracts because then they start getting into "league" territory instead of just being a fight promotion.

Out of those options, though, I'd suggest B for them, which is what they usually do with stuff like this. I just think if they want to get into the Nick Diaz business, they should have expected to pay the price of admission.

DID YOU MISS KONGO VS P4P MITRIONE SON?!

Fair enough Mikey, and keep up the good work at BE.

So you are blaming the UFC. Thanks for making that clear regardless of what you said earlier.

Just read the Tim Burke article. It sums up my feelings nicely. Especially the frustration with everyone refusing to hold Diaz accountable for acting like a grown man for once in his life. This was a chance of a lifetime for Diaz. He gave that chance away. It was not taken from him.

i doubt he could beat any heavyweights. they could just tackle silva and beat him up.

I think he would have a good chance against any non-wrestler except for Overeem and JDS.

silva would destroy fedor, werdum and possibly even overeem

imo

what happens if he fought mitrione?
unstoppable force vs immovable object

In this regard, I think about things much differently than you(and most others). I don't think "this guy will probably lose and UFC doesn't want him to lose"; I think "lets put together the coolest possible fights and not worry about who will win or lose them...just let them play out and go from there."

I probably am overrating Penn's chances though(was my -400 line way off in your opinion?). If so, then I can more understand where you guys are coming from.


Someone else asked me above what chance BJ would have and I forgot to reply, but I think it'd be really fascinating if it hit the ground. And while Anderson is outstanding on his feet, its not like BJ is chopped kidney.


Anderson has to wait for Sonnen/Stann no matter what, so wouldn't this actually let him fight more before he retires?

Exactly what I was thinking except more elegantly put

In sports, when an athlete has a history of messing up(Ron Artest or Mike Vick for example) when the commish gives him another chance he does so with the provision that he will be even more strictly watched. You seem to think that because Diaz has a history of messing up that he should be allowed special privileges in the future. That simply isn't how it works. Everything you mention in your first paragraph is reason to believe that Diaz should be on a SHORTER LEASH than other fightes, not a longer one.


If Mike Vick was caught dog fighting again, he wouldn't be excused in any way because "Commissioner Goddell should've seen it coming." Thats just silly talk imo.

Everyone seems to be focusing on the "moral" aspect in Mikey's criticism of the UFC. I took it more as a criticism from a business perspective and that they should have been more circumspect in dealing with Diaz.

Should every fighter be held to the same standard? Yes. Was this par for the course for Nick Diaz and should the UFC indemnified themselves against more likely than average complications with Nick playing nice for the cameras? Yes, if they like money.

Part of the reason that "trouble" guys are kept on a short leash is so that their less likely to create PR bad for the organization. Their not excused, the controlled.

Penn vs Diaz in October

http://twitter.com/#!/danawhite/stat...53183512870912

I want the coolest fights as well, but I just don't think this is a cool fight. Plus it could screw up other, cooler fights in the future.

Anderson would murder BJ. Anderson's the best fighter who has ever lived. He outweighs penn by like 40 pounds. (walking around 205 vs walking around 165). Penn would have essentially zero (less than Serra/GSP) chance to win the fight standing, so he would have to use his average-ish (for LW) wrestling skills to drag down a fighter who is 40 pounds bigger, longer, stronger and probably faster as well. And then on the ground, Penn would have to pray he could grab a submission before Anderson escapes/gets up (and Anderson is a black belt and a very good grappler). This fight wouldn't be remotely close, imo.




Anderson would have to take this fight on short notice, and could potentially come out with a broken hand, get injured in training, etc, and screw up future plans.

kahn it be?

Now I can cheer for Penn and Condit instead of choosing between them. I"m happy

hahaha ok im happy with that result.

Perfect.

small mistake by dana?

the event is the 29th not 27th?

Yes he almost certainly meant 29

http://mmajunkie.com/news/25152/shoc...main-event.mma

yeah his next tweet said "I meant Oct 29th"