411 MMA Fact or Fiction 02.08.12: A Diaz vs. Condit Rematch, Stripping Overeem of His Title Shot, Strikeforce Falling Behind Bellator, More

Posted by Todd Bergman on 02.08.2012

Should Alistair Overeem be stripped of his #1 contendership after his recent arrest? Should Nick Diaz get a rematch against Carlos Condit? Is UFC on FUEL TV one of the worst-looking cards in UFC history? 411's Robert Winfree & Steve Cook debate these topics and more in this week's 411 Fact or Fiction: MMA!

Season 2, Week 20, Tournament Bouts
Welcome back to the 411 MMA: Fact or Fiction headquarters. I'm your host with the most Todd Bergman. This week on the FoF Battlefield, we have the returning Season one 411 MMA: Tournament of Great Significance Champion Steve Cook taking on one of the fastest rising MMA writers on the planet: Robert Winfree. Both guys will take questions revolving around this past weekend's UFC 143 and next Wednesday's UFC on Fuel 1 card. As per the usual here, I'm going to take a second to ramble on about something so if you don't care then skip ahead to the questions below. At UFC 143, Nick Diaz apparently retired citing bad judging and Carlos Condit not being a man (cue the Macho Man's dis-song of Hulk not being a man. Just replace Hulk with Carlos.) I have ZERO problem with Nick Diaz retiring because he doesn't like the way that MMA is judged. It's his life and his career, so do whatever you want. It's not the end of the world if Nick doesn't compete again. My problem was really with the reaction of some "lower tier" fighters on Twitter hating on Diaz and his retirement. I'm not going to name names here because I get myself into enough trouble on Twitter for speaking my mind as it is. With that said, the guys hating on Diaz couldn't hold a candle to anything that Nick has done in his career. Maybe it's jealousy that sparked the hatred. After all, these are the same guys who make pennies on the dollar while Diaz rolls around naked in Franklins. What's the point of this rambling? If you are a "lower tier" fighter then you should not hate on someone competing for a title while you are fighting in front of 34 people on a Friday night in a low budget casino. It should be noted that I'm not a huge Nick Diaz fan and Nick Diaz can stand up for himself just fine. I just don't like when fighters who get all butt hurt about the payment scale starting dissing his or her own. This is probably the reason why fighters don't have a union. They are too busy trying to cut each other down instead of coming together. Anyway, onto the introductions.

This week's FoF combatants are:

Blue Corner: Robert Winfree
Nickname: "Oprah"
Fighting out of: Chicago
FoF Record: 1-2
411 Column: MMA Contributor

---

Red Corner: Steve Cook
Nickname: "Juvi Juice"
Fighting out of: Vegas Baby
FoF Record: 4-2
411 Column: MMA Contributor

---

1.) Ed Herman is the best non-TUF winning fighter in the UFC.

Robert Winfree: FICTION, but I wouldn't fault too many people for disagreeing with me. The reality is he has to contend with Josh Koscheck, who has fought for the title and is consistently a top ten if not better fighter, and Kenny Florian who has fought for the lightweight title twice and the featherweight title once. Herman is a talented fighter and in a few years he might top the list, but for now I'm sticking with fiction.

Steve Cook: FICTION I have no idea how a guy who's 4-3 in his last seven fights rates as the best of anything, much less the best Ultimate Fighter contestant that didn't win the competition. You can't expect me to rate Ed over Kenny Florian, right? Ken Flo's also 4-3 in his last seven, but his losses were to Penn, Maynard & Aldo. Ed hasn't even faced anybody on those guys' level from where I sit. Speaking of Gray Maynard, he was on Season 5 and he's had an incredible rivalry with Frankie Edgar. Josh Koscheck remains a top contender for the welterweight title and has defeated a UFC Hall of Famer, Matt Hughes. I can't rank Ed over anybody I've listed here with a straight face.

SCORE: 1-1

---

The video doesn't disappoint

2.) The two point low blow deduction on Bruce LeRoy made no sense.

Robert Winfree: FICTION. Two point deductions normally occur following a deliberate foul, think Bisping and Rivera, but I don't think this was too much of a stretch for a couple of reasons. First was the second blow came after a strong warning from the referee, and the other factor was how damaging the blows were. Point deductions are meant as punishment to a fighter for executing them and to help the fighter on the receiving end compensate for taking them. Following two substantial low blows, and you could see how badly Figueroa was hurting, it makes sense. You don't see two points deducted often, but watch Figueroa writhe on the ground again and tell me Caceras didn't deserve to have them deducted.

Steve Cook: FICTION Yeah, I'm the guy that advocated soccer kicks being legal the last time we did one of these tournaments. So you'd think that I'd be a bit more lenient in these situations and would totally be against the decision to give Alex "Bruce Leroy" Caceres a two point deduction for repeatedly kicking Edwin Figueroa in the little jimmy. You would be incorrect. Even back in the days when UFC had no rules, there was an understanding that you don't hit people in the beanbag. That's dirty pool. One time is accidental, two times is a trend, especially when you're delivering the kicks with the velocity that Caceres was delivering them with. When I saw the Honorable Herb Dean deduct two points, I was a bit shocked (The last time I remember seeing a two point deduction was in boxing when Mike Tyson bit Evander Holyfield's ear), but at the same time I approved of the ruling. You can't have people repeatedly kicking other people in the junk. It makes UFC look bad, it makes the fighters look bad, and it makes the sport look bad. Good on Herb for taking a stand against such a disgusting act, and hopefully these types of punishments will make fighters think twice about taking the low road.

SCORE: 2-2

---

3.) Nick Diaz should get a rematch with Carlos Condit because of poor judging.

Robert Winfree: FICTION fiction fiction fiction. The only complaint that Diaz seems to have is that he was moving forward and Condit was circling and using footwork. The key component in scoring a fight is effective striking, grappling, aggression, and octagon control. Nick Diaz was ineffective. He moved forward, but missed with most of his punches, couldn't control Condit at all, and got countered for the majority of the fight. Condit was effective with his leg kicks, counter striking, movement, and defense. You shouldn't get points for moving forward if you're getting hit most of the time and not landing anything. The judging was correct, Carlos Condit didn't let Nick Diaz fight the way Nick Diaz likes to fight and was more effective than Diaz was. The reality is that for all of Diaz's "boxing" skills, he got out boxed. Boxing involves movement, both head and foot, and strategy. Condit moved around Diaz, countered what Diaz tried to do, and earned the decision. There really aren't any two ways about it.

Steve Cook: FICTION I'm continuing to agree with Robert here, but I have to disagree with the path he took to his decision. Apparently it was a lot more evident to him that Condit won the fight, because I had no idea who I would pick in most of the rounds. The fight consisted of Condit backing away & Diaz talking junk and showboating, with somebody occasionally landing something that didn't do a whole lot of damage. The reason I don't want a rematch isn't because Condit absolutely kicked Diaz's ass, it's because the fight bored me to tears and I don't want to have to watch it again. It wasn't until the fifth round when Diaz finally tried something and took Condit down, but it was too little too late. I'm not sure why people are so adamant that one of these guys won the fight, because I saw a fight that overall was probably a draw. Condit landed more stuff, so I have no issue with him winning. Dana will have to find another way to book GSP vs. Diaz.


SCORE: 3-3

---

VIDEO INTERMISSION

---

4.) The UFC on Fuel card slated to air on Feb. 15th may be the worst looking UFC card in history.

Steve Cook: FACT I'm grateful that Mr. Bergman included the qualifier "may be", so people don't yell at us about some show in 2003 that looked a lot worse on paper. As far as the modern era goes, this is definitely an uninspiring card. Jake Ellenberger is rated anywhere from the third to sixth-best welterweight in the world depending on who you ask, and he's been on a five fight winning streak since losing to Carlos Condit in September 2009. He had a decisive victory over Jake Shields his last time out, and a victory over Diego Sanchez should solidify him as a top contender to the welterweight title. That being said, Diego's last fight took place eleven months ago, and who knows how that layoff will affect his fighting skills.

Stefan Struve & Dave Herman aren't top-ten heavyweights, but they are big sumbitches that are prone to throwing the leather. It'd be a decent opener on a good UFC card, so it's the semi-main event here. Honestly though, it's a card on a station that not a whole lot of people get, even less than Versus. What can you expect? It could very well end up being a good show, but not many people will see it and not many people will even know it's going on. You guys will, because you gotta be a diehard MMA fan to be reading this column, but the casual fans probably don't even know what Fuel TV is.

Robert Winfree: FACT but only with the "may be" qualifier, and because I don't feel like going back through every UFC event and comparing them to this one. The UFC is counting on Diego Sanchez to overcome the weak card on paper and deliver an exciting fight. It's been a long time since Sanchez was in a boring fight, and I think the UFC is hoping for a bit of Griffin vs. Bonnar in that the fight goes more than one round and people call their friends to tell them about it. Not sure that will happen.

As for Herman and Struve, I don't care. I've grown incredibly apathetic towards the heavyweight division in general, and neither of these guys are top ranked. The one potential saving grace is that win or lose Struve does either in pretty spectacular fashion. Even with that though, it doesn't look like an appealing card. There might have been worse cards further back in UFC history, but I really don't want go looking for them.

SCORE: 4-4

---

5.) Alistair Overeem should be stripped of his #1 Heavyweight contendership steaming from his recent arrest.

Steve Cook: FICTION Here in America we believe in people being innocent until proven guilty. Overeem has not been proven guilty of anything here, and the facts in this case seem a bit sketchy. Overeem allegedly shoved a woman in the face at a Las Vegas casino at 3 AM on January 2. This is why you don't hang out at casinos at 3 AM if you‘re famous…nothing good ever happens, and other people hanging out at casinos at 3 AM see dollar signs. Considering the woman wasn't seriously injured (Given Overeem's size this should be an indication that he wasn't looking to hurt anybody) and there doesn't seem to be a history between Overeem and the woman, it doesn't look like the type of situation that would require more action. Dana White doesn't seem too concerned about this, and I'm sure that if he had a reason to take Overeem's title shot away in favor of one of his boys, he'd do it.

Robert Winfree: FICTION. Cook correctly points out the basic premise of innocent until proven guilty, but there's also a fact lost in all of this: Alistair Overeem wasn't arrested. He was summoned to court, and there is a significant difference. If this was a serious incident odds are that some kind of video footage would have leaked onto the internet by now, and the woman claims that Alistair pushed her in the face causing her to stumble backwards. Given Overeem's strength I have a hard time believing he wouldn't have been arrested if he'd actually pushed her because there would likely be some physical marks. Until he's proven guilty, or arrested for something much more serious, he's earned his chance to get knocked out by dos Santos and we shouldn't be deprived of seeing it.

SCORE: 5-5

---

6.) Strikeforce needs to produce more shows in order to not fall behind Bellator in terms of visibility amongst MMA fans.

Steve Cook: FACT Business for Bellator is definitely going to pick up once they start airing shows on Spike TV, a channel with more visibility and more of a connection with the MMA audience than MTV2. That won't be until 2013, so Zuffa has some time to build Strikeforce up and solidify it as the #2 brand in MMA. The question is whether or not Zuffa will put the effort into it that's necessary…on one hand, they have renewed their contract with Showtime & the emphasis is actively being shifted away from heavyweights and towards the lighter weight divisions & the women's divisions. On the other hand, Zuffa moving guys like Nick Diaz, Dan Henderson & Alistair Overeem over to UFC makes Strikeforce look like a feeder organization to UFC, like the minor leagues if you will. Zuffa will need to come up with ways to make Strikeforce matter and make it unique. Having Miesha Tate & Ronda Rousey headline their next show will help, but they need to continue in that direction and make Strikeforce a must-see show for MMA fans.

Robert Winfree: FICTION. I wasn't aware Strikeforce was above Bellator in terms of visibility to MMA fans. Bellator runs more shows, runs them on free TV, generally has more exciting fights, and was just bought by Viacom. When Strikeforce was putting on exciting events and had some momentum, like the start of their heavyweight GP, they were clearly more visible. In the time since they announced the tournament they've slowly slipped further and further down the totem pole. It's to the point where I don't care about the promotion that much, or their fighters. Bellator has been growing and for my money has already surpassed Strikeforce now that Strikeforce doesn't have any homegrown stars.

SCORE: 5-6

There for a minute, I thought that both guys were going to agree on every question and that was going to anger me. Last week, I announced that I will be picking winners regardless of the hate messages and this week, I will do the same. It's been awhile since Steve Cook has competed on the FoF Battlefield and his cage rust was nearly non-existent. I don't want to take anything away from Robert Winfree because the guy is becoming a force on this website. Steve gets the Split-Decision victory based on his answers in the first three questions and his general snarkyness. Come back next week as Samer Kadi returns to 411mania.com to battle Wyatt. Remember to support your local MMA and keep your tapping hand strong.

---

411mania MMA Fact or Fiction Scoreboard!

Larry Csonka: 8-1

Samer Kadi: 5-5-1

Jeffrey Harris: 5-8

Todd Vote: 4-7

Scott Kuczkowski: 8-6

Jonathan Solomon: 4-2-1

Steve Cook: 5-2

Dan Plunkett: 7-2

Todd Bergman: 4-1

Dustin James: 1-5

MMA Fighter Jason High: 1-0

Jon Butterfield: 4-4

Mark Radulich: 3-5

Alex Watt: 1-5

Stewart Lange: 3-3

Wyatt Beougher: 3-3

Jeremy Lambert: 4-1

Jack Bramma: 0-1

Robert Winfree: 1-3