With Your Shield or on It: The Unfortunate Death of Jake Shields
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 1:41 PM EST
in News
112 comments
Did Jake Shields cost the Chicago Cubs another shot at a World Series? Ye gods. Shields received so much heat Saturday night that South Side hero/North Side goat Steve Bartman announced he would return from the underground world he entered following the Cubs' 2003 playoff exit.
Chicago, it seems, is not the place to host your middleweight title fights. Just over a calendar year passed since Anderson Silva mocked and embarassed Patrick Cote in the UFC Octagon before Cote blew his knee out. While Silva danced circles around Cote, Shields brought opponent Jason Miller's hug-a-thon prognostication to fruition.
Yet, while Shields initiated the ground war of attrition, Miller has escaped any sort of blame for the entertainment value of the fight. It was Miller, not Shields, who lacked the ability to maintain a vertical base. It was Miller, not Shields, who entered the cage as the larger fighter. It was Miller, not Shields, who guaranteed he would turn the fight into a brawl.
It's also hard to find fault in the reaction from Sears Center patrons. For all the build the first two fights provided, Shields and Miller unleashed a buzzkill more potent than flashing red and blue lights outside of a high school house party.
The blame should rest squarely on the shoulders of Scott Coker and the Strikeforce matchmaking team. Not only did the fight look like a turd for casual fans on paper, but Strikeforce found a way to increase the turdness exponentially when it put up the vacated (and meaningless) Strikeforce middleweight title, adding two rounds to a fight that promised to go fifteen.
And now, instead of crowning a champion with exposure to a national network audience, Jake Shields is stuck with a case of MMA's genital herpes, the Scarlet Letter "B" for "boring".
Like a real case of the herp, no cure exists. You only hope to contain the symptoms. He'll have to have his next fight on Showtime with the virus still fresh on his skin. He won't be able to headline an event for the foreseeable future. And you'll constantly have to apply high-priced lotions like Gina Carano to keep that bothersome itch in check.
It's unfortunate for Shields because he went out and did exactly what he needed to do. You could hear the faint whispers of Randy Couture gushing about Shields's ability to impose his will on Miller. But now, because he couldn't finish a guy that makes Gumby look rigid, Shields, and Shields alone, has to deal with the backlash for putting on an "underwhelming" performance.
1 recs |
112 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Anderson actually fought Cote in Chicago, Leites was in Canada… pretty much the same thing tho ;)
by Marcelo on Nov 10, 2009 12:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Argh, ich bin stupid.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not a bad article, but perhaps you might want to re-word your analogy about skin cream so it doesn’t look like you’re implying that’s what you meant. I don’t think that’s what you meant but it kind of reads that way. And if you actually did mean to imply Gina Carano has herpes…. not cool.
by Chromium on Nov 10, 2009 12:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Isn’t what I meant, obv. People can glean that from teh comments.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You know, even if she DID have it I’d still…..
by ufc4 on Nov 10, 2009 1:27 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
Miller, while dominated for four round, managed to be the closest to finish the fight at any singular point. Shields was impressive with his scrambling, but the dynamics of his game weren’t that exciting.
As for
but Strikeforce found a way to increase the turdness exponentially when it put up the vacated (and meaningless) Strikeforce middleweight title, adding two rounds to a fight that promised to go fifteen.
striping the guy that IS FIGHTING IN A MONTH…. it just made this move even more pointless.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 12:54 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You mean kinda like when UFC had an Interim title defended the month AFTER the actual title was defended?
Just like that instance, the title fight was made, and the contract was signed, before the champion agreed to come back.
Just curious: Are you also in the “Strip Overeem” camp?
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am in the camp that if you were going to strip these gentlemen, strip them last year. What is the point now? Well other then creating a 5 round fight. And a five round fight is not something you really want on CBS right away due to time constraints. and when you do put on a five round fight you have to be careful which ones get on CBS. No one I talked to thought the fight would be exciting in a traditional sense. I like watching Shields grapple, but 3 rounds would have been fine and there had to be talks with Cung before the fight was signed to be a title fight. It wasn’t a TUF situation.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought it was made pretty clear that Cung Le’s filming obligations had him not due to fight until early 2010…which was why he relinquished the belt. Then, at the last minute, his filming schedule was changed, giving him the opportunity to fight in December. The Smith fight, then, is a bit of a tuneup fight for Cung, one that I imagine he thinks he can win easily. Regardless, Cung would still be looking at not fighting again until late winter or early spring, so giving up the belt was a prudent move.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It was clear Le was going to not be fighting for a while up to a year ago. Why stripe him now? Why stripe him to make this fight two more rounds? Titles should enhance fights and promotion, in this case it did not.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now you’re just being obtuse. Find me an interview from 2008 where Cung Le says he isn’t going to defend the title until 2010. Up until the summer, he was saying that he hoped that he’d be able to fight on the CBS card. You don’t just arbitrarily strip champions if you’re Strikeforce, because your schedule is always so up in the air.
Also, hardcore fans care about 25 minute fights, but casual fans care when a belt is on the line. Shields vs. Miller is a COMPLETELY meaningless fight if it isn’t for a title, so while the fight is much more entertaining if it ends after the 3rd, it’s also FAR less dramatic, because less is at stake when Shields is fighting off Miller’s choke. Sure, Jake “ran out the clock,” so to speak, but he did it to win a title.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This article from may saying Coker expected him back late 2009 As soon as he won the title in March 2008, a sad day in my betting life, he put himself on the shelf for a year. At that point, I strip him. For AO its been a lot longer, but until recently the HW div has been MIA, so the issue never came up.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 1:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A title didn’t add or subtract to the meaningfulness of the fight, imo.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Correct me if I'm wrong
but Coker didn’t strip the title. Cung vacated it.
by pdl on Nov 10, 2009 6:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
im in favor of more STD metaphores in MMA
and can miller get a little credit for sinking a deep DEEP im not going anywhere for a while RNC that just ran out of time in the round?
by bearcox13 on Nov 10, 2009 12:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
1. If Carano has Herpes, I will still wait in that shortened line to lovemaking with a slightly less attractive, lip blistering Carano.
2. I agree with this entire article. Cung Lee was a real fighter and the Mayhem Shields bout was like saying that Chris Leben and Junie Brown should fight just because they have TV street cred.
3. The comparison of Shields to Couture is not possible. That is like comparing Michael Jordan to Bill Lambeer just because they play basketball professionally doesn’t mean they are the same. Couture has more talent in is eyelash than Shields does at all.
4. I was really disappointed in this fight. Mayhem showed some amazing ground skills, but he was clearly weak from the weight cut, having to lose 8 lbs for the weigh in clearly affected him.
by b_radical on Nov 10, 2009 12:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I wasn’t comparing Shields to Couture.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Mayhem would have won that fight in PRIDE.
Anyway, I’m not sure why Shields is getting heat for fighting EXACTLY how we all thought he would have to in order to win. Position before submission. When he got to aggressive for subs or strikes Mayhem was good enough to make him pay. It was a SMART fight, but a bad choice for network TV.
by VegasBatman on Nov 10, 2009 12:58 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
The bad for network TV thing is the problem.
It was a good fight, but it definitely hurt Shileds in terms of what his bank account can look like in the near future. SF is going to put him on Showtime, which means less from sponsors. And if a UFC deal is possible (I think they would still sign him, but the EA game and SF’s champiion’s clause may be road blocks) the value of that deal just dropped considerably. Zuffa will go after (if they can) because he’s a top fighter, but the dollar amounts will be lower because it’s not likely for him to be on CBS any time soon.
by Phildo on Nov 10, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe it’s because I actually enjoy grappling more than bad kickboxing, but I actually enjoyed the fight. My wife and I were making fun of the crowd for booing. It would have been nice to see a few closer sub attempts, but watching the move/counter/counter the counter grappling was actually entertaining to me.
by McEwen on Nov 10, 2009 1:05 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I didn’t mind the fight either. I was five deep though. Haven’t watched it sober yet.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 3:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was on the other end of that……I watched it Sunday morning hung over.
by McEwen on Nov 10, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not a Shields Fan!
Shields is one of the most boring fighters ever. Also, he would get crushed in the ufc.
by pwdminotauro on Nov 10, 2009 1:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Jesus, dude. Bad headline
death shouldn’t be treated lightly. probably get a lot of reads, though.
by bobthewriter on Nov 10, 2009 1:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
you know he didn't mean that literally right?
by ruckus on Nov 10, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
nope, not when i first saw it on Twitter
so of course i clicked the link, because i my reaction was “oh shit. you have got to be kidding me! how’d THAT happen?”
by bobthewriter on Nov 10, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
While I understand your point...
rest assured…when/if/god forbid a fighter dies…we won’t use a headline like this
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Nov 10, 2009 2:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“Shogun Got Shown a Gun: The Unfortunate Death of Mauricio Rua”
by ufc4 on Nov 10, 2009 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i thought the same thing. maybe “the death of jake shields as a draw”… but not just the death of jake shields
I'm old school hating Lesnar, I've been hating Lesnar since '08
by MicahW on Nov 10, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My only problem...
Shields’ punching while on top was fucking pathetic. I mean, I’m not going to blame the guy for the fight being a tad boring. He positionally dominated Miller, but at one point while he was working his 10th mount or something… Shields’ pitter pattered Miller’s head. He needs to gain some power.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 10, 2009 1:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
And the dude had the back a million times with nothing to show for it.
Did he just start training RNCs? Miller got his back for a half-second and nearly ended the fight.
Don't believe a word I say, I don't train BJJ.
I blog at TangleBones - you should follow me on Twitter here.
by jemaleddin on Nov 10, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The only thing I found interesting was Miller’s rolls right out of mount. That was somewhat impressive, but a lot of it hinged on his length and build compared to Shields.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 10, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
^ X100. He didn’t seem to be working to finish. I like grappling and his transitions at some points were works of art, but would it kill you to try to finish? He had the back all day and nothing. He had takedowns and control at will, so he could have taken a few more risks. He was working the cuddle very effectively.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Go look at his fight with Paul Daley, it’s hilarious. Shields was wailing on the guy with elbows and Daley was literally laughing at him while he did it. Shields finished him with an armbar moments later.
by Dooda on Nov 10, 2009 1:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I know he has finishing skills, thats what is the killer for me. And it not like the Miller fight was close. He had control any time we wanted it. It wasn’t even a risk to try a finish. Miller has more ground game then Daley to be sure, but what is more risky to me is to let the fight go longer then it needs to and letting Miller get desperate giving him a chance later rather then finish him now.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 1:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But Miller, at this stage of his career, is a difficult fighter to finish. Almost every pundit said as much before the fight. It’s not about not trying as much as it’s about knowing you can’t do it, and not wanting to get finished yourself. It’s playing it safe, and it’s a sportsman’s strategy…just win.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 1:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s not the problem. We know that. I was talking about the punching power he exhibited. It looked like a schoolyard fight, but between kindergarteners. He was just pitter patting Mayhem in mount, and I hope to God those weren’t serious attempts to damage.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 10, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I felt watching the fight that those were more a waste of energy than anything else. I think he needs to either do some serious training, be it plyometrics or whatever the hell else will give him some pop, or just abandon striking on the ground entirely. Those shots made Nick Diaz go “you hit like a bitch.”
by Tedd Welch on Nov 10, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you’re being a little alarmist. Jake Shields isn’t moving numbers one way or the other; his opponent is. And if a few fans were turned off by his style, that’s fine, as long as they can find exciting opponents who declare their intentions to “stand and bang.” Cung Le, Scott Smith, Joey Villasenor, a Robbie Lawler rematch…even Frank Shamrock, if the fight is held in San Jose. And the best part? They’ll all be fan favorites. Where’s the harm there, exactly?
This isn’t PPV…the concept of “draw” is slightly different. The challenge isn’t getting people to part with their money…it’s making a match where fans will care about the outcome. And yes, hoping that their favorite knocks out the boring wrestler counts.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 1:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The problem with that is the loss of viewers
If they get taken down and it is a five-round hugfest your ratings could go down which will lose you sponsorship/commercial money on the next show.
This fight will make advertisers think twice before buying commercial time.
by joseph. on Nov 10, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But 90% of Strikeforce’s shows are on Showtime, where they don’t sell commercial time. Jake Shields was never going to headline a CBS show…not after the putrid ratings Smith-Lawler II did. And Jake Shields, matched against a good enough opponent, for a title, is still good enough for a high-profile spot on a Showtime card.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 1:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Shields loses a lot of money by being on Showtime compared to CBS because there are a lot less viewers.
he also loses if/when he goes to negotiate with Zuffa because they don’t need to try to make up in fight purse what he will be giving up in sponsors by fighting on network TV, since he’s not going to be on network TV.
by Phildo on Nov 10, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He did lose a lot of value though not going for anything but control. Well, maybe not loss in value as much as missed a huge opportunity to gain value.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This. Plus whether or not he’s going to be a main event draw in the future, this fight certainly didn’t help his case.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 3:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yea, it doesn’t matter what people who comment on BE thought of the fight. The reality is, people changed the channel, that action (more than what Shields did in the fight) is going to have consequences on his bank account, no matter what we thought of the fight.
by Phildo on Nov 10, 2009 3:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He did move numbers, he moved them the wrong way, and that’s a problem with the current relationship between SF and CBS.
Everything is one card at a time, so every card needs to be an A to get SF a better deal for the next card. People stopped watching during this fight, that moves the grade of the card down, so it’s not likely that CBS is going to be giving SF a multi-fight blockbuster deal after this card. So they’ll have to do another “test” card, which Shields will not get on.
by Phildo on Nov 10, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I argue putting the shields hug fest before the fedor fight in fact made fedor match all that more exciting.. like the ugly chick who makes her friends all that more better looking
by pandaboy99 on Nov 10, 2009 1:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Bad title dude – very misleading.
And Josh Koscheck found a way to beat the Boring rap…he started dropping his opponents. So, until that happens, Jake is just boring when he fights someone who can defend subs.
by scoozna on Nov 10, 2009 1:20 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Jake couldn’t even damage Miller in full mount. He’ll have to go on Overeem-oids to get any kind of power in his arms.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 10, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
^This. Jake Shields was that guy who regularly submitted people inside of two rounds. He just happened to face a guy he couldn’t finish. So Miller’s not in the highlight reel — Thompson, Daley, Lawler, and others are.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sheilds perfectly represents the “sport v. entertainment” problem in MMA. Him and Antonio McKee can 100% say “if you can’t stop what I can do…why should I stop doing it?” but at the same time why should a promotion risk putting them on TV if they’re going to actively drive viewers away from the show? But if this is a sport than shouldn’t the best get airtime?
It’s a really difficult situation to deal with for a promotion.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Nov 10, 2009 1:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
But it’s not different than anything else that wants airtime. Entertaining things are on TV, things that aren’t entertaining aren’t.
by Phildo on Nov 10, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If this were the UFC, I’d expect Jake to receive the worst possible style matchups for him over and over again, until he either lost or was undeniably an amazing fighter, even to the casuals. With SF’s divisions being what they are, I wonder both whether SF will attempt it, and who they’ll throw at him.
I imagine the next major Shields fight to air on any major platform is going to be against Cung Le. It’s clear that Strikeforce want Le as their MW champion, and as bad as Cung matches up on paper with Shields it’s the only clearly marketable fight for him at the weight that I can see coming up.
I can definitely see Shields having a Sylvia-esque effect. He’s got such fantastic top control, and he knows he’s not a striker or a strong GNP artist. I think it’s going to be hard for Shields to shed the label of being boring, but I have an even harder time seeing him losing to anyone on the horizon for him in SF.
by Tedd Welch on Nov 10, 2009 1:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Le presents a different problem because his fight schedule is dictated by his movie schedule…and he has all but said that the movies take priority.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Nov 10, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're right
That’s something I totally failed to touch on. Who do you think their best option is for the division?
by Tedd Welch on Nov 10, 2009 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
On the current roster?
Mo Lawal.
If they can get him?
Dan Henderson
Le is up there in “best options” but the movie thing…
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Nov 10, 2009 2:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It should be henderson vs shields so henderson can win the middle weight championship.. then shields fight zaromski for the championship.. and hopefully strikeforce gets their dynamic champion.
by pandaboy99 on Nov 10, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
" Shields and Miller unleashed a buzzkill more potent than flashing red and blue lights outside of a high school house party."
This line is pure gold. Thank you Mike Fagan.
"Stop smiling you are about to be punched in the face !"
by Warhand on Nov 10, 2009 1:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
To be fair, you probably can’t really put all the blame on Coker and the matchmaking team. Showtime and CBS has the final say and probably made the decision based on Shields tapping out cats his last 3 fights on national tv and Meyhem’s popularity from “Bully Beatdown”
by The Bronzeville Bully on Nov 10, 2009 1:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Actually: This was a good fight. For me all this talk about the fight beeing boring is only absurd.
Sure, it’s a valid point that the crowd, and reportedly the TV viewers, found the fight boring, That is interesting. But I found really strange that hardcore fans and mma-writers go out and bash the match. Shields fought very well. He won! To bash him is then to bash the sport itself.
by Sventsh on Nov 10, 2009 1:36 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I don’t know Mike, I really don’t like this article.
Shields put on a grappling clinic and a bunch of drunk hockey fans booed it so you’re trying to find someone to blame? Shame on you. It wasn’t a boring fight, it was a good fight that was frustrating because Shields couldn’t finish.
Why do we have to find someone to blame? Miller? I’m pretty sure he’d have stuffed those takedowns if he could. But he tried, why find blame in that? And blame strikeforce? It’s not like they have a deep pool of renowned talent. They have to work with what they have and I thought that Shields and Miller were a decent choice. What do you want, a middleweight title fight that was a sure thing barn burner? The entire night of fights was awesome, let’s let the fight just be a fight.
People booed it, big freakin deal. That doesn’t mean we have to go finding blame and make it into some huge issue. Let them boo. I felt the same way when I was first into the sport until I learned better. Now I enjoy it. Why not expect more from the ravenous fans that want the sport to be something else, then expect the organizations to cater to their ignorance? You guys, of all people, should know better.
by Dooda on Nov 10, 2009 1:41 PM EST reply actions 8 recs
I should do this the anonymous way but hell.
rec’d
10/24
by spectaa on Nov 10, 2009 1:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Couldn’t agree more. That kind of logic breeds promoters instituting a 10-second ground clock, and paying fighters extra to keep it standing.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Retarded promoters
I don’t want the fight standing. I just don’t want anyone stalling.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is…people aren’t going to stick around to be educated by things they don’t find entertaining. People aren’t going to force themselves to choke down crap that doesn’t agree with them.
Yes, we have to cater to those who drive ratings…and those people are, by and large, uneducated. When promotions put on fights that people not only don’t want to see…but would choose to actively avoid…then they’re going to lose their ability to put on those shows on TV/cable/etc
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Nov 10, 2009 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If that’s the case Brent, then the sport has no business being promoted to them, because you approach this any way other than putting the most skilled fighters at your disposal into the cage together, you are, at best admitting that MMA has areas that sort of suck, and at worse you’re trying to pretend that the sport is something it isn’t.
by Dooda on Nov 10, 2009 10:55 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
That’s dumb.
Soccer and Hockey use Penalty shootouts to determine certain games because some people think that ties are dumb. Because certain parts of football were dumb years ago they decided to let people throw the ball.
It’s reality, certain things are more entertaining than others. If the fighters want to get paid more, they need to be on TV. For the sport to be on TV, it needs to be entertaining to more people.
by Phildo on Nov 11, 2009 12:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well a lot of people think that shootouts are dumb, and it’s just more hockey at the end of the game so that there’s less ties, because there were way too many ties. Shootouts were already a part of the game. If they suddenly let people throw the ball, at least they were adding to the game, not taking away from it.
And don’t talk to me about dumb. The sport is already on TV, and the fighters have been getting steadily more based on the current sport. It made it this far the way it is, you don’t need to go tweaking it just because the mainstream wants it that way. You want guaranteed ruination of anything, start tweaking it so the mainstream likes it more. It works in music, in sports.
BTW, NBA basketball is a shadow of its former self because of tweaks and changes trying to appease the masses. When I used to watch the Lakers and the Celtics the game was pure and true. Now there’s a ref blowing a whistle every other time down and you don’t even know why.
And that’s not reality. Certain things are percieved more entertaining than others, but that’s no objective reality. There’s no such thing in something as subjective as entertainment. A lot of people really liked that fight and found that it wasn’t boring. Are they wrong? I used to be bored when things were grappling on the ground. Then I started learning about the techniques. Now I appreciate it more. I used to find hate tomatoes. I used to find baseball boring. I’ve changed my opinion on different bands. The only reality is, there is no reality when it comes to what and what is not boring, only the processing in the peoples’ minds.
by Dooda on Nov 11, 2009 2:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No. It was a boring fight.
I love me some Sexyama!
by pud333 on Nov 10, 2009 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
a boring fight? lol WOW are all these people that say that MMA fans? seems more like boxing fans.
by OnewayTiket on Nov 10, 2009 2:15 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It was boring because Shields did nothing when he had the advantage, which was the whole fight. He played a positional game. Playing position control to get you in a spot to finish is one thing, but a positional game with no follow through is boring. There are plenty of guys that are exciting on the ground, guys like Maia, GSP, Aoki, Hazelett, etc. Just because someone says it was a boring fight doesn’t mean all they care about is standing and banging. It’s not an either – or situation. There are plenty of ground fights that are boring, just as there are plenty of stand-up fights that are boring.
I love me some Sexyama!
by pud333 on Nov 10, 2009 2:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you think that was exciting...
… I bet you LOVED Shamrock-Gracie 2!
by TDITZ on Nov 10, 2009 2:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're missing the point
The co-main event of a fight on CBS should NOT lose viewers. Whether you or I found this fight boring really isn’t the point, if we want to see more free MMA on network TV there can’t be fights like this happening because the casual fan doesn’t want to watch it. Is that fair? Maybe not, but life isn’t fair and if people don’t find Jake Shields entertaining then they aren’t going to want to watch him and that’s going to cost them viewers.
by ufc4 on Nov 10, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
This.
As I said above, I enjoyed the fight. I wanted Miller to finish Shields in round 3 because FEDOR! and all, but I didn’t have anything against it personally.
But it’s just atrocious matchmaking given the circumstances. You took the crowd out of the event (fortunately FEDOR! brought them back), you lost viewers, and you killed any sort of momentum for Shields.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If I recall correctly, Arlovski-Nelson lost viewers on CBS. That didn’t stop Arlovski from headlining show opposite Fedor, and won’t prevent him from being in a high-profile fight in the future. And plus, since CBS cards won’t be a regular occurence, we should be thinking about whether Shields can headline a Showtime card, which I maintain he can do, provided he is matched against the right opponent.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Arlovski was a former UFC champ, has been a very popular fighter over the last decade, etc. etc.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was also 1/2 of the worst UFC PPV ever. Arlovski/Sylvia III had a lot of eyes, a much worse fight and had no long term detrimental effect on the UFC.
by bignerd on Nov 10, 2009 4:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There’s a big difference between fighting on free TV and on PPV.
by ufc4 on Nov 10, 2009 7:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Was AA/Fedor on CBS and I missed it?
Completely different animals.
by Phildo on Nov 10, 2009 4:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and besides that, just listen to the way the announcers called the fight. They even made a joke about how Shields was mad at them for not giving him enough credit against Lawler, and made up for it by shitting all over him during this fight also.
CBS does not like his fighting style.
by Phildo on Nov 10, 2009 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you missed my point. The co-main event of a fight on CBS should simply be two fighters doing everything they can, within the function of the sport, to win. Whether or not it’s boring to some and exciting to others is irrelevant. You put the best fight together that you can possibly come up with and you let the cards fall where they may. Why do we have to apologize to the casual fan for that? It’s a fact that some fights are going to be positional battles on the ground and the only way you can avoid this is by changing the actual fabric of the sport. If this is a danger to us getting free cards on cable then so be it. I’d much rather be relegated to PPV’s then to have the sport be pandered to by specific and careful match-making. The sport, in itself, should be it’s own ambassador and shouldn’t be coddled in ANY way with regards to what direction a certain fight may take. And if the mainstream doesn’t like that, then that’s just what we’re all going to have to live with. It ain’t the end of the world. Trying to put blame on anything other than the sport is completely misplaced.
MMA won’t go away. There’s always going to be us hardcores supporting it, is it really so important that the mainstream accepts it that we’re going to cherry pick every fight and then cross our fingers and sweat while they all play out, hoping that they’re entertaining?
by Dooda on Nov 10, 2009 10:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If it was as simple as putting the best fighters you can in the cage together, Rich Franklin would have fought Anderson Silva about 5 times by now, and Affliction would have made zillions of dollars by putting on the fights they did, but that’s not how the real world works.
by Phildo on Nov 11, 2009 12:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s just infantile reasoning on a lot of levels. So what, you’re reasoning that the UFC doesn’t try and put the highest skilled fighters they possibly can in title matches? I mean of course there has to be something compelling to it. Lutter did quite well against Silva, yet was killed by Franklin (illustrating that you can’t just say ‘well, Franklin is the best middleweight so lets keep putting him up against Silva). Matchups man. You get different highly skilled people and see how they fare against each other. I can’t even believe you bothered to use such a lame example. After Franklin was convincingly destroyed the second time, you get the next person that’s demonstrated the highest skill.
Unless you’re being sarcastic about that or I’m missing something,
by Dooda on Nov 11, 2009 2:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The blame should rest squarely on the shoulders of Scott Coker and the Strikeforce matchmaking
Perfect statement.
for all intents and purposes, just consider all my posts as works of satire.
by Bandaka on Nov 10, 2009 1:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
is it just me or does shields vs henderson make sense?
by Hellrazer on Nov 10, 2009 1:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The guys are there to get the belt off Shields if the promotion wants
- Hendo – Won’t get taken down, won’t get held down…
- Le – Will PROBABLY tear Shields up, on the feet it’s not even close to a contest and his wrestling is pretty good. If Shields can grab the kicks and get takedowns…who knows.
- Mo Lawal – Won’t get taken down, has a massive power edge standing. Not a lock to win, but I’d give him a better than 50/50 chance
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Nov 10, 2009 2:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not much of a jake shields fan either, but he goes the distance with a fighter who is known to be hard to stop and is a naturally bigger fighter, the 1rst time shields has went the distance in over 3 years and 8 fights with names like lawler, who was in alot of peoples top 5 mw rankings, and shields stopped on Showtime, Daley, who is a big hit in the ufc now, whom shields stopped on CBS for Elitexc, and nick thompson who is a very formidable opppenent ,and now, none of that counts?
i dont get the comparison to mckee, who has only stopped 1 fighter in 7 years. shields is never going to be a good stand-up fighter with good power, some fighters just dont have it. matt hughes for instance. he gets alot of flak too, but will be in the hof as soon as he feels like it.
by bdw on Nov 10, 2009 2:05 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
THe same thing was with Anderson/ Leites fight. Some people labeled him as a boring fighter who doesn’t end fights.
by dancingChicken on Nov 10, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I feel bad for Shields.
Personally, I am no Shields fan, but not because I think he’s boring. I think he’s overrated, no imagination on the ground, and is really ineffective with no punching power at MW.
It was a boring fight. Despite having mount a billion times, he didn’t hurt Miller ever, and he couldn’t do anything from the back. Miller had his back for a few seconds and almost finished Shields (would have if he had an extra five seconds). But in the end, Shields did what he had to in order to win. As Rogan likes to say, if a guy can hold you down and molest you the whole match, too bad.
I feel bad for Shields because he still got booed despite winning solidly. Was it exciting? No. But Shields is going to have to learn to incorporate more things than just positional control. There is a balance between winning and entertaining. Guys like Sean Sherk take things too far the other way. Standing and banging just for the sake of being crowd pleasing isn’t the way to go. In fact, it reeks of desperation. There’s a balance. I think Shields just needs to figure it out.
I love me some Sexyama!
by pud333 on Nov 10, 2009 2:24 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
For those complaining about Shields not being able to stop Miller, not many people have, and specially not by submission. Jacare couldn’t do it, GSP couldn’t, and now Shields couldn’t. This is more of a testament to Miller’s skills than to blame the others for not being able to finish.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Nov 10, 2009 2:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t expect him to finish Miller, but it was lack of effort. Like he accepted he wouldn’t before the fight started.
by szucconi on Nov 10, 2009 2:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This...
yeah. Miller is hard to stop. But he made no actual sustained effort to do so.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Nov 10, 2009 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You definitely have a point with Miller being very tough to finish. I thought Shields would win by decision. I didn’t think he would finish Miller when others failed to do so. However, that fight was still boring. Shields has no imagination when he hits the ground. I kept hoping he’d take a risk, but he played it safe. I guess I can’t blame him. I tend to like guys that take risks to futher their chances of finishing. That’s why I like guys like Condit who will put themselves in bad positions if given a shot at finishing. It’s just a personal thing. Shields never did anything for me. Probably never will.
I love me some Sexyama!
by pud333 on Nov 10, 2009 2:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I kept hoping he’d take a risk, but he played it safe. I guess I can’t blame him. I tend to like guys that take risks to futher their chances of finishing.
I hear you. I just think that Shields realized he couldn’t finish Miller, and Plan B was to control the grappling. It wasn’t aesthetically pleasing, but it was a title fight, and he won. Now he’s a Top 10 middleweight as well as a Top 10 welterweight. And he still has the opportunity to fight Frank Shamrock and Cung Le, which are fights that he has wanted for a while now.
by madiq on Nov 10, 2009 3:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Shields and Miller unleashed a buzzkill more potent than flashing red and blue lights outside of a high school house party
been there one too many times
We're just a million little gods causin' rain storms, turning every good thing to rust.
by Robert Downey Sr. on Nov 10, 2009 3:47 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
bad title
don’t tell me that someone died in the headline when he didn’t.
by Demogorgo on Nov 10, 2009 4:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Missed it by a Mile
Shields has been featured how many times on CBS? He’s record for finishing fights is outstanding and you want to bury him for one competitive fight that went to the cards? Christ, this is so bad I feel though the UFC’s PR department handed you this story to publish . . . and you are my favorite writer here!
Would you write such dribble if GSP had put on one his patient 5 round lay-n-prays to an easy, uneventful decision on CBS?
This way too reactionary. You are burying a horse in Shields that consistently performs.
by bignerd on Nov 10, 2009 5:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’m not burying Shields at all. He didn’t do anything wrong. But the fight with Miller didn’t do anything to help his standing with the casual fan.
And you can’t compare Shields to GSP for very obvious reasons.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Nov 10, 2009 6:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know why this is so hard to understand
Fagan isn’t shitting on Shields, he’s laying out the facts. There’s a reason this fight lost viewers and it’s not because there were millions of MMA n00bs sitting on the edge of their seat at home waiting to see how long Shields will lay on Miller in this round. 25 minutes of two dudes taking turns laying on the floor doesn’t interest the casual viewer, and I don’t blame them, it really didn’t interest me a whole lot either. There were some exciting moments during the fight but for the most part there just wasn’t much going on. I realize Shields was just doing what it takes to win but do you really think CBS gives two shits about that? Here’s a hint- they don’t. The only thing they are interested in is how many people are looking at the TV screen at any given moment in time and for that half hour there weren’t enough of them. A co-main event should NOT lose viewers, plain and simple, and if it does there’s something wrong. That is the reason Jake Shields will not ever be featured on network TV again. This is really Strikeforce’s fault, not Jake’s, but if Shields had done to Miller what he did to Lawler a few months back this wouldn’t be a problem. Instead he was content with grinding out a decision instead of actually trying to finish the fight. I’m all for doing what it takes to win but you can’t bitch when there is backlash like this because he knew going into it there’s a lot more pressure fighting on CBS than on Showtime.
by ufc4 on Nov 10, 2009 7:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
BTW
Your point about his record for finishing fights being so great is a little off the mark, 11 of his 24 wins are via decision, almost half. Whereas GSP, the man you compare him to, only has 6 decisions out of 19 wins, less than a third.
by ufc4 on Nov 10, 2009 7:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that’s one way of reading his FightFinder page. Another, possibly more relevant way (since fighters, you know, DEVELOP) is that since September of 2006, he finished all eight of his opponents inside of two rounds. This streak of over three years without a decision ended on Saturday night.
And again, you miss bignerd’s point. If on UFC’s biggest show GSP happens to put together a boring, five round decision where he grinds it out, rather than going all out for the finish, and that happens to turn off a bunch of casual fans, would you be saying that GSP should never be in a main event of semi-main event spot? You wouldn’t, and not just because GSP is “better.” It’s because St. Pierre is one of the promotion’s stars, someone that the company is committed to promoting, and they’ll stand by him in the face of an aberrational performance. Jake Shields’ recent history, plus the recent history of his opponent, suggests an aberration, not a trend.
by madiq on Nov 11, 2009 12:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tell you what, why don’t you forward a copy of that comment to CBS management, maybe after you talk some sense into them they’ll be itching to feature Shields at the top of their next event. But my guess is they won’t be.
by ufc4 on Nov 11, 2009 12:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Every person I know liked that fight.
I don’t think Jake is that worried. He beat Miller decisively .But some people who don’t like Jakes style want to make it into a disaster. All the GSP comparisions. Gsp couldn’t finish Miller either. GSP did make Jasons face look like well, Fitches face.(another decision) I thought it was an awesome fight I watched it a third time today. Theres a point in the fight were Jake looks like he is fighting on pure will and is so filled with emotion that made me think he’s the kind of guy I will always want to see fight. I would like to see him work his stand up which I’m sure he will. I can’t think of anything that is faster at killing a fighters career than standing and Wanging or Gurgeling and not doing what your great at.
by son of mark on Nov 10, 2009 9:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
