Is Barnett Overrated?
by Steven T. Kelliher on Jun 28, 2009 10:47 AM EDT
Email
Print
While his nickname leaves much to be desired, “The Babyfaced Assassin” Josh Barnett is widely regarded as the best non-Russian heavyweight fighter in the world today. While the former UFC Heavyweight Champion has shown flashes of brilliance at several points in his career, is he truly the biggest test to date for The Last Emperor?
...
Beginning with a February 2006 submission victory over Japanese favorite Kazuhiro Nakamura and continuing with one-sided wins over Aleksander Emelianenko and Mark Hunt, Barnett not only proved himself a top ten heavyweight, but also a finisher. It was not until his September fight with Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira, however, that Barnett emerged as a true great among his peers with a Split Decision victory over the former Pride Heavyweight Champion.
Since that victory almost three years ago, Barnett has clung to the top five rankings—climbing as high as the number two spot in recent months—with victories over Jeff Monson and Pedro Rizzo after losing a third fight to Filipovik in 2006 and the rematch to Nogueira the same year.
...
The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.
232 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
He was almost out struck by a mediocre fighter when HE HAD HIM MOUNTED! So yes, all signs point to him being overrated. Also the fact that he is a ground fighter and a sub guy and couldn’t sub Yvel quickly was disappointing.
Im constantly surprised by people that take the Yvel fight as a negative. The fact that the fight went past the first round is a testament to Yvels heart. And suggesting Yvel almost outstruck Barnett from the bottom is nuts. Barnett totally dominated him. He controlled the entire fight and pounded him into submission. Yet somehow its a negative because he didnt do it quickly enough? Barnett is a proven great.
by GeeDub on Jun 26, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
The number two heavyweight in the world should of murdered Yvel in that fight, obviously what people saw wasn’t up to the level they expected to see out of what everyone realised going in was a very lopsided match up.
Yvel was murdered as far as Im concerned. Barnett easily got the takedowns and transitioned with ease from half guard, to side control to full mount repeatedly. Yvel defended the Americana very well which I am sure he spent a lot of time training for.
I think a lot of people were underestimating Yvel if they thought Barnett was just going to take him down and submit him in the first. Yvel has only been submitted twice in 48 fights and has 5 submission wins of his own. He proved in the Barnett fight that his submission defense is solid.
Im not sure what people were expecting to see from Barnett v Yvel. I expected to see complete ground control and domination from Barnett and thats what I saw.
They were expecting to see one of the best heavyweights in the world demolish a unranked guy who by his own self admission cares nothing about the ground game. If you go by the rankings it was a utter mismatch, Barnett was supposed to murder him, anything less than that would be a let down. Josh won a fight he was supposed to win but it was such a mismatch that even that wasn’t enough to fit what the rankings said and they damn sure don’t fit with earning Barnett a jump in the rankings. To be honest I was let down by the fight the moment it was announced, Josh deserves better opponents than that.
He did dominate. Dominated with control, but Yvel looked to get bored under Barnett and started throwing bombs from the bottom (with zero power). But he was throwing strikes and Barnett was in a position to finish and seemed to not know how, like he forgot. That fight was ugly. I am not saying Barnett was anywhere near close to losing it, but Yvel landed a lot of strikes that are seemingly impossible to throw while being mounted. It made me laugh at the idea that Barnett is going to be fighting Fedor after that match. If Barnett wins, I will laugh at Fedor.
I think Barnett wasnt confident he could finish with the americana as Yvel had already defended it well numerous times in the fight. Barnett probably felt controlling Yvel was easy, so he did and just beat him up from mount. He probably though he could finish the fight from there and if not he would be guaranteed the decision win. It worked a treat and he finished the fight.
And yeah, Yvels strikes from the bottom were a good effort, but I think he really didnt know what to do. He couldnt escape from under barnett so just struck out in any way he could. I wont be laughing at either Fedor or Barnett. Barnett has great control on the ground, as does Fedor. Sadly for Barnett, Fedor is much harder to sub than Yvel and is much more slippery and evasive. But for Fedor, he hasnt fought as many big heavy guys that are as wiley as Barnett. I cant see Fedor easily catching Barnett in an armbar like he did coleman or anything so if Barnett gets on top, Fedor is gonna have to reverse him, which will be tough, and then probably use some gnp to butter Barnett up if he is going to submit him otherwise this fight is going to a decision. Im looking forward to it though as Barnett is a worthy opponent imo.
At least he hasn’t suffered a loss recently.
Keep firing Assholes!
Out out, you demons of stupidity!
I Can Understand People Saying He Is Overated
But I wanted to see this fight in PIRDE and it never happened, I think we can all agree Barnett is a top 5, and as long as Top 5 guys are fighting Fedor I am exicted. Look what Fujita did, Randleman, and Mark Hunk almost had Fedor in a keylock! Antthing can happen and I am excited!
lol... check your spellings man
Mark Hunk? I about pissed myself when I read that one.
What the fuck is a "robster craw"?
by Gunslinger20 on Jun 30, 2009 3:43 AM EDT up reply actions
People have to remember we are talking about HW’s here.
Theres not many skilled well rounded ones out there.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
You need to beat a top ten fighter once every couple of years in order to be a legit #2.
Barnett hasn’t done that since 2006.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
And what HW has beating a top ten HW, lets say, for the past 3 years?
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions
What HW has consistently beaten a top 10 HW in each of the past 3 years?
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Which Barnett beat already once, although, in 2007, he only beat Herring, who wasn’t a top 10 HW.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions
At least Nog actually fights top guys occasionally, the only fighter that is even ranked that Barnett has faced in years in Jeff Monson. Not only that but the last two top ten fighters (at the time) Barnett faced he lost to. Barnett has been going up in the rankings while fighting meaningless fights, if he’d stayed at 5 or 6 it would be one thing but what has he done to go up the rankings to second best heavyweight in the world? Is he a top ten guy, undoubtably, is he a top five, quite possibly but what logic is used to have him ranked at 2?
Its easy to pick on the fighters Barnett has fought, but atleast he has enough fighters to do that. Who else would be #2? Not Randy. Do you know what his HW record is, and he is coming off a loss? Nog is coming off a loss. In the HW class, by default, he is the #2 HW.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions
So he goes up by default even though his last two fights against top ranked fighters were also losses? Barnett lost to Nog who lost to Mir yet Barnett is ranked higher. Lets get real I keep asking why he keeps climbing the rankings but we do know, it’s because he gets a nostalgia bump after other popular older fighters go down. It’s not that people are grouching about why he has maintained his ranking off what he has done in the last two years it’s people wondering why he keeps climbing the rankings even though he’s fighting meaningless fights. What has Josh Barnett done to push him from 5 to 2?
What has Josh Barnett done to push him from 5 to 2?
The same thing Werdum did to deserve a bump during his layoff – stayed out of the UFC.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 12:27 AM EDT up reply actions
I went backa nd looked and Josh Barnett was ranked 5th on the meta-rankings after Affliction Banned, that means that he jumped from 5 to 2 in the last year and the only fight he had during that time was against Gilbert Yvel. Seriously does beating Gilbert Yvel mean you deserve to move from 5 to 2 ????
He’s the most logical candidate for #2. Who would beat him right now other than Fedor? And for that matter, I think he’ll put on a strong showing against Fedor. I know he won’t get KOd in the first damn round.
Nog would give him trouble, maybe Mir. I think he’d beat Lesnar more easily than anyone else, including Fedor.
If Barnett fights
in the UFC he will have a losing record, maybe a .500 record. I like Barnett but he isn’t top 5.
Fedor
Lesnar/Mir
Nog
Couture/Carwin/Rogers
Here is the problem.
1) Nog and Couture will retire by next year (not including that Barnett already beat Couture).
2) Barnett has more wins than Lesnar/Carwin/Rogers put together.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh yeah, Barnett has already beaten Nog as well, and Monson, and a few others.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions
He also lost the rematch to Nog. Also in 2006.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Three years ago
And that was the last time he fought a top ten heavyweight, let alone beat one.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions
One’s career is not discounted because it took place before your 3 year range.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Why hasn’t he challenged himself since then? Fear of being exposed as… gasp… overrated?
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly, thats why he is fighting Fedor in August.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Where he will be EXPOSED AS OVERRATED.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Josh Barnett cheated to beat Randy Couture
That win should not count and I am baffled as to why it does.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Can Someone Name Me A HW That Has...
1) Better Quality Wins Than Barnett?
Randy, Nog, Monson, Yoshida, Rizzo, Nastula, Aleks, Hunt, Yvel, Schilt, Severn.
These were in their PRIMES, I might add.
2) More Quality Wins?
Barnett has 24 wins, more than Carwin+Cain+Lesnar combined.
That is all.
=)
He’s got a very impressive record…prior to 2007.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jun 26, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh and Fedor. ;-)
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jun 26, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions
That said, the point I made above stands. Barnett not only hasn’t fought top comp since the end of 2006 and hasn’t looked impressive against any of his opponents since then save for a very shopworn Rizzo. Nevermind that he didn’t fight at all in 2007 and should have been removed from the rankings. Meaning that his present standing should have been based on victories over Yoshida, Monson, Rizzo, and Yvel.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jun 26, 2009 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions
NASTULA WAS IN HIS PRIME?!?!?!!?
It was his fourth fight and he was 1-2!
And HE WAS ON STEROIDS WHEN HE BEAT RANDY.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
When I look at his record, there is a W next to Randy’s name.
Thats all I am saying.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions
That win should be stricken from the books.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sadly, that was Nastula’s prime since he hasn’t really fought since.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions
No, he lost two more fights to finish his MMA career at 1-4.
Quality win for Barnett right there.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I guarantee you that was a better quality win than some of the other HWs being discussed in this thread. =)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Brock Lesnar has never and will never fight a guy with a 1-2 record.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Thats because he was given a title shot after only having a couple of fights.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:26 PM EDT up reply actions
And those fights were against Min Soo Kim (first fight ever, 2-5 record), Frank fucking Mir (former UFC Champion, win over Sylvia, 10-3 record) and Heath Herring (former top 5 HW, 28-13-1 record).
Barnett fought a 1-2 Nastula in his twenty fourth pro fight.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Wow, what is that like 2 or 3 fights you can possibly mention?
The Mir fight was a loss, so Lesnar has beaten a fighter who is not the same guy he used to be in Herring and a 44 year old Randy couture that was outweighed by 30 something pounds. Congrats. =)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions
At least he’s not padding his record and being protected by shitty, shady promoters.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:36 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Are you referring to the UFC or PRIDE?
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmm… who was shittier and shadier?
Which was ripped apart by fight fixing and the Yakuza, and which one is setting records right now?
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:39 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I just wanted to make it clear since Josh fought in both UFC (since he was the champ) and PRIDE.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Well see, I'm glad you made that clear
Because he was stripped of the belt and left the UFC in disgrace because he tested positive for steroids. Then, he went to a shitty, shady organization that wasn’t particularly concerned whether or not you were on steroids.
Thank God the UFC killed PRIDE.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:43 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You mean like that other UFC HW champ that was also roiding? The whole UFC HW division history has been roider champs then, if you want to look at it that way.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:44 PM EDT up reply actions
You just accused Randy Couture of using steroids.
And all to defend Josh Barnett’s indefensible ranking.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The whole UFC HW division history has been roider champs then, if you want to look at it that way.
That’s a lot more more than just Timmy.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Thats not that many more, in the prestigious UFC HW division, LOL.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions
It includes Randy Couture
Whom you recklessly accused of using steroids.
This is not a winning issue for you.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Hahaha…whatever you see as a win for yourself, I guess.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Also
Tim admitted to using roids, apologized, came back, tested clean and won the belt again. Josh Barnett put his tail between his vag lips and bitched right out of Dodge.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Umm, if they offered you a ton of money to compete in the PRIME org at the time, you would too. Thats how PRIDE got Dan Henderson, Mark Coleman, Randleman, etc.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, that and they let you use steroids.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It was an even playing field, either way, so it really serves no purpose pointng that out, unless you are accusing Dan Henderson, Anderson Silva, Rampage, Machida, Nog, etc of roiding?
See, two can play that game.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Sigh
Not while they’re in the UFC.
And saying ‘you guys can endanger your lives as much as you feel comfortable with’ is not providing a level playing field.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Because it gives an advantage to fighters that don’t really calculate whether or not they want to be around to watch their kids grow up. When nothing is banned and everything is allowed, fighters willing to accept carcinogens, shorter life expectancy, etc will have a competitive advantage.
Drug testing is my biggest problem with Japanese MMA, and one of the main reasons I love Zuffa so.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Guys with more money have an advantage over those who don’t.
In addition, most supplements are unregulated by the FDA but allowed under the Unified Rules. We have no idea what, if any, long term effects these can have on the body. Where do you draw the line?
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
The point being, as long as the rules in place are enforced fairly and consistently, we can’t really call it an unlevel playing field.
Now, if you want to say Pride looked the other way with regards to steroids/PEDs for some guys and not others, we can talk about that. But I don’t think there’s any evidence publicly available to make those sorts of claims.
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
I don’t think there’s any evidence, public or otherwise, that PRIDE gave two damns about the health and well being of their fighters. The line is always moving, cheaters always find ways to cheat – but the greater point is that we try to catch them.
We make them hide it, we punish them when they’re caught, we evaluate every fighter with a doctor after the fight and then suspend him for 30 days if he has so much as a hangnail. And if he pisses hot, even if it’s in the UK and we don’t have to publicize it, we do. And we shame them into apologies (or denials) and pledges to do it the right way next time.
I find any diminishing of the importance of rigorous, athletic-commission enforced drug test to be at fault, because I want these guys around when they’re 70.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
One rec between the three of you. Come on, people! I can’t do it without you! :-D
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions
In what possible scenario would Brock be fighting a 1-2 fighter?
Keep firing Assholes!
Out out, you demons of stupidity!
You can’t if you are the champ obviously.
He foguht Min Soo Kim at 2-5 for his first fight though.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions
First fight versus twenty fourth fight.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
If Barnett was the Champ and fighting a 1-2 fighter, than maybe your argument may mean more.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t give a shit if you have a belt or not – you’re Josh fucking Barnett and you’re fighting Pawel fucking Nastula. What a joke.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Pawel Nastula fought Nog, Barnett, Draggo, and Aleks for his first 4 fights.
Name me another HW who has had tougher 4 first fights.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:40 PM EDT up reply actions
You're proving my point
Nastula was fed into a fucking meat grinder to make other fighters look good. He had no business being in those fights. He was sacrificed.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:42 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
But he actually fought well and was extremely talented. Its not like he was outclassed and did not belong in the ring.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:43 PM EDT up reply actions
His career was over before it began because he was advanced too quickly. He could’ve had five or six fights against, oh I don’t know, people with similar experience in the sport, and really been something by the time he fought in the Big Times.
But alas, PRIDE knew as much about fighter development as I do about keeping my mouth shut.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2009 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed
It was sad, but it also means you can’t discredit his ability as a fighter by his record.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions
So that makes it ok that they chewed him up and spit him out like that? Either he was a potential talent that Pride utterly ruined or he was a inexperienced fighter that Pride used to pad out their star’s records or sadly the most likely option, he was both.
If you read above, I sate that it is not okay. What I am saying is that you can’t say he isn’t a quality fighter based on his record.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions
His incredible lack of MMA experience combinded with being fed to the wolves before he had a chance to develop is exactly why you can discount him as a credible opponent. He might of been a credible opponent one day if he wasn’t utterly ruined by Pride(and that small roid issue).
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Considering the context
I’d say they’re about even. Nog, Barnett, and Aleks were all feared, elite HW’s (Nog & Josh are still top 5) at the time Nastula fought them.
Mir wasn’t even ranked when Brock fought him, Herring wasn’t ranked, and Randy was coming off a year layoff (which, at that age is a death sentence).
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 30, 2009 12:27 AM EDT up reply actions
My math is a little fuzzy, but 2-5 is not 1-2.
Keep firing Assholes!
Out out, you demons of stupidity!
by Ubernoober on Jun 26, 2009 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Here is how the math works.
The 1-2 fighters is a much better fighter than the 2-5 guy.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:36 PM EDT up reply actions
At that point, he very well could have been.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 26, 2009 8:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Well Randy has better quality wins that Barnett, particularly if you weight recent fights more heavily (which is what you are supposed to do in rankings). How much weight do you give to Barnett’s win over Randy from 2002 now that it’s 2009?
Barnett won a very close split decision against Nog and then lost the rematch.
Monson, yes he got a good win over a tough opponent there, Monson is a top twenty guy. Still it’s not anything to build a top two rating off of.
Yoshida, 8-7-1 lost to James Thompson in his fight before the Barnett fight. Not what I would call a quality win.
Rizzo, got his revenge win against Rizzo but would of been more impressive if it hadn’t been 8 years later against a fighter who’s best days were behind him.
Nastula, was fed to Barnett like a lamb to slaughter but still gave him a very hard fight. Nastula also failed his post fight drug test. Not what I would qualify as anything close to a quality win at all.
Aleks, yep good win for Barnett but I never figured out why people were so high on Aleks? If he hadn’t been Fedor’s brother would he of got the press that he did? Who did Aleks ever beat to be thought of as such a big deal?
Hunt, decent win but it seems that Hunt has been pretty overrated too.
Yvel, get real.
Schilt, Quality but more for what he’s done in K-1 than MMA. Schilt is a tough veteran.
Severn…. yes he beat Dan Severn in 2000 that’s one that should really have a huge effect on 2009 rankings.
Your list just isn’t as impressive as you seem to think it is.
by who me on Jun 26, 2009 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Randy has better quality wins at HW than Barnett?
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions
He has better quality wins overall and if we go by the last two years since Randy went back to heavyweight there is no quality comparison at all, Randy has been fighting for belts and Barnett has been fighting mostly meaningless fights.
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Barnett is still way over rated.
I won’t waste my time arguing with MMAsup. He knows it is true. Thank you subo for taking on my case. Barnett in the UFC will get rickrolled. The UFC cast offs are now GREAT cause they aren’t in the UFC. I heard all the same BS about Timmeh and AA before the Fedor fights. Dana obviously knows more about fighters than we do.
You mean Dana knew his HW’s sucked the whole time they were UFC champs?
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 12:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Maybe he just knew they were shot when they were done.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Its not hard to see that at the time of their departures they were far from the exciting, finishing fighters that the UFC knew them as when they started…. Both were coming off repeated boring or sub par performances(against each other, sylvia vs. vera and randy, arlovski vs. werdum and jake obrien)…
Their drawing power was falling IN the UFC; negotiations failed with arlovski, and Tim had no real place in the division either so the UFC basically let them leave… Once they left, people claimed that the UFC hw division was a joke, and the additions of Sylvia, and Arlovski to “co-promotion” strengthened non UFC MMA greatly… After its all said and done, the ufc has a solid young hw division, and Arlovski and Sylvia are coming off devestating turns to their career.
What discussions like this tend to miss is that when it comes to heavyweights, it’s possible to pick apart literally any top fighter’s record to make them seem wildly overrated. Certainly people have tried it on Fedor enough times to make my case for me. It’s just a weak division with an outsized degree of prestige. Maybe you can’t justify Barnett’s #2 ranking, but anybody else you could put there wouldn’t fare much better under the same scrutiny.
It’s inarguable that, relative to his division, Josh Barnett is an outstanding fighter.
(I also think it’s funny when fighting and beating cans in Japan is held against a fighter. Beating cans isn’t a strike against you—losing to them is. Whether you’re arguing for or against a fighter’s ranking, victories in gimme fights are mostly irrelevant.)
No, he isn't.
If anything, he’s underrated. At least around these parts.
All anyone ever talks about is how overrated Barnett is, and I couldn’t disagree more. He’s been an elite HW for quite some time now, and he’s undefeated against guys not named Pedro Rizzo, Mirko Crocop, or Nogueira.
The win streak he’s riding right now consists of H Yoshida, Monson, Rizzo, and Yvel. None of those guys are top 10 (Monson arguably is), but I guarantee that not very many HW’s could get through those 4 guys without a loss (not to mention 3/4 of those being finishes).
Now, I don’t think he’ll beat Fedor, but he’s definitely the #2 HW in the world. And people need to stop shitting on the guy and his skills; he’s a very good fighter.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 26, 2009 10:34 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
It’s not that none of them are top ten it’s that only Monson is ranked at all, they aren’t even top 25 fighters in the heavyweight division.
I don't care if they aren't ranked.
Yoshida, Monson, Rizzo, and Yvel are good fighters.
Not to mention his already stellar record.
Rankings aren’t simply based on “recent top 10 wins,” especially not in a division as thin as HW. Barnett has been top 10 for years, and his recent win streak against quality opponents just affirms that he’s a legit badass. You don’t beat guys like Randy, Nog, Aleks E, Schilt, as well as prime Severn and Bobby Hoffman without being a very skilled fighter
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 27, 2009 2:32 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes they confirmed he was where he was in the top ten before he fought them but don’t tell me that those wins improved him from the 5th best heavyweight to the 2nd best heavyweight in the world because that just doesn’t float. Why isn’t is sinking in? The problem isn’t that Barnett is ranked it’s that he’s ranked at 2 when he hasn’t done anything to earn moving up to that ranking in the last two years. If he was still ranked at 5 where he was two years ago then I wouldn’t bat an eye or mention any of this stuff but the fact that he actually moved up the ranking ladder from 5 to 2 based on those 4 fights is laughable.
Hell I agree he’s a top ten fighter, damn I even agree that he most likely is a top five but why are people dancing around trying to show why those specific four fights should convince anyone that he should be moved up from 5 to second best in the world? What did Josh Barnett do and who did Josh Barnett fight to move up that much in the rankings?
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 4:02 AM EDT up reply actions 9 recs
After the Pedro Rizzo fight Josh Barnett was ranked at 5, he’s moved up from 5 to 2 in that time frame and his only fight was against Gilbert Yvel (and please don’t try to convince me that Yvel was a quality opponent). His entire huge jump in rankings has come after the Rizzo fight, what did he do from the time after that fight when he was ranked at 5 to now to get ranked at 2?
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2008/7/26/579486/bloody-elbow-july-mma-meta
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 5:57 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Word.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jun 27, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions
The problem with your argument that Barnett doesn't deserve #2 is that
as several other people have pointed out, there’s really noone else deserving of the spot.
Let me spell this out for you: Barnett has been top 10 for quite some time now. His only losses are to ELITE HW’s, and even then he has a good record against top fighters. And the fact that he’s gone from #5 to #2 has less to do with his win over Yvel (which was still impressive, IMO), but more to do with other HW’s fucking up.
- Frank Mir has beat Hardonk, a very green Lesnar, and Nogueira (who had severe staph, and nagging knee injuries) impressively, but he’s also suffered some DEVASTATING TKO losses within the last few years. #4 Nogueira, as aforementioned, got demolished by Mir. #5 Lesnar got subbed by Mir just last year, and then got a wet blanket decision over a fading, unspectacular Herring, and a TKO of a 45 year old Couture. Etc etc, ad nauseam.
I think MMASupremacy summed it up best when he said that Josh is the #2 by default.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 27, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
He’s gone up in the rankings that much in the last year because he’s a known name and the fact that he didn’t lose to freaken Gilbert Yvel but he never actually did anything to show that he should be ranked that much higher. And so in a discussion of whether Josh Barnett is “overrated” moving up from 5 to 2 based not on anything at all you did but on what other fighters around you did or didn’t do would point to being “overrated” now wouldn’t it? I mean the whole thing revolves around Nog losing and him getting the “signed to fight Fedor” ratings boost. Thanks for making my point.
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
Why are you
shitting all over Yvel? Gilbert is a very dangerous guy (ask Pedro Rizzo), and shouldn’t be taken lightly.
In fact, when you think that in the last year, Barnett has beat Yvel, whereas Randy was TKO’d by Brock, Nog got stopped by Mir, Timmy’s career has gone in the shitter, and Arlovski has suffered 2 back to back KO losses.
If you can’t understand how Josh is #1, then there’s no point in trying to explain it to you.
BTW- who WOULD you consider #2 at HW?
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 29, 2009 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Yvel isn’t even discussed as being ranked, yes he hits hard but of his big 7 fight win streak people talked about going into the Barnett fight 4 of them weren’t even known enough to have their own wiki page, only three of them have winning records and 4 of them were relative newcomers with fewer than 7 fights when they faced him. It wasn’t all that impressive of a run(. Yvel is a mid level guy at best, not to mention he’s absolutly not a ground fighter at all going in to fight a top five ranked guy who’s specialty is ground fighting, it was a gimme fight from the very start. Yvel vs an past his prime Rizzo or a Paul Buentello is where he should be not fighting a guy the caliber of Josh Barnett. That win proved nothing at all because it was on a silver platter. It’s not shitting on Yvel it’s shitting on the matchmaker who thought that would be a worthwhile test to put Barnett next in line for Fedor. With all that heavyweight talent Afflcition has under contract don’t tell me bringing in Yvel was the best they could do.
not fighting a guy the caliber of Josh Barnett.
Well, at least you recognize that he’s a good fighter. haha
I’m with you on a few points, I mean Barnett could’ve fought someone like Big Tim (who was still a viable opponent), but obviously Affliction was setting Barnett up for the winner of Fedor/ Arlovski. It was basically a cherry picked opponent who Josh matched up well with.
And honestly, I like Barnett alot, but I think one of the main reasons that he is considered ‘overrated’ is that he isn’t built like an Adonis, and that the way that he wins fights aren’t always the prettiest.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 30, 2009 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions
I never ever said he was a bad fighter, hell I have said over and over in this discussion that I believe he’s probably a top five fighter(a lot of people don’t), I just don’t believe that he’s the second best fighter in the world like people have been making him out to be. People put too much weight behind what the rankings say and over exagerate just because he is going to fight Fedor. He lost twice to top ten opponents, took a year off and came back to fight four opponents that were well below him yet all the sudden he’s the second coming for some reason? That’s the overrated point, I think lots of fighters are overrated and lots of them are underrated but that doesn’t mean that I think the overrated guys are bad fighters.
Who would you
put in the top 5, in front of Barnett then? I say that based on accomplishments and recent record, he’s the most obvious choice for #2
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 30, 2009 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m sorry, what has he accomplished recently? Going the distance with Yvel?
Due to Cheick Kongo's atrocious takedown defense....
Walla walla walla, I’m an idiot
Some people might say that winning a fight makes you a better fighter but I don’t agree with that.- BlueberryMuffin
Uh...
Barnett stopped Yvel in the 3’rd round of that fight, dude. You obviously didn’t watch the fight.
But seriously, who deserves a #2 spot right now, in front of Barnett?
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jul 1, 2009 2:12 AM EDT up reply actions
OK sorry, you’re right, doesn’t change the fact that he should have finished him about six minutes earlier than he did. It was not an impressive performance for a guy who is supposedly #2 in the world against a guy not ranked in the top 15.
Due to Cheick Kongo's atrocious takedown defense....
Walla walla walla, I’m an idiot
Some people might say that winning a fight makes you a better fighter but I don’t agree with that.- BlueberryMuffin
Good man Elliot. Im with ya on all your points. Whilst AA, Nog and CC, all potentials for the #2 spot a couple of years back have turned in losses and disappointing performances, Barnett has continued to win…..against comparitively solid opponents. Nog may still have a claim to #2, but other than that…..who? Crocop? Mir? Monson? Aleks? Rogers? Arlovski? Couture? Overeem? No way any of those guys should be at #2 right now. Having said that, I think he will lose to Fedor and probably drop to 3rd or 4th. (mma-elo)
by GeeDub on Jun 27, 2009 5:04 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
If anything, he’s underrated
Well he’s ranked #2, sooooooooooooooo……………………………………..you’re saying he should be ranked #1?
Due to Cheick Kongo's atrocious takedown defense....
Walla walla walla, I’m an idiot
Way to take what I said out of context.
The whole sentence:
If anything, he’s underrated. At least around these parts.
In the MMA blogosphere, all I hear are people talking about how he’s overrated.
But nice try
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 30, 2009 12:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Aren’t the meta-rankings taken mostly from different MMA blogs?
Due to Cheick Kongo's atrocious takedown defense....
Walla walla walla, I’m an idiot
Some people might say that winning a fight makes you a better fighter but I don’t agree with that.- BlueberryMuffin
By blogosphere
I mean MMA fans hashing out issues via mediums such as the BE fanpost system, or forums like Sherdog/ the UG/ etc.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 30, 2009 2:23 AM EDT up reply actions
Could you argue Barnett isn’t #2, of course but you could do that for any fighter in the HW division. The relevant question is he worthy challenge for any Top 5 HW and the answer is a resounding yes. He has a great career record and has been dominate in his last 2 Affliction matches. Has he been perfect or crowd pleasing, no . . . but at no point did it ever look like he could lose to Rizzo or Yvel. FYI, ended those fights with a KTFO and TKO.
You could shit all over Randy’s record the past 3 years worse than you could Barnett but no one would take it seriously.
Randy Couture has only had one fight since 2001 that wasn’t a world title fight (Mike Van Arsdale). Honestly the reason no one would take you seriously is because it would be ridiculous.
by who me on Jun 26, 2009 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
What matters in HW rankings is how you have done in the HW class, not what you did at LHW.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions
In that case Randy’s last three heavyweight fights were still all title fights against much larger men. Randy is a “should be retired” light heavyweight who is still in the hunt for the world title belt in the heavyweight division. By comparison Barnett fought two aging guys, a thug with no ground game at all and the moderately impressive Jeff Monson. Three world title fights “after he retired” vs 3 mostly meaningless fights against unranked opponents and one moderately worthwhile one; there still is no comparison at all.
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sounds more like a fanboy argument than anything.
Last 3 fights? His best win was against Timmy.
You are telling me that a guy who barely beat TImmy and just lost to Lesnar should be the #2 fighter behind Fedor? Does that even make any sense at all?
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 2:13 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
When did I say that Randy should be number two? How is that relevant? It’s not a fanboy arguement at all it’s just the plain facts, the three guys Randy fought at the time he fought them were ranked so much higher than any of of the four guys Barnett has fought in the last two years that it isn’t even comparible. If your going to move Barnett from 5 to 2 based on those four fights then comparing them to Randy’s last three would be the saddest joke of them all.
Look two years ago Josh Barnett was at 5, all of Josh Barnett’s fights up to that point had put him at 5, if those fights were supposed to of earned him a 2 ranking now they would of earned him that then. What Josh has done to go up those ranks are his most recent 4 fights, does anyone actually think those four fights earned him a huge jump in the rankings?
It’s not JUST what Josh has done, but what the other top 10 HWs have done as well.
A fighter could not fight anyone in a year and still move up if fighters ranked above him lose.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions
No when you are talking about “overrated” it is just about what a fighter has done. And yes you can move up past fighters who are above you on the list even if both win because strength of competition is very important to rankings(at least it should be). Lots of fighters behind Barnett in the rankings are getting much higher quality wins than Barnett has gotten in the last two years.
Then why the fuck is Overeem even ranked?
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 12:38 AM EDT up reply actions
You mean beating Buentello, Hunt and kicking Cro Cop in the nuts doesn’t make him worthy of being ranked 10?
He had his fingers crossed, that one didn’t count.
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
That made me smile.
...Behold, a pale horse. The man that sat upon it was Wieters, and hell followed with him.
"BJ on the BE" - Kierkegaard
He is ranked in the top 10, but not the #2 HW, which is what this argument is about.
Keep focus subo.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 2:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Overeem is ranked in the top ten for some odd reason then if only his heavyweight fights count for that ranking, it’s a valid point.
This post is not titled is Overeem Overrated?
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Not really. Too many tangents and not relevant to the point we were making. I think it all got cleared up and sorted out below.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions
See this is the problem with the Barnett argument, your judging fighters by two different scales.
You judge the UFC fighters opponent based on the ranking he had the time of the fight to determine the victory merit.
But you retroactively judge non-UFC fighter’s opponents based on the rankings they have now.
Under the Barnett scale you could argue Randy hasn’t beaten any HW opponent of consequence. He has two victories in the last 3 years over an unranked ass clown in Tim Sylvia (BTW took him nearly 25 minutes longer than Mercer) and a top 15 fighter in Gonzaga. Than you could go onto say Brock’s biggest victory is Randy, who hasn’t beaten anyone so therefore Brock can’t even be a Top 10 fighter.
What are you talking about? I am judging both guys on the scale of where the fighter they were fighting was ranked at the time they fought them. It’s the exact same scale for both guys. I’m not sure what you are talking about?
When Randy fought Tim Sylvia, Tim was a top 5 world champion and when he fought GG Gonzaga was a top 10 coming off the Cro Cop KO, heck even Brock was on a lot of heavyweight ranking list when he fought Randy. When has Gilbert Yvel ever been ranked? Where the heck was Yoshida ranked when he fought Barnett? If Rizzo was anywhere on any list in the last year it wasn’t something anyone ever noticed(he fought twice between 2003 and 2007)? Monson probably was the best of them rankingwise and when was the last time Jeff Monson cracked a top ten?
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 1:05 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Why isn't Monson Top 10?
I need to check his record just after his loss to Tim Sylvia in UFC. The guy has shit load of quality wins to be ranked so far down.
Barnett won all those crappy fights, right? You gotta give the independent circuit some sort of a break, it’s had it’s dry periods. He’s resume is still stellar, the only fighter Barnett’s been called out for ducking these past 3 years is Fedor and that’s not the case anymore.
Monson might of cracked the top ten at the time of the Sylvia fight but that was back in 2006. The question would be what was he ranked when he fought Barnett in 2008. I do agree that Monson doesn’t get the attention he deserves.
The problem is in rankings no I don’t have to give the independent circuit any breaks at all, thats not what rankings do. If Barnett had held his 2007/2008 ranking (even though he didn’t do anything at all in 2007) then I wouldn’t of batted an eye but Josh Barnett was ranked at either 5 or 6 on most rankings then and now for some reason he’s moved up to the second best heavyweight in the world based on those “crappy fights”. How do you move up 4 slots based on those 4 specific fights?
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 1:34 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ask yourself this question.
Randy deserves to be the #2 HW because he beat Timmy (who just lost to Mercer), Gonzaga (who just lost to Werdum and Carwin), and Randy just lost to Lesnar (whos best win is against Herring). How does that equate to him the #2 HW in the world?
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions
When did I ever say Randy deserves to be 2? Where are you getting this at? Seriously what does that have to do with anything?
I was pointing out that Randy’s fights in the last two years are vastly more significant than Barnett’s not that Randy should be ranked at two, Randy lost obviously when you lose you are going to go down in the rankings but if you are supposed to be a top ten guy then beating a unranked fighter shouldn’t raise your ranking. Randy was fighting top ranked guys in his fights at the time and Josh Barnett was fighting competition so far below him it was assumed he would beat them all anyway. How do you go up in the rankings that drastically for beating guys that according to the rankings are that far below you?
Are you even reading who me’s arguments? He hasn’t said shit about putting Randy in at #2.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jun 27, 2009 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
That IS the question, my friends. If not Josh, than who should be at #2?
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Went back and looked Rizzo was actually ranked at 20 a year ago, which makes it a bit better(about on the same level as Monson was back then). Of course looking back, Josh Barnett was ranked at 5 after he beat Rizzo so his rapid jump to 2 only included the Yvel fight which makes it even more of a headscratcher.
I think you're analyzing it wrong...
Not to say that I think Barnett is the #2 HW in the world… but his spot in the ranks is subject to change upon the other fighters’ performances… If all the guys in front of Barnett lose their spots, and no one has done enough to move up in the ranks, he could move up a spot or two by default…
by Loot on Jun 27, 2009 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It is a combination of Barnett not losing, people not giving UFC HW division enough credit, and the main reason being Barnett can and is going to fight Fedro.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
The Fedor boost should be well documented by now, guys go up in the rankings just for signing to fight him.
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Which is the very definition of being “overrated” now isn’t it? He went up in rankings a huge jump due to reasons that had nothing to do with what he was doing.
by who me on Jun 27, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
That’s not overrated LOL. That is the nature of ranking people. That is how people move up in the rankings, by your and your peers performances. It is not solely based on what you do.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly!
I didn’t think that was that hard of a concept to get.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
It's bullshit
Because Barnett doesn’t fight anyone that has a prayer of beating him, he doesn’t fall. Me, I kind of disqualify you from the #2 spot if I haven’t seen you against top competition in years.
If Barnett loses this fight, he might drop out of the top ten.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Rankings are not an exact science where everyone agrees on. So, that is just your opinion, but, as you can see by the BE rankings, thats not the way others interpret it, exactly.
Maybe you guys should start a fanpost how rankings are bullsh*t, instead of Josh being overrated, because the way the rankings work, Josh is the #2 HW.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Being at 2 in the rankings is the overrated. Of course if you go back and look at comments in older rankings even a year ago when he was at 5 people were questioning his rankings then. Yes he is number 2 but he’s there by technicality because other fighters fighting tougher schedules didn’t win out all their fights not because of anything he did and now he’s being pushed even harder just based on him signing to fight Fedor.
If he was a legitimate 2 then he would still be at 2 even if he lost to Fedor but we know that won’t happen. Same situation with Tim Sylvia and Andre Arlovski, they jumped in the rankings, fought Fedor and then fell back.
Barnett is ranked #2 because he is seen as the next challenger to Fedor. AA did the same thing, becoming the #2 fighter simply because Fedor is #1 and everyone wants to see #1 vs #2. Plus the HW division is going through a pretty big face lift at the moment. Stars like Randy and Nog are aging, Sylvia and AA are dropping, and the younger and less experienced guys in the UFC (Cain, Carwin, Dos Santos, Lesnar) are coming up the ranking but are still somewhat unproven. Rankings are not an instant thing, they take a long time to really shake up.
I hope
Barnett wins. The only thing we all agree on is Fedor is #1. God things will get ugly if he loses!
If Barnett wins I will buy MMAsup and subo plain tickets to my house so I can BBQ for them. Maybe feed them some crown royal to start the festivities.
I think some of you guys are missing the point
No one is saying that Barnett isn’t a great fighter [well maybe, but i would disagree] but rankings are all about “what have you done for me lately?” Mir has beaten two top ten heavyweights in his last two fights and Barnett hasn’t beaten one in three years.
Barnett is very overated and unless he beats Fedor he will continue to be that for the forseable future.
by Raker on Jun 27, 2009 6:27 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I don’t think Barnett is the second best heavyweight in the world but he’s ranked there because all of the other top ten fighters have lost recently against opponents who were ranked well below them.
Nog (ranked 2 going into the fight) lost to Mir (10)
Couture (7) lost to Lesnar (16)
Arlovski (4) lost to Rogers (NR)
Werdum (5) lost to dos Santos (NR)
Gonzaga (9) lost to Carwin (24)
Cro Cop (9) was struggling badly against Overeem (13)
Kongo (12) lost to Velasquez (19)
Sylvia (8) lost to Ray Mercer (lol)
Of that group of winners, only dos Santos has fought since and that was against an unranked opponent.
Mir is the only fighter who has a legit case to be ahead of Barnett. It’s not worth arguing though as it’ll all be sorted out in under two months anyway.
by rabrown on Jun 27, 2009 7:35 AM EDT reply actions 7 recs
So we
penalize the UFC fighters because they fight stronger/better fighters. The UFC will always make top fighter fight the best available. They don’t use the formula Fighter A needs a win so bring in this guy.
If the UFC brought in Barnetts last 5 (wins) opponents to fight Lesnar/Mir/Carwin/Couture you guys would be having aneurysms. Rizzo (2 wins in 3 years) Yoshida (8-7 career) 2 wins in 4 years, Nastula 1 win in the last 30 years, Monson, Yvel. Barnett 2 losses are quality in Nog and Cro cop but Nog just got hammered and Cro Cop has been a UFC wash out as well.
by Riney on Jun 27, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly, and moving up the rankings while not doing anything to justify is would make you “overrated”, which is the whole point of the discussion.
No, you are completely wrong here. That is how rankings work. Your definition of overrated is just as silly as fanboys saying that the winner of Fedor vs Barnett will determine who is overrated.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Rankings don’t tell us who is and isn’t the best, it’s not that Barnett is ranked at number two (we all agree that is just a technicality due to how the ranking system works) it’s that people are actually talking about him like he is the second best heavyweight due to that ranking, that is “overrated”.
Easy way to tell if Barnett is overrated:
If he truly is the #2 guy in the world, he will retain the #2 spot after he loses to Fedor (same as John Fitch after he lost to GSP)
If he is overrated, he’ll fall down the rankings after he loses (like Arlovski did after he got trounced).
Keep firing Assholes!
Out out, you demons of stupidity!
by Ubernoober on Jun 27, 2009 11:31 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I mean, thats how rankings work. If he puts on a good performance, like Fitch did, he will retain the #2 or fall one spot. If he wins, then Fedor won’t fall out of the top 10. A lot has to do with the lack of strong contenders in the WW and HW classes as well.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, Barnett’s going to plummet after this fight.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Not if he puts on a good performance, like Fitch did against GSP.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
If Josh Barnett goes the distance with Fedor Emelianenko, I will eat my own foot.
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Good thing I don’t have to travel far to see that…. you going to saw it off or try to reach for your foot. Lets be honest with ourselves Subo, you’re not that flexible… lol
What the fuck is a "robster craw"?
by Gunslinger20 on Jun 30, 2009 4:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Fitch got fucking dominated against GSP. It was impressive that he lasted all 25 minutes but I believe the scores were something like 50-44, 50-44, 50-43. Fitch was never anywhere close to having GSP in trouble while Georges was close to KO’ing him 3 or 4 times. Not that I’m saying Fitch deserved to fall in the rankings but I don’t know what part of his performance was good other than the fact that he survived.
Due to Cheick Kongo's atrocious takedown defense....
Walla walla walla, I’m an idiot
Good enough not to fall from #2, apparently.
=)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 29, 2009 5:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Since when did losing to the #1 guy deserve you to plummet in the rankings.
Both guys will still be in the top 10, either way.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Leites went five rounds with Anderson Silva and almost dropped out of the top ten. Ratings are subjective, remember?
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 27, 2009 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Do I even have to say why? Do you consider that a good performance?
=)
And still, he was around the top 10, even after that performance.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 27, 2009 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with you for the most part
but I just can’t see how anyone could call what Fitch did against GSP “a good performance”.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA. Xtreme Couture FTMFW.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on Jun 29, 2009 12:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Agreed, but its the only example of a #2 staying at #2 after losing that I could recall.
GSP pretty much wooped him though. Either way, somehow people said it was a good performance and he stayed at #2.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 29, 2009 5:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Anyone here want to actually see Barnett win...
Just so there’s a chance the UFC might sign him (like Dana suggested) and then he can proceed to get stomped by Carwin, Lesnar, etc.?
Due to Cheick Kongo's atrocious takedown defense....
Walla walla walla, I’m an idiot
definitely an interesting scenario..
Kuwabara Kuwabara
by J. B. Maddox on Jun 29, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
That’d be awesome.
Bolts from the Blue // "Game over." - Jamal Williams
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Jun 29, 2009 11:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I see MMASupremacy changing his tune entirely about Josh Barnett if he were to go back to the UFC…
What the fuck is a "robster craw"?
by Gunslinger20 on Jun 30, 2009 4:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Nope. I would love to see Barnett beat all these rookies up and sub Lesnar.
That would be great, actually, I just don’t see it happening anytime soon. Barnett doesn’t like to work under exclusive contracts, demands a lot of money, etc.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Jun 30, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow.
I didn’t expect this to get this many comments.
by Steven T. Kelliher on Jun 29, 2009 10:46 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
