PDA

View Full Version : dana is like don king



QUEEF_BLAST
08-02-2007, 10:35 AM
check this out. watching some vids and came across this one on nbc. at the end of the vid Dana says I set up randy to lose against chuck and look what happend. I think that is bullshit if you dont think they are good competition why put them in there? I want my champ to be the champ cause he had a tough road to walk. And rose to the occasion. idk let me know what uguys think.:banghead:

http://video.nbcsports.com/player/?id=111856

matto
08-02-2007, 11:53 AM
not in the silghtest. thats bs that dana wanted chuck to win, everybody thinks and knows that couture is better then chuck and got a bunch of bad luck. they eye poke then the slip.

Clint
08-02-2007, 12:17 PM
He put Randy in there because he was legit competition with a good name but everyone and their brother knew that Chuck was a heavy favorite going in and nobody expected Randy to come in and outbox him like he did.

matto
08-02-2007, 12:18 PM
randy is and always will be>chuck.

teshore
08-02-2007, 12:21 PM
randy is and always will be>chuck.


2 out 3 fights says thats not so... randy is a great competitor but to say he is better because he slipped or got poked is ignoring the truth at the end, he lost 2 out of 3.

matto
08-02-2007, 12:31 PM
2 out 3 fights says thats not so... randy is a great competitor but to say he is better because he slipped or got poked is ignoring the truth at the end, he lost 2 out of 3.

shit happens, ur right he did lose in the end and thats what matters, but randy is still better then chuck. compareable to bj losing to hughes and aa losing to sylvia in the 3rd fight cause of injuries that werent their fault, while randy got bullshit poked by chuck and then slipped right in front of chuck the next fight.

teshore
08-02-2007, 12:36 PM
shit happens, ur right he did lose in the end and thats what matters, but randy is still better then chuck. compareable to bj losing to hughes and aa losing to sylvia in the 3rd fight cause of injuries that werent their fault, while randy got bullshit poked by chuck and then slipped right in front of chuck the next fight.


i understand what your saying but its not like chuck ok let me poke him in the eye then punch him.. the same as low blows, i think randy is great, but i regardless of a slip or poke or whatever i think chuck has his number just like rampage has chucks...

eazye76
08-02-2007, 12:37 PM
2 out 3 fights says thats not so... randy is a great competitor but to say he is better because he slipped or got poked is ignoring the truth at the end, he lost 2 out of 3.
IMO one on one Chuck can obviously beat Randy, but in the grand scheme of things, I think Randy is the best ever... if that makes any sense.

teshore
08-02-2007, 12:39 PM
IMO one on one Chuck can obviously beat Randy, but in the grand scheme of things, I think Randy is the best ever... if that makes any sense.


oh i agree, maybe not the best ever, but best ever to compete in the ufc... but it does make sense

CEVANS
08-02-2007, 01:09 PM
dena is like don king
YES they are both big fucking assholes :fingersmilie:

QUEEF_BLAST
08-02-2007, 02:01 PM
He put Randy in there because he was legit competition with a good name but everyone and their brother knew that Chuck was a heavy favorite going in and nobody expected Randy to come in and outbox him like he did.
yea but heres the thing he still says "i put randy in there to lose and look what happend"just think its bs that he would set that up that way being a favorite is one thing but we all know dana and chuck are butt buddies so did he do that to help him move up the ladder or was there just no one good enough to beat chuck back then

Clint
08-02-2007, 02:12 PM
yea but heres the thing he still says "i put randy in there to lose and look what happend"just think its bs that he would set that up that way being a favorite is one thing but we all know dana and chuck are butt buddies so did he do that to help him move up the ladder or was there just no one good enough to beat chuck back then
There were no other legit contenders. Tito was the champ and wouldn't fight Chuck so they had to find a guy for Chuck to face for the Interim Title and Randy was the former HW champ and coming down to 205 so he was the best choice.

Ramma
08-02-2007, 02:32 PM
Yeah, I totally see what you mean about Dana being like Don King
http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m144/RaMMaCriCkeT/Misc/Dana.pnghttp://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m144/RaMMaCriCkeT/Misc/DonKing.jpg

They could be from the same womb.

teshore
08-02-2007, 02:37 PM
Yeah, I totally see what you mean about Dana being like Don King
http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m144/RaMMaCriCkeT/Misc/Dana.pnghttp://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m144/RaMMaCriCkeT/Misc/DonKing.jpg

They could be from the same womb.


too funny, was gonna rep, but have to spread around first, ill try to remember later

Noob
08-02-2007, 03:11 PM
This thread is definitely Noob Jack City. If you're going to make a statement like 'Dana is like Don King', at least back it up with some rationale.

QUEEF_BLAST
08-02-2007, 03:26 PM
This thread is definitely Noob Jack City. If you're going to make a statement like 'Dana is like Don King', at least back it up with some rationale.
did u see the interview? hes fixing or setting the fighters up!!!! he said it not me and named it that cause they are both scumbags!:confusedsmilie:

valheruking
08-02-2007, 03:30 PM
Dana is wearing an Irish Jersey in that photo, interesting.

Noob
08-02-2007, 05:23 PM
did u see the interview? hes fixing or setting the fighters up!!!! he said it not me and named it that cause they are both scumbags!:confusedsmilie:
First of all, the statement that he made about setting Randy up is neither here nor there. There is no way to be sure that is what he really intended. It may be true, but he could also have been talking out of his ass.


Like I said, if you're going to make the comparison, you should have some logic or reasoning to back it up. Not just that you heard him say that he set someone up. That's called conjecture, and it makes for less-than-stellar arguments.


Besides, the UFC sets fighters up to lose all the time. What do you think Dana had in mind with the Crocop / Sanchez fight? Or with the Crocop / Gonzaga fight (though that went horribly wrong). Or the Chuck / Jardine fight? Anderson Silva / Chris Leben? The list of huge mismatches could go on all day long. The fact is that MMA is a business, and right or wrong these businesses have a vested interest in seeing some fighters succeed. It certainly creates a conflict-of-interests on some levels, but that's a far cry from saying that Dana literally sets fighters up to lose. That's presumptious and a far conclusion to jump to.


I'm no expert on Don King, but I'm fairly certain the the rap sheet of illegal/immoral activities that he pursued during his multiple decades as a boxing promoter are far enough beyond what Dana has done (or has had time to do so far) to really warrant a serious comparison between the two.

kaindakiller
08-23-2007, 08:07 PM
i agree with the thread starter and heres why.because he said pride would stay the same.making a statement like"he set randy up to lose"that's all the proof one needs to know this guy is only out for himself and wants to use the fighters and fans for his own greed.i don't care what he's done for the ufc,he is a slimey promoter.this is a pro sport where slime is king just like in boxing.