So we’re two weeks into May. Does that mean the time to reflect on one of the most intense months of mixed martial arts has come and gone? No, of course not. (That comes after you read The Bag.)
Enjoy the latest edition of the infrequently compiled but always-enjoyable J.G.’s mailbag. Want to be heard next time? Shoot me an E-mail.
Tito and Zuffa: What happened?
Josh, I have emailed you once before, regarding your light-heavyweight rankings a couple of years back, and you graciously replied. Thank you. This email is in regards to Tito Ortiz. Specifically, I am wondering if you know, or can hypothesize, what happened between Tito and the UFC to prompt them to remove him from their site and edit the UFC 51 DVD so that no footage, other than the fight between him and Belfort, is shown on it. This seems to be quite drastic measures on the part of the UFC to take on a fighter for asking for 300k a fight, don't you think?
What seems oddest to me, is that they would do this to Ortiz, a fighter who carried the company for such a long time before the re-emergence of Ken Shamrock and the mounting to the top of the heap by Randy and Chuck. Also, does the UFC really think that UFC 40 would have been such a success if it hadn't been Ortiz fighting Shamrock and, say, Couture instead?
Why would the UFC try to be rid of Tito so quickly, while leaving the door open for someone like Penn, who, in my opinion, disrespected the UFC by his actions more than Tito did by asking for more money? Tito is not a "bottom of the heap" fighter; in fact, I would argue that he still has a fair chance of beating Liddell. Why would UFC send Vitor to Pride when the guy who most recently beat Belfort wanted the chance to go? I just don't get any of this. Your thoughts on this matter would be much appreciated. Thank you very much for your time Josh. Regards. — Sean Crerar
Tito made his own bed. And it’s safe to say that UFC president Dana White is enjoying sticking it to the “Huntington Beach Bad Boy.”
I have no problem with fighters getting every last penny they can. They’re the ones putting it on the line and all to often they’re the ones who pay a bitter price. So I don’t begrudge Tito for asking between $300-350K a fight. Does that mean I think, compared to every other fighter in the UFC, he deserves that much? Probably not.
You mentioned UFC 40, which prior to Couture-Liddell II was the biggest PPV success of the Zuffa-era UFC. But people tend to forget that UFC 50 (Ortiz vs. Patrick Cote) was by most accounts a PPV disaster.
Ask anyone from Zuffa if it was Ortiz or Shamrock responsible for UFC 40 numbers — to a man (or woman) you’ll hear, “Shamrock.”
Would a Couture-Shamrock PPV have done as well? I believe so. (Hopefully we get to see this fight in the not-to-distant future.)
More than anything else, I think Ortiz’ antics surrounding Chuck Liddell cost him capital with fans who, to that point, bought into everything he did. Ortiz most glaring miscalculation after UFC 40 was failing to realize that a loss to Liddell would do nothing anything more than trigger a good-paying rematch.
Instead, in the years that followed, the Ortiz-Zuffa relationship continue to sour, resulting in pettiness so ridiculous — Frank Shamrock anyone? — Edwin Dewees is listed among UFC light heavyweights on the UFC.tv Web site while Ortiz is MIA.
After being exposed in the Octagon, what leverage could the light heavyweight possibly use against Zuffa? And with PRIDE not wanting to use Ortiz unless he was a “UFC fighter,” where does he go from here?
(By the way, publicly acknowledging no one wants him shows a complete lack of judgment on Ortiz’ part. Why admit you’re worth as much to the world’s biggest MMA promoters as a mop is to Paris Hilton?)
I’m guessing he’ll hook up with a local Southern Calif. promoter and headline a card in his native Orange County. Could he sell out the Pond of Anaheim? You bet.
As far as Zuffa preferring someone like Penn to Ortiz … well, despite an ugly contract battle the Hawaiian is a great fighter who stopped the most dominant champion in UFC history. Often in sports the best of the best get away with murder — OK, maybe not the best idiom considering what happened Sunday.
Final Look at Couture-Liddell II
Hello Josh! This is Tomas from Sweden writing a couple of lines again. I’d just like to say I think Couture versus Liddell 2 was more a matter of Liddell being far agiler, sharper and crisper than last time than a matter of Couture being slower. Watch the fights and compare how Liddell moves and throws. The second time he maintains striking distance all the time, avoiding takedowns, and counters very quickly, tightly and accurately. Couture looked pretty good the second time, I think, throwing and landing nice shots (however not managing to rock Liddell’s concrete skull noticeably), but succumbed to a very much motivated Liddell in great shape with a well thought-out game plan adjusted to what Randy brings generally and brought to the first fight. Regards yo! — Tomas Rutegård, Lund, Sweden
Two things: 1) Liddell was on and 2) Couture was not.
This is the fight I expected in 2003 when I foolishly said I feared for Couture. The roles that June night, however, were reversed and Randy fought an amazing fight.
In the rematch I went with Randy — How could you not? — as I expected the sort of performance we’d come to expect from the 41 year old. But that didn’t happen.
He can deny it as much as he wants and people can say I’m wrong, but Couture was a step slow in the Octagon; regardless, it does nothing to diminish from Chuck’s win.
I suppose we’ll know for sure about Randy the next time he steps in the cage, which should be August unless, as he informed me last Saturday, he goes Ortiz on us to work on a film.
So he was forced to reach. And his range was off. And Chuck peppered him with straight shots — the only real adjustment he needed to make. And he fell out of balance. And Chuck clobbered him.