Comments on: Dana White wants a strong showing from Chuck Liddell at UFC 97 or else

By: Elder

Elder — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 00:44:26 +0000

I dont see Chuck leaving the UFC and i dont see DW sending him out the door. He is still a big cash cow for the organization. I hope Chuck reterns to form but if he keeps loosing i say its tome to restructure that contract.

By: GetItOn

GetItOn — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:01:33 +0000

Chuck could very well retire and he could very well fight for another organization. That’s up to Chuck. Dana has no control in that except that Chuck has to fulfill his contractual obligations with the UFC. Anything is possible. Remember this is MMA.

By: king mah mah

king mah mah — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:38:24 +0000

@ KTru- Hey that old assume saying is really old, you’re not clever for using it. You also know damn well there was hints of Liddell’s retirement all over this article. Because you and I both know Liddell isn’t going to fight outside of the UFC. If he’s done there then he’s done period. Even the last statement of this article said another loss could signal the end of Liddell’s UFC career and I highly doubt he would ever fight anywhere else.

By: Cathedron

Cathedron — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:13:11 +0000

This is really all just Dana’s way of hyping this fight. It makes the fight seem more important than it really is. Neither fighter is up for a title shot anytime soon based on their past performances, so this fight would barely matter except that now everyone thinks Chuck’s career is on the line. If Chuck loses, he makes less money per fight (like that would bankrupt him). If Rua loses (which I think he will), he’ll probly just drop to 185 where he would be able to get a title shot with only one or two wins (though he may also be looking at a pay cut). Neither fighter is in danger of having their kids starve. As was mentioned above, the UFC isn’t going to drop either one anytime soon since their competitors would kill to have them.

By: Sergio Hernandez

Sergio Hernandez — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:08:26 +0000

“Plus the moment Chuck enters free agency, Affliction / Strike Force will scoop him up in a second and gain a tonne of new fans.”

Chuck will never get cut. If anything, he retires. I guarantee Chuck Liddell never fights outside the UFC.

You know what I mean.

By: Brandon

Brandon — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:59:16 +0000

Money talks, if Chuck can still sell PPV then Dana will always find a place for him. Hell if Dana can bring back Elvis Sinosic after all those losses then I’m pretty sure he can find room for Chuck.

Plus the moment Chuck enters free agency, Affliction / Strike Force will scoop him up in a second and gain a tonne of new fans.

By: Angry Mike

Angry Mike — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:57:50 +0000

It may be time for Chuck to rethink his style, or at least his game plan for fights. It’s no secret that he moves laterally waiting for the chance, usually on a counter, to land a ko punch. That’s also been Rampage’s game plan, and it contributed to his loss to Forrest and lackluster performance against Jardine. They both need to diversify their attacks. Training with somebody like Jackson might give him the change up that he needs.

By: Texwatson

Texwatson — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:41:47 +0000

Chuck needs to train with top level guys who can push him, the Pit is his home but it may be time to train with some other camps as well, Greg Jackson could do Chuck a world of good, train with guys like GSP who will push your cardio and allow you to expand your game

By: Jackyl

Jackyl — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:33:46 +0000

Right. He said that at the post fight press conference. But prior to the fight and all during the broadcast it was made perfectly clear that if Rampage won he would get the title shot. My point is that he shouldn’t be putting undue pressure on a fighter before the fight. Let the fighter go out there and do their thing and let the chips fall where they may.

By: KTru

KTru — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:22:25 +0000

Looks like it helped Grove, imo.
He finished the fight with strikes. That is all you gotta say for a little fire under their proverbial asses, then I am for it.
And maybe Liddell needs a lil kick in the rear. Chuck has been around long enough to not let the “mental” stuff be an issue.
DW was also not the one who guaranteed any title shot. He came out on the post-fight conference saying “Not so fast on anything”.

By: Jackyl

Jackyl — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:05:48 +0000

I really disagree with some of the things Dana has been saying before a lot of these fights. Things like “putting fighters on notice” can change the whole mental makeup of a fighter. It’s the same thing with guaranteeing title shots. It puts unwarranted pressure on the fighters to say these things right before their fights. It happened with Kendall Grove. Now it’s happening with Liddell. Not to mention it’s pretty dumb to guarantee a title shot when you don’t even know if the winner is going to be in condition to fight like with the Rampage situation. These things should be kept private or at least discussed during the post fight press conferences.

By: KTru

KTru — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:01:24 +0000

Hint of retiring means “or else” to you?
Why would it not mean he would be let go from the UFC?
So everything that Dana implied means he has total control on Liddell and that means his only option is to retire?
Liddell cannot fight for another promotion?

Nowhere in this article, the title included, does the word “retire” appear. You can assume that, for that is “your” opinion. Just remember the first three letters “assume” can lead you to be one of these.

As for Rashad had one lucky punch? Get back to me when you have seen enough MMA to have an opinion. Scouted, game-planned , and well-timed was the reason for that outcome.

By: Texwatson

Texwatson — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:49:24 +0000

I really don’t think he will get fired either, I was only making a joke in the last post. I do think he will get a healthy dose of humble pie and take a huge paycut and maybe have to fight on the undercard

By: Cathedron

Cathedron — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:29:28 +0000

I don’t think he’s “on notice” to be dropped by the UFC, but it’s White’s way of saying Chuck’s going to have to take a major pay cut in order to stay.

By: Jstew3785

Jstew3785 — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 16:21:17 +0000

I don’t really care who wins out of Liddell and Shogun, I just want to see both of these guys get back on track. I’m fans of both guys and it sucks seeing them like this. Hopefully they can go out there and have it out and impress the hell out of everyone. I don’t think Liddell is finished, but it’s obvious he is in the latter stages of his career. I think it’s a little ridiculous to talk about cutting him after 1 KO loss.

By: Texwatson

Texwatson — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:32:03 +0000

Your on notice Liddell, I love the fact that Dana is now putting people on notice. I would love to see Chuck pubically fired, I feel that he has lost his drive and refuses to improve, he is banking on his legacy and we all know that MMA is a what have you done for me lately business, time to retire Chuck hang it up and impress twenty somethings with your stories of yesteryear

By: wardog

wardog — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:26:06 +0000

Dana is just saying what alot of people on message boards have been saying. Alot of people think Chuck is done. I am not one of them. He lost 3 fights! I was not impressed by Evans stoppage of him considering Rashad had no other offense except that one punch. Chuck seems to be changing his game up, a game plan mind you that got him the LHW title and gave him a 21-6 record. Other fighers finally caught on, it happens. Now he needs to come back and KO a few people! I really hope he makes everyone including Dana eat their words! Also wouldn’t it be funny if he won the belt back and left for Affliction or something?

By: king mah mah

king mah mah — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:09:44 +0000

“Where did it have anything to do with Liddell Retiring?”

Uh, well, look at the title of the article for one. “Dana White wants a strong showing from Liddell at UFC 97 or else”. What do you think “or else” means?

Also Dana said that Chuck would have to dazzle him for him to want Chuck to fight again.

Those are both hinting at his retirement, are they not?

By: KTru

KTru — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:48:22 +0000

Where in this article did it have anything to do with Liddell retiring?

When someone is in the business of making money, says to a degree its not about the money. Means its exactly about the money. The UFC cannot shell out 500k to the “Iceman” for anymore losses. Its quite simple, they are losing when he is losing. But instead for DW to come out and say we need to re-structure Chuck’s contract and/or get rid of the percentage of PPV buys, it is easier to state the obvious and say he is on high alert. Liddell knows this, he knows he has been a shell of his former self. So it makes sense. But Dana should not to come out and say its not about the money, because its all about the money.

By: king mah mah

king mah mah — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:35:40 +0000

I don’t know why a few losses in this sport automatically doom you to retirement. I know I know….. he got knocked out by Rampage and Rashad. AND! They are two of the best in the world right now! Someone has to lose. The Jardine fight was a split decision and Jardine just took Rampage the distance. Come on now, everybody matches up differently. Just because Dana “loves” him doesn’t mean he should retire if he loses again. Or even if he got knocked out again. How many times has Couture been knocked out now? Yep, he’s still fighting. All I’m saying is, it shouldn’t matter wheather or not Dana is friends with him or not. That shouldn’t be the deciding factor for his retirement.

P.S. How many times has Liddell knocked other top contenders out? Plenty. Are they all retired? No.