Trading Shots: As Askren and Burkman battle on Twitter, an old question rears its head

In this week’s Trading Shots, MMAjunkie columnist Ben Fowlkes and former UFC/WEC fighter Danny Downes discuss Ben Askren’s latest attempt at sniping his way into UFC-related news, as well as Josh Burkman’s curious response to him.

* * * *

Fowlkes: Danny, your buddy Ben Askren is back in the news after doing a little Twitter prodding of former WSOF champ Josh Burkman, who was recently re-signed to the UFC in order to take on Hector Lombard, who no one else seems to want to fight. After Askren pointed out that losing your title to Steve Carl and then polishing off Tyler Stinson probably shouldn’t result in a UFC contract and a fight with a top-10 welterweight, Burkman then pretty much claimed that he’d lost that fight on purpose so he could get out of his WSOF contract.

He has since retracted that statement by claiming he was merely being “a smart ass,” prompting me to wonder, how come it didn’t come out sounding very smart at all?

But wait, is it possible that Burkman actually did know what he was doing here? Because now we’re talking about whether the UFC’s new (old) signee just admitted to throwing a fight, which means we’re not talking about Askren’s original point. And really, didn’t Funky Ben make a pretty good one, possibly even one to which Burkman could think of no good retort?

Downes: I’m glad that we’re dismissing the idea of Burkman’s tweet being a real expression of guilt, but I’m equally dismissive of the idea that he’s changing the discussion on purpose. Askren called him a jobber, and Burkman tried to play it off like it was all part of a master plan. Things should work out for him, though, so maybe “Mr. Magoo” is a better nickname than “The People’s Warrior.”

Now as for the veracity of Askren’s claim, I don’t think there’s much to it. It’s just your usual matchmaking critique. Whenever a fight is announced, everyone rushes to give their predictions, and they’re mostly a waste of time. Except The Downes Side, that one is definitely worth your time. I’m not going to throw out the “Anything can happen” cliche, but what’s the real issue here? That Burkman is the underdog? Of course he didn’t have a retort to that claim because there’s nothing to say. What was he supposed to do, tweet back, “I’m ready to go to war!!!!! I’ll knock him out and prove all the #haters wrong! #RealTalk”? Burkman has a difficult fight ahead of him. There’s a false dichotomy in MMA where every fight is either a squash match or “the match of the century,” and that’s what we have here.

Even if we were to admit that this fight is Lombard’s to lose, what’s the problem? Remember the whole Daniel Cormier vs. Patrick Cummins debate? Cormier got the fight, Cummins earned a shot in the UFC, and both are ultimately better for it (you know, other than that whole getting punched by Cormier part). Plus, are we already crowning Lombard a welterweight “monster”? If I recall correctly, it was only a short time ago that the majority of fans/media out there were calling him a bust. A couple wins and now he’s the next champion? Whether Askren is right or wrong, I guess the real question is, “What’s the point?”

Fowlkes: Near as I can tell, Askren only has one point, and it always goes back to UFC President Dana White’s assertion that his Bellator title and his unbeaten record do not necessarily make him worthy of a UFC contract. That claim inspires Askren to look at all the guys who are apparently worthy of such an opportunity and ask, “Seriously? This guy, and not me? What gives?”

Burkman is just the latest in a series of those guys. Askren could do this all day if he wanted to. Look at all the welterweights who fought on this weekend’s doubleheader. Sure, you’ve got proven fighters like Rory MacDonald, Tarec Saffiedine, Rick Story and Gunnar Nelson, but you’ve also got guys like Nordine Taleb and Bruno Santos and Nico Musoke and Alexander Yakovlev. How many of those dudes, on both sides of the welterweight equation, would Askren totally smoke? The answer is, we don’t know. And the reason we don’t know is because the UFC took a pass on him.

I don’t really have a problem with the UFC welcoming Burkman back into the fold or with it giving him a crack at Lombard, who no one else seems to want a crack at right now. I also don’t have a problem with Askren pointing out the hypocrisy of the situation, even if he has self-serving reasons for doing so. Burkman’s two-pronged response – the middle school classic, “Hey, I meant to do that, and also you’re just jealous, bro” – kind of proves that there’s nothing he really can say in response to Askren’s criticism. Isn’t that how we know he’s right?

Downes: So the major takeaway here is that Ben Askren should be in the UFC? That’s not really earth-shattering news, but I’ll concede the point. I know that Askren should be in the UFC. Not only that, he should be fighting top-10 guys and on the road to earning a title shot. Let’s not forget why Askren isn’t doing these things. Yes, the official reason we heard was “he hasn’t fought anybody,” and we all have a good time pointing out the other fighters who have signed who don’t have anywhere close to Askren’s resume.

That’s not the only reason, though. Every contract negotiation has a number of other factors. When you’re an up-an-comer, you take whatever offer the UFC throws at you. Why? Because you don’t have any leverage. Fortunately for Askren and his family, he did have some leverage. We don’t know how much money he wanted. We don’t know if the UFC wanted to put him at the bottom of the welterweight ladder and he politely declined.

Let’s not forget the No. 1 reason why Askren has been an MMA persona non grata: his fighting style. Whether it was the ignorant “let me bang bro” fans or the more savvy hardcore fans, they all complained about Askren fights. They were “boring.” He’s just a “blanket.” He’s MMA’s Ambien. Even your buddies in the so-called media piled on when he fought. I think it’s funny that the same people who made Askren a pariah are now championing his cause. I remember hearing you talk on the CME podcast about how there’s no way Askren could compete with the top fighters in the UFC, and now you’re out here decrying the injustice of the whole situation. You call out the UFC when it doesn’t do things in what you perceive to be the fans’ best interest. Isn’t that what it did by not signing Askren? Public opinion has changed, and maybe it’ll sign him at a future date. The market works!

Fowlkes: Have I told you recently how much I enjoy it when you willfully misrepresent the statements I’ve made on my podcast? No? Huh. Weird.

What I said, way back when Askren was still wrecking fools in Bellator and the big question in the UFC was whether there was anyone who could dethrone Georges St-Pierre, was that he’d probably trash a bunch of UFC welterweights, but probably not the elite guys like GSP and Johny Hendricks. I could say the same for Burkman, except he’d probably trash far fewer existing welterweights. Still, I don’t mind seeing him give it a shot.

That’s my objection to the UFC’s Askren strategy. Don’t like his style? Don’t think he’s that good? Fine, throw him in there against whoever you think will beat this guy, and let’s find out if you’re right. That’s the whole impetus behind this sport, right? That’s why I don’t see any conflict between thinking a guy is a boring fighter and thinking that the UFC should sign him to fight. You are not doing the fans a favor by keeping good fighters out of the organization. Plus, let’s be real, there’s no way he could be any more boring than a lot of those dudes who fought on the main card on Saturday night. The possibility that we’ll be forced to sit through a one-sided Askren fight every three months is not so worrisome to me. The possibility that we’ll see a bunch of TUF contestants fighting cheap on an Internet stream every weekend while really good fighters are deemed too expensive, that seems like a bigger problem.

As for the contractual details that may have kept Askren out of the UFC, that’s nothing new. Any fighter with a brain will try to get the best deal he can. And while Askren is off in ONE FC, sniping at the UFC and its welterweight prospects from afar, I suspect he is in the process of getting himself an even better deal somewhere down the line. If I’m Burkman, I’m mostly just hoping that the UFC never asks me to fight him.

Downes: “Plus, let’s be real, there’s no way he could be any more boring than a lot of those dudes who fought on the main card on Saturday night”

There are a number of problems with that statement. First, arguing that another “boring” fighter should be added to the roster because there are other boring fighters doesn’t really make sense. By that logic, the UFC should sign more 10-8 heavyweights because the Mark Hunt thing has been fun to watch. What’s James Toney up to these days? Hey, it already happened once before, let’s do it again. Second, it still doesn’t address the crux of the issue.

You can say that the UFC should have just signed Askren and thrown him into the octagon because it doesn’t cost you anything. You don’t have to pay the salary, promote the fight, or convince sponsors to support it. If we really wanted to see who the best fighters in the world are, maybe we should go back to the un-timed bare-knuckle matches of the days of old. Oh wait, that’s not going to happen because those fights were boring. Maybe we could find the best basketball team in the world by getting rid of the shot clock, but it probably wouldn’t make good television.

“As for the contractual details that may have kept Askren out of the UFC, that’s nothing new.”

Brilliant counter point there, Ben. Whether it’s Eddie Alvarez, Holly Holm, Cristiane Justino or Ben Askren, there are a number of reasons why fighters don’t get signed to the UFC. Fighters should always get the best deal possible, but the UFC has the same right. It’s not in the charity business. It makes decisions based on the sport – and yes, money.

Remember the outrage when Jake Shields and Yushin Okami were cut? Where’s that fervor now? That’s right, it doesn’t exist anymore. People are quick to rush to Twitter and other outlets to give their reactionary opinions, but they hastily forget about it to rush to the next outrage. The only thing that makes the Askren story any different is that he injects himself into the discussion more often. It’s a lesson fighters of every level should learn.You can be boring, and you can be a blanket. You can even be an out of shape former boxer. Just don’t be irrelevant.

Ben Fowlkes is MMAjunkie and USA TODAY’s MMA columnist. Danny Downes, a retired UFC and WEC fighter, is an MMAjunkie contributor who also writes for UFC.com and UFC 360. Follow them on twitter at @benfowlkesMMA and @dannyboydownes.