Trading Shots: Is Donald Cerrone one of the greats, or just a fun scrapper who never won the big one?

Will “Cowboy” Cerrone go down as one of the great fighters of the UFC, or just a fun scrapper who gave us some good times in the cage? Retired UFC and WEC fighter Danny Downes joins MMAjunkie columnist Ben Fowlkes to discuss in this week’s Trading Shots.

Downes: Ben, we had ourselves a welterweight scrap last night at UFC Fight Night 126 in Austin, Texas. When you put Donald Cerrone and Yancy Medeiros together in a cage, I suppose you shouldn’t expect any less.

“Cowboy” snapped his three-fight losing skid when he put Medeiros away with just two seconds left in the first round. The win gave him his 20th victory in the UFC, which brings him to a tie with Michael Bisping and Georges St. Pierre for the most in the promotion’s history.

I don’t see Cerrone hanging up the gloves any time soon, but whenever you hear about a fighter reaching a milestone like that, you wonder about his place in MMA history. Where do you see Cerrone among the other legends of the sport?

You often talk about how his propensity to fight “any time, anywhere” hurt his ability to work his way up the ladder and earn title shots. Does that attitude hurt his legacy, too? Is he one of MMA’s greatest ever, or a fun scrapper?

Fowlkes: It’s interesting how you frame those as if they’re mutually exclusive. Here’s my take: If you’re a fun enough scrapper for long enough, that right there can qualify you as one of the best ever – and I don’t even care if you never won a belt.

Your mind is probably reeling at that one, so let me explain. Obviously, Cerrone’s whole thing is throwing down as often as he can, chasing that paper, and occasionally overextending himself in the process. Remember his first year in the UFC, when he fought five times? Remember how he won all but one, the last one, when he got whooped up on by Nate Diaz, which his coaches attributed to burnout?

The next year he fought twice (won both), then four times the year after that (went 2-2), then four times (won them all), then four times (won all but the last), then four times (won them all) – and after that is when his recent losing skid started.

I don’t have to tell you this, Danny, but four fights in a year is a lot at this level, which is part of why it’s so uncommon. It’s even more uncommon to see someone win so many of them. Kind of makes you wonder why it took this long for Cerrone to hit a sustained losing skid. You go that hard for that long, heedless of the consequences, and sooner or later the cards are bound to turn cold on you.

For me, his sheer number of wins and stoppages, not to mention the many memorable performances, earn Cerrone a place among the greats. Matter of fact, it earns him a higher spot than someone who picked his spots all the way to the top, then had a cup of coffee with the belt and dropped it a few months later. If we’re talking about greatness, we need to assess the whole body of work, not just one good year here or there.

What I wonder is, do you think the answer to this question changes somewhat now that UFC titles don’t seem to mean what they once did? If this title stuff is “a fairy tale,” does it maybe not matter so much if you never won one? Or is it the opposite? In the age of multiplying interim belts, do you look even worse if you never got your hands on one?

Downes: Look at you! Ben Fowlkes is capable of nuanced thinking.

I’d agree with a number of those points. We could get embroiled in the semantics of differences between being “one of the greats” or “legend of the sport,” but whatever honorific you want to give Cerrone, I think most fans would agree that he deserves a spot in the upper echelon.

Too often people confuse being one of the best with being one of the most decorated. Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl, but you’d be foolish to say he wasn’t one of the best quarterbacks to ever play.

I don’t know if the current proliferation of interim titles hurts Cerrone, because he’s just so likable. In a sport so personality driven, fans will twist themselves in knots to champion someone they like or hate on someone they don’t.

As far as the diminishing relevance of titles are concerned, that brings up another problem whenever you compare legacies in a sport. All sports adapt and grow. That’s why you can’t compare Lebron James to Bob Cousy. They’re from two totally different eras.

In sport as young as MMA, those differences in skill level are even more pronounced. There’s no doubt in my mind that a middling UFC fighter of today could hop in a DeLorean to the early ’90s and win every UFC tournament, no problem. That doesn’t mean Royce Gracie’s accomplishments are any less significant. It just means that the game has changed.

Since we’re in agreement on Cerrone’s place in the MMA landscape, I wonder if you think “Cowboy” is the last of his kind – not in terms of skill set, but in terms of attitude. There are plenty of fighters who like to go out there and throw down, but the business landscape is much more difficult.

You’re right that four fights in a year is a lot, but we have to remember that he was allowed to fight four times in one year. He was one of Dana White’s “guys” who could get a fight whenever he wanted. With roster bloat and the promotion’s desire to keep the brand bigger than an individual, once this cowboy rides off into the sunset, who knows if we’ll ever see another one?

Fowlkes: That’s a fair point, but you have to look at why he was “allowed” to fight so often.

One reason is because he was willing to. He’d take short-notice fights, he’d fight twice in a month, he’d say yes even when it seemed like a bad idea. If you’re willing to do that, you probably move to the top of the list of guys the UFC calls when it has a problem that needs solving.

Then there’s the issue of his style. Not only will Cerrone show up when you need him, he’ll almost always give you a fun fight. He built that reputation for himself, and it paid off in the form of more chances to ply that trade.

Will other fighters follow in his footsteps? I think a lot of that depends on how rewarding they deem that path to be, based on Cerrone’s example. That’s why, when you hear a guy like “Cowboy” complaining about his pay, it ain’t a good sign.

It’s in the UFC’s interests to make sure he’s richly rewarded for the services he’s rendered, and it’s also in the UFC’s interests to make sure everyone knows how well he’s been taken care of. That’s how you motivate younger fighters to step up and be the next “Cowboy.” You show them that it pays to take these chances.

But if it turns out that, once Cerrone finally exits the sport, we don’t find a replacement for him? That might just be all the extra boost his legacy needs. We already suspect he’s one of a kind. In time, we might find out we were more right than we knew.

For complete covearge of UFC Fight Night 126, check out the UFC Events section of the site.

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