It’s clear that the UFC 214 main event carries different, though equally important stakes for the two participants. But since someone has to win and someone has to lose, where will that leave them at the end of this grudge match? Retired UFC and WEC fighter Danny Downes and MMAjunkie columnist Ben Fowlkes discuss in this week’s Trading Shots.
Downes: We are less than a week away from Jon Jones vs. Daniel Cormier, Ben. I should know better by now, but I’m actually starting to get excited.
The promotional videos behind UFC 214 have been on point, and even the usually dull split-screen interview provided some entertainment. There were a lot of gems, but I suppose the true highlight was when Brian Stann asked if there was any chance of the beef getting squashed and the two earning each other’s respect. To which Jones replied, “F-ck ‘D.C.'”
I’m not normally a fan of the “there’s more at stake than just a title” cliche, but it applies here doesn’t it? Jones needs to prove that he’s the best in the world. Cormier can finally legitimize his title reign. Is this fight about something greater, or is it simply two guys who don’t like each other?
Fowlkes: You say Jones needs to prove he’s the best in the world. Does he, though? Is that really what he’s doing here?
Think of it this way: Say the Honda Center collapses into a giant sinkhole on Friday night. Unable to secure an offshore barge in time, the UFC is forced to postpone this event. In the meantime, we revert to our default settings in thinking about the light heavyweight division. Who’s the best in that scenario?
It’s Jones, the guy who clearly won the first meeting. No one’s ever beaten him, so how can he not be the best? That’s what Cormier is trying to take from him. It’s the only thing left that Cormier doesn’t have, and there’s only one way he can get it.
So what’s Jones fighting for? According to what he’s told us, it’s to get his life back. Which is a little bit weird, don’t you think? I can see how, for Jones, winning this fight and putting the belt back on his mantle might feel like putting everything back into its rightful place. He wants to show us that he can be the best without letting it make him so crazy that he sabotages himself.
But what if he loses? What, then he doesn’t get his life back? Then he becomes someone else? In a sport where there are so many ways to do all the right things and still not get the result you want, is that really the right way to think about a prizefight? Can losing really ruin your life any more than winning can fix it?
Downes: The unofficial title of “best in the world” is about as useful as “pound-for-pound champ,” and equally nebulous. Despite that, I still feel the need to argue about it with you.
Being the best isn’t like the Ronco Rotisserie. You don’t set it and forget it. It’s something that you have to constantly prove. Jones hasn’t fought since April 2016 and his fight before that was in January 2015. It’s like the old Zen Buddhist question: If a champ is crowned and never defends his belt, is he really a champ?
As for Jones getting his life back, I think you’re taking him a little too literally. If that’s the case, than we should be worried, because Jones has threatened to kill Cormier before. I think Jones means that he’ll be able to get his life back on track.
Before being stripped of the belt, Jones had a plan. He wanted to clean out the light heavyweight division and then move onto new challenges. Jones worries about his legacy and his image. Or, well, I guess he used to. Cormier can’t call the new IDGAF Jones “fake.” He’s openly showing his disdain and arrogance for all to see.
Jones has a lot to lose, but we all know Cormier is the one who needs this win. He can say he doesn’t care about the narrative, but it’s clear that he does. Few people consider him the “true” champ and that wears on him. Just look at how he snapped at Stann in the interview on Saturday. More than a win/loss record, though, I think Cormier needs this to keep his faith in the world.
In one of the UFC 215 promo videos, Jones talks about how Cormier views himself as a “good guy” and the former champ as a “bad guy.” I think that’s an accurate description. Cormier always talks about how he does the right thing. He’s behaved himself and showed up to work as scheduled. He hasn’t hit a pregnant woman with his car. He hasn’t done a bunch of cocaine. He hasn’t caused the collapse of a huge event because of erectile dysfunction pills. He’s a family man who tucks his T-shirts into his athletic shorts.
I think he legitimately hates Jones in part because Jones represents the unfairness of the world. Cormier has followed the rules, and yet he doesn’t receive the accolades he deserves.
So I’ll flip your questions back on you. In a sport where there are so many ways to do all the right things and still not get the result you want, is that really the right way to think about a prizefight? Can losing really ruin the way you view the world any more than winning can fix it?
Fowlkes: I have to admit, I sympathize with Cormier there. The whole good guy/bad guy narrative? I’m not prepared to call Jones a bad person, but I know Cormier fairly well and he’s always seemed to me like an uncommonly good guy.
Like you said, he’s done all the right things. He’s refrained from doing the wrong ones. He’s worked hard and bounced back from some severe life struggles. In the after-school TV special version of life, that would be enough to guarantee him success. In the real world, it guarantees him very little.
It’s been said before, but there’s no moral lesson to be found in the result of a professional fight. This is why we fazed out trial by combat. It doesn’t tell you anything other than who is the better fighter, and sometimes it doesn’t even tell you that.
That’s a little sad to think about it, but I suspect Cormier can deal with it any way it turns out. Jones, on the other hand? His problems caught up to him even when he was the undisputed best in the world, possibly because he was the best in the world. I don’t wonder if he can handle failure. I wonder if he can handle success.
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.
view original article >>