Trading Shots: With Conor McGregor's loss, another UFC star goes down

In this week’s Trading Shots, Conor McGregor’s loss to Nate Diaz at UFC 196 capped off a rough stretch for a few of the UFC’s favorite fighters. Now MMAjunkie columnist Ben Fowlkes and retired UFC/WEC fighter Danny Downes discuss what it means when superstars fall in the cage.

* * * *

Fowlkes: Danny, consider the fates of the UFC’s blond brigade of anointed superstars over the last few months. Ronda Rousey: Lost. Paige VanZant: Lost. Sage Northcutt: Lost. And now McGregor: Yep, lost.

Setting aside for the moment the very different circumstances of all those losses, I’m curious what you think this tells us about the business of building stars – or in some cases, straight-up insisting on them.

Obviously, individual appeal is what drives this sport. But this is also a crazy, unpredictable sport, and planning for certain outcomes in MMA seems like a great to see your plans wrecked. What have we learned from watching one UFC darling after another get picked off?

Downes: I don’t know if we’ve learned anything other than how much MMA fans enjoy schadenfreude. Sure, the UFC would have liked the “blond brigade of anointed superstars” to win, but how much did the losses hurt them?

“Super Sage” is still getting air time and doing karate tricks in a used car lot. Rousey still gets more mainstream coverage than any other fighter. And I would hazard a guess that the next time McGregor fights, he’s not going to be any different. He’ll still play his pool noodle games and call his opponent a wildebeest or a prairie dog or something.

Who do Diaz and Rose Namajunas work for? Oh yeah, the UFC. Even when Uncle Dana “loses,” he wins. McGregor may be a better option when you need someone to be a guest on “The Tonight Show,” but don’t tell me you can’t promote a Diaz brother.

Whether it’s Georges St-Pierre or Rousey, a lot of favored sons and daughters of the UFC will come and go. That doesn’t mean that you can plug in anybody and get the same result, but MMA fans find a way to gravitate to a hero or villain. Sometimes it’s organic and sometimes it’s forced upon us by a promoter, but it’s still there. Do you really think that’s going to change because the UFC’s Fantastic Four lost?

Fowlkes: I’m glad you pivoted to Diaz and Namajunas there, because I think that opens us up for a necessary follow-up question.

“Thug” Rose beat the brakes off strawweight Barbie back in December, as you no doubt recall. She showed up looking like a miniature Furiosa, and her visual contrast with VanZant (for instance, in this incredible photo) served as a perfect reminder of the difference between whom the UFC wants to push and whom it probably should, considering the violent nature of this business.

So where’s Namajunas now? Why aren’t we constantly hearing about her, the way it feels like we’re constantly hearing about other, lesser fighters? Why didn’t the VanZant push become the Namajunas push the instant she won that fight?

I started thinking about this when Diaz showed up at the post-fight press conference, wondering out loud whether he’d finally get some support from his employers now that he’d won the big fight. Seems like he should, right? And obviously it matters who the UFC wants to put in front of us and who it doesn’t.

Look at Northcutt, who’s still grinning at cageside on UFC broadcasts while the dude who beat him (the UFC isn’t even concerned with making sure we remember Bryan Barberena’s name) has melted back into the crowd.

I agree that a loss for the UFC’s preferred stars isn’t necessarily a loss for the UFC, but that’s mainly because a) fans love that aspect of the sport, and also b) when a star gets beat up it should, theoretically, create a new star. Why doesn’t the victor get the spoils in MMA? How should a promoter balance the need to highlight some fighters more than others, while also not completely neglecting who wins and loses?

Downes: You mean the same Namajunas whom Dana White called “the next Ronda Rousey” when she was on “The Ultimate Fighter”? it certainly seemed like she was the promotional favorite heading into that title fight with Carla Esparza. These things are fluid. That’s why every single fight is so important. Namajunas went from next big thing to losing some of the extra push. If she beats Tecia Torres in April, you don’t think they’ll be setting her up for a title fight?

As for how a promoter should balance wins and losses vs. personality, I think that’s a case-by-case basis. Wins and losses don’t tell the whole story. A lot of times it’s just a lazy way to fill space (e.g., [Insert fighter] has lost three of his last four). Matt Brown is 20-13 in his career. Diaz is 19-10. Not the best records, but they’re always in entertaining fights.

MMA doesn’t work like “The Highlander.” Just because you beat someone, it doesn’t mean you become them. Personalities matter. We’ll stick with the women’s strawweight division. You tweet/write/podcast about your admiration for Joanna Jedrzejczyk fairly often. You’ve even given her a nickname, and it’s not just because you hate typing Jedrzejczyk.

I don’t remember you spending your time thinking of adorable pet names for Esparza. Why’s that? How come your buddies in the so-called media gravitate toward certain fighters and not others? The UFC’s PR is powerful, but they can’t do it alone.

Fowlkes: First of all, NEVER underestimate what I’m willing to do to avoid typing a really difficult name over and over. Second, maybe one of the reasons Esparza didn’t get a cool nickname is because she had a cup of coffee with the belt before giving it up to Joanna Champion, who, in case you haven’t noticed, is among the last champs left standing after a tumultuous year in UFC titles.

Point is, yes, personalities matter. So do victories, though. I don’t need to see Diaz move into the McMansion or take over the video game cover spot (which, by the way, just became a permanent reminder of the shifting fortunes of pro fighters) just because he beat McGregor. But I do think, after he stepped up and won a big fight, Diaz is deserving of, as he put it, a little help.

The UFC hype machine can’t do it alone, but neither can the fighters. At this point, I’d say a dude like Diaz has moved that stubborn needle, even if he used the Stockton slap to do it.

Downes: A lot of fighters think “the man” is out to get them. Sometimes it’s paranoia, and other times it’s accurate. As much as promoters and matchmakers try to deny it, they do have people that they would like to win. Sometimes, though, those preferred fighters lose and throw a wrench into the plans.

These unexpected outcomes may be inconvenient, but the hype machine will be back with a new program. And when it does, I’ll be the one telling you, “I’m not surprised motherf-cker.”

For more on UFC 196, 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 also writes for UFC.com and UFC 360. Follow them on twitter at @benfowlkesMMA and @dannyboydownes.