Yesterday we posted an interview with Quinton "Rampage" Jackson in which he bashed UFC commentator Joe Rogan for favoritism. Jackson was doing some media in advance of his UFC 144 co-main event against Ryan Bader this Saturday in Japan.
Rogan took the opportunity to respond to Jackson on his Joe Rogan Experience video podcast.
Some quotes:
"I love Rampage. I don't mean to be rude when I assess things. I'm just trying to look objectively and figure out how a dude could be doing better than he's doing."
"I like Rampage as a person. I enjoyed hanging out with him."
"All I'm trying to do is objectively assess what someone could be doing differently."
"I'm just trying to commentate. I'm not looking deep into someone's soul."
"I can't do what I'm supposed to be doing and try to protect someone's feelings."
"When I tell him to throw leg kicks, it's just because the guy has awesome leg kicks."
"The last thing I want to do is add more pressure, add more stress (to a fighter's job)."
They also speculate about why Jackson no longer slams opponents the way he did back in the Pride days, whether or not Joe should be worried the next time he runs into Rampage, and Joe names his all-time fighter.
dude should just man up and admit he gets more excited watching certain guys fight than others. he’s a fan. he’s not always objective. own up to it bro.
i mean he had some moments (example: machida vs. shogun I) but its not like hes completely biased.
i agree that sometimes he gets more excited but i believe he keeps it under control. it is def. more than watchable. yea he gets a lil more hyped up when fighters are making a great grappling fight but hes a jiu jitsu guy, of course hes gonna get hyped up when fights go to the ground. but i dont think he was rooting for certain guys over other guys. (once again, except machida vs. shogun I)
I’m sure Stann is more than capable of calling the action on the ground. He’s not a BJJ or wrestling superstar, but he’s not clueless. He’s been training full-time in those particular disciplines for nearly five years. I am sure he is well versed in the basics.
Especially when he’s had little to no real training since he was still fighting and was doing this as a side job for the most part.
I don’t think anyone realizes that it’s a really hard job to be a good color guy. Takes a lot of work. Kenny has the talent for it. Just needs some more experience.
Kenny has done much more of it than Randy and yet Couture is awesome at it.
If anything Kenny should have a chin up on Rogan. Sure, Joe has all kinds of martial arts experience, but Kenny has been in there on a high level and is also a coach himself. SO all that paired with his experience he should be just starting to pick at his proformance to adjust things, but overall he should have it down.
Back when he called the UFC 75 he had little to no acting experience back then. Kenny has covered major events that have been major events and also on MMA love doing his thing, so he has more experience than couture
I didn’t think anyone else than Dana White actually did this. It annoys me to no end when he’s referring to 10 fight events as “the fight” or “a fight”. Doesn’t make any sense.
And I consider anyone who'd get pissy about saying fight or fights to be an asshole.
It depends on where you’re from. I’ve always heard people say “going to go watch the fight” in Jersey and now out here in WV. It’s not exactly something uncommon.
but his color commentary is pretty goddamn bland. Not to say he couldn’t improve, and he does have some good comments, but he just isn’t talkative enough to be a great commentator.
Personally, I don’t get why everyone makes such a big deal about the commentators. Rogan is good at what he does IMO, and isn’t really as biased for certain fighters, or biased for certain techniques (like low kicks, for example… yes, he points them out when a fighter lands a good low kick, but he also points out when a fighter is landing good knees/ elbows/ punches/ etc.
I believe it is a drawback of the sport. IN other stick and ball sports the guys in the booth may like one or two players, but due to their being so many other players it is a little hard to see the dias and also their commentary does not really matter when it comes to the preception due to the score board telling the tale. There is come grey area when it comes to small things like a guy being safe or out, but overall a run is a rn.
In MMA it is easy for guys in the booth to get attached for fighters because they see and talk to them on a consistant basis, more so Rogan who does a lot of press and other funtions for the UFC with fighters. I think it would be nearly impossible for the guys calling to action to dodge bias completely, but work their hardest to hide it.
Pat done a great job when he called the Lawler fight a while back.
Condit/MacDonald, Garcia/Phan II, Shogun/Machida I, ect. He also gets very dismissive of what is actually going on in the cage sometimes (Edgar/Spencer is a first that comes to mind).
i just don’t think it’s particularly toward bjj fighters. i think he just gets behind the fighters th ufc is trying to push. i don’t mind the bias so much (in Chicago the Bulls’ home announcers are so blatantly biased they don’t even attempt to be objective and I actually like their passion). the problem i see with Rogan is that his bias leaks into his analysis of the fight. Machida/ Shogun he was clearly mentioning Shogun’s strikes primarily, which impacts fans’ perception of who won. it’s fine to back a fighter, but call the fight like it is.
Rogan on the podcast is different from Rogan on the UFC
Not just conspiracies and swearing more, but seriously, if you listened to Aldo/Florian on the broadcast, you’d have thought Florian was beating Aldo at least 48-47. The only person who had Florian winning was actually Subo.
He’s objective most of the time bust some times he has obvious bias, especially with fighters he’s trained with or worked with like Florian and Couture.
I just thought it was interesting. For me it was more the other way around. 1st time I thought it could’ve gone either way, like really 50/50. 2nd time I saw it 3/2 Condit. I thought the judges who had it 4/1 Condit were way off. Thing is I just rewatched the same taping of the fight whereas Joe had 2 different points of view.
side note-listened to my first jr experience podcast a few days ago (with deadmau5) and it was pretty entertaining, with the exception of eddie bravo, who sounded like a ritalin-addled attention whore. dude should become a silent monk.
which helps make him a great color commentary guy. Give me guys like Rogan and Bas over some besuited communications major. Some day he’ll be gone, they’ll replace him with some dull, unbiased drone and we’ll all miss him greatly.
Erm, why the hell would you want a non-fighter as a color guy?
The color guy, in sports, is supposed to be a former professional of that sport with a wealth of information who can speak well. Rogan is neither. One day they will replace him with a fighter who actually knows what he’s talking about and we’ll al be amazed.
I get the feeling Rogan is a former kickboxer like Dana White is a former boxer, as in hanging around a gym and never taking part in an actual fight. Tae- bo baby, tae-bo!
With his Karate, TKD, kickboxing and BJJ background, Rogan is more than qualified, maybe even more than most fighters currently in the UFC. Add to that his experience with cameras and stand up comedy, it’s hard to find a more capable color analyst.
Rogan has experience and is better.
Florian will get better and will be great for the FX and Fuel events. Anik will also be good as he gains experience.
I’ll take a biased Rogan that is an exuberant fan with true knowledge of the sport and a good gift for gab vs. a professional multi-sport announcer that has to study up on MMA before the broadcast because he doesn’t love the sport like Rogan does.
I remember when people used to trash on Chick Hearn's color commentary.
Now we look back on the greatest ever. People just want to bitch and prove how cool they are. Such is the nature of hipster/hardcore/cool-guy types. Joe Rogan is hands down the best MMA analyst on the planet. he has his flaws, but so does everyones mom.
Everyone needs to get over their cool-ass selves and admit what Joe means to MMA.
While I’m pissed, I’m going to punch the next person that uses the term “efforting”
Just like when rampage defied all odds and beat machida biased ass Rogan interviews rampage after the fight trying to promote a rematch like he was dana or something.. Rampage spoke the truth about Rogan and the haters that try to fade him
And rampage said he thought he lost the fight at first because of how the 3rd round played out he believed he won the 1st two rounds.. And that’s all I got to say about that.. you should read my signature
The only reason why rampage said he can have a rematch is because it was a close fight and machida feels like he won even though he didn’t.. You can’t fade what can’t be faded
Rogan goes off on things about the fight sometimes, i’m not sure if it’s a bias or he gets attached to a story line of a fight and beats the shit out of it. One fight i can think of when he was fully bias was the Horn/ Paul Harris fight, he was bad in that fight.
Honestly, I think that is a pretty fair comment by Rogan.
People hate Garcia because he “robs” people, when in reality, he has nothing to do with. He goes out there to put on a show, and it is very entertaining. He is sloppy as fuck, but he puts it all out there. If you hate him because a few of his fights were judged poorly, then you are way more biased than Rogan.
Joe was being a bit hyperbolic. But if your opinion of a fighter is swayed by something that is completely out of their control, I don’t think you really are a fan of the sport. Behaving that way makes a person look like a petty douche bag.
I also thinks rings more true post-Condit and Diaz. Condit has been destroyed by fans for how he fought that fight, while Garcia’s main attribute is his heart and pace. Garcia is the anti-gameplanner.
People don’t like Leonard Garcia because he’s a bad fighter and shouldn’t be wasting a roster space in the UFC. He should be on a nine fight losing streak.
Thats some serious horseshit right there. Inviting the loser into the winner’s post fight speech and then not even letting the winner speak. Rogan has some serious balls on him to do that.
of just bleed type fighters, he goes crazy over guys like rampage, diaz bros, penn, etc. so i dont know where this B.S is coming from, if anyone has a reason to hate on rogan, its sonnen.
watching sonnen/spitsping on mute, it was a landslide victory for sonnen, rogan ignored all the shots sonnen landed, kept repeating “bisping is holding him against the cage” for no good reason, in rd 1 bisping did zero damage against the cage, in rd 2, he landed short elbows, so i gave rd 2 to bisping.
and the shit he said after the fight was more ridiculous, it looked like dana paid him to turn into a bisping fanboy for the night.
but ive noticed his bias’ alot…In the Franklin/Wand, the Aldo/Florian, Shogun/Hendo, Diaz/Condit fights to name a few…I always like to rewactch fights with no commentary. K-flo was doing the same thing in the ellenberger sanchez fight, he had nothing good to say about jaygo
i watch it again on mute, these guys can call themselves, Analysts, Objective, Commentators or whatever, im no fool to fall for it, deep down everyone is a fanboy.
Rogan is just commentating on the fight, not scoring the fight or telling you how it should be scored.
Everyone thought Chael would have a definitive wrestling advantage going into the fight, but Bisping improved his grappling by leaps and bounds. If you’re scoring the fight, that really doesn’t matter as Chael still won the round. But if you’re commentating on the fight, Bisping’s ability to hang with Chael in the grappling department is something that obviously should have been talked about.
tag with their knees up against the cage, also what grappling ? he held him against the cage late rd 1 and didn’t do anything, and rogan acted like that won him the round, before that, sonnen landed hard on the feet, took bisping down and beat him silly like he was a boy, all of that was ignored by rogan. his biased commentating goes a long way in shaping perceptions of the audience.
Sonnen was a massive favorite, and was expected to take Bisping down at will and hold him there. That didn’t happen, and that was the more important fight storyline than Chael beating Bisping in a pretty competitive round (Bisping out-landed him from striking distance, Chael had overall striking with clinch and ground striking added in, as well as two takedowns that Bisping got up from fairly quick).
It’s obvious you don’t like Bisping (I don’t either), but because Rogan didn’t say the exact thing you wanted him to say didn’t mean he did a bad job. He did a solid commentating job in describing the overall flow of the fight; his job is to create an interesting narrative, not to render a scorecard.
sometimes rogan goes off on stuff and neglects the other things that happen. As i stated earlier i believe Joe gets attached to a storyline in the fight and he rides it for the entire fight. Example being Bisping’s ability to stay on his feet vs Sonnen, or Shogun’s ability to land on Machida. Joe tends to go off the rails about one thing and over states it sometimes.
im not taking sides here based on hate for someone...
also i would like to see some stats about the strikes, i think overall sonnen landed more, in rd 1, he went toe to toe with mike, tho his weren’t very technical, they landed nevertheless.
and the 2 TD’s, bisping ate shots before he got up, besides, the point isn’t about sonnen, he didn’t destroy bisping like was expected, its the delusions of grandeur displayed by rogan as he left his table muttering “that was a controversial fight”, what did bisping do to win that fight ?
what did rogan see to sway in his side so much ? the fact that he wasn’t getting beat up like was expected ? how does that help you win rds ? watch the fight on mute, you will see the clear difference. that biased commentary misguided lots of people, and it was evident in the arguments here on BE next morning.
I’ll have to go back and listen to the entire commentary again, but from what I remember it wasn’t like Rogan said it was a robbery or anything, just a close fight. I scored it 29-28 Sonnen, round 1&2 were fairly close and 3 was Chael’s round.
Again, Rogan’s job is to describe the fight in an entertaining way, getting super worked up about his perceived scoring is counter-productive.
this is a prime example of how heavy rogan’s commentary can lay on ppl.
rd 1 started off, they boxed for a while, bisping landed some crisper shots, sonnen answered all of those, a bit harder imo, then got the TD, pushed mike in the cage and did some effective GnP before mike got up, it was around 3.30 of the rd where bisping got him pressed, pretty much did nothing for the remainder 1.30. no way that can be a bisping rd.
he used the same method, landed some good short elbows, some dirty boxing, and clearly stole rd 2, and rd 3 was all chael. it was a close fight, and i see you point about rogan’s methods, whatever maybe his reason, you simply cannot focus on one fighter, and ignore everything the other guy is doing, its very misleading.
Again, I said it was close, not that I scored the first round for Bisping. If things Bisping got in a little more offense or stuffed one of the takedowns I would have scored it Bisping, just like if Sonnen had scored another takedown or done more damage in the 2nd I would have scored it for him. Rogan commented on the takedown and strikes from Chael when they happened, it’s not like he totally ignored them.
Think about it this way, if someone was fighting Werdum and surviving in his guard for most of a round, that would be the biggest think to comment on. In most fights it wouldn’t be worth mentioning too much, but being able to work against an opponents main strength is the biggest thing that needs to be commented on. It absolutely is the thing that needs to be talked about the most as an announcer, even if you thought the round in general went to Werdum.
But Joe’s job isn’t precision scoring, its providing engaging commentary to what’s happening. If you need someone to tell you what to think as far as judging, just get all your mma results from fightmetric updates.
I'm pretty sure Rampage was just messing in that interview.
And if he wasn’t, maybe he should listen to some of Rogan’s advice – there is no element of suprise with Rapage’s game. Yeah, he’s dangerous in the pocket, but fighters have him worked out before they even step foor in the Octagon.
on mania, read some like “im a streetfighter, not a martial artist” about rampage, i didnt read it, but that line pretty much explains his stagnation as a MMA competitor, there are others in the UFC with same stubborn attitude, i wont name names, but we all know who they are, and where they will end up.
there was more to this story than simply Quinton Jackson being an over sensitive baby. The guy is immature, crass, and called acting “gay” when the A-Team bombed at the box office after so many positive things to say about the experience. He’s right about Rogan (though I think Rogan’s bias stems from the narratives he creates around a fight more than the fighters themselves), but to extrapolate criticisms to be insults is stupid, and childish. Only a complete dunce would think Jackson’s response was somehow pointed.
Why Rampage doesn't slam anymore Why Rampage doesn't slam anymore Why Rampage doesn't slam no more
A) people know that it’s coming from Rampage when they go for an armbar or triangle from guard so they either let go (ex. Machida) or they don’t attempt them.
B) You don’t see Rampage in people’s guards much recently.
It's always amusing to hear people being critical of someone....
….without getting their facts straight.
Just the mere fact that Rampage qualified his statement that he “would beat the hell out of Rogan” with “as long as he didn’t get it to the ground” is enough proof that Rogan has enough combat experience to be able to do the job very well.
On the Ronda Rousey episode of the JRE podcast they were all talking about Rogan’s knowledge and I think Eddie Bravo was like “you are top notch when it comes to jits and kickboxing, your american wrestling knowledge is okay and your weak point is your judo and greco”
So part of why Joe says so much about jits and leg kicks is that he is very comfortable with those two disciplines. He isn’t as comfortable with wrestling and judo, so when it’s a wrestler on top and a JJ guy on bottom, he’s just going to gravitate towards describing what the JJ guy is doing because he knows it so well.
Yeah, quite a mature and well argued response from Rogan
He does a decent job, not sure if screaming out load for a minute occasionaly counts as objectionaly analysing the fight tbh, but you gotta have some passion. Saying that the fight’s over too early and perhaps bigging up fighter’s evolution as mixed martial artists a little too much, bigging up guys for title shots too early are occasional flaws, but he’s fine. That fellow he’s partnered with who shares the name of a former world champion professional wrestler has the habit of hyping people and fights up to even more ridiculous levels.
Joe just go and have a cup of....
Joe and talk it out with Rampage…..i am sure he will llisten.
Martin Arredondo - February 21, 2012
great response by rogan
rampage’s comments were really disrespectful and rude but rogan handled it like a pro.
good job rogan
DK_Monster - February 21, 2012
horrible response by rogan
dude should just man up and admit he gets more excited watching certain guys fight than others. he’s a fan. he’s not always objective. own up to it bro.
bmilo - February 21, 2012
what do you mean?
i mean he had some moments (example: machida vs. shogun I) but its not like hes completely biased.
i agree that sometimes he gets more excited but i believe he keeps it under control. it is def. more than watchable. yea he gets a lil more hyped up when fighters are making a great grappling fight but hes a jiu jitsu guy, of course hes gonna get hyped up when fights go to the ground. but i dont think he was rooting for certain guys over other guys. (once again, except machida vs. shogun I)
DK_Monster - February 21, 2012
Eh, Joe is a fan.
He can be very, very biased at times. It’s one of the main reasons I wish we could have someone different doing the fights.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Couture is the only one I'd be interested in as a color analyst
No Trigg, Bas, Frye, Florian, maybe Mir, but the lack of capable commentators in MMA is pretty glaring.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
I actually really like Bonner.
Couture would be fantastic, though. Trigg isn’t bad at all, either. Neither is Florian.
Mir is insufferable at times.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Bonnar is horrendous
Terrible camera presence and doesn’t really describe the action well.
Florian isn’t bad, but he’s doing 99% of the talking to Anik’s 1%. And this has been an issue with him with Todd Harris or Mike Goldberg.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
Eh, I like him. I think it's partly due to his funny voice.
Florian also has only done a few fights. Let’s let him get a bit more experience, first.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Florian has hardly done a "few fights"
He’s done WEC 41 and 49, along with UFC 83, Fight Night 19, TUF 11 Finale, 134, 143 (3D), FX 1, and Fuel 1.
Florian isn’t really a rookie at this. Bonnar’s voice is funny, though. Especially during the Pettis/Bendo Showtime Kick.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
So Florian has done under 10 fights?
We can judge him on that? And a number of those were in between fights for himself. Come on, man. That’s simply not fair.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
10 fights? Dude that's 10 events
Which probably totals well over 100 fights. And he’s had some dry runs with Anik (not broadcast to public) so count those, too.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
Small sample size, but if there's anyone they should
Give a crack at commentary ringside, it’s Brian Stann. Well spoken, knowledgeable, and coherent in his FUEL debut and is doing the next FOX event.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
If Chael can stay out of character long enough
he would probably be a good fit for the job
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
He'd be even worse at calling submissions than Rogan.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
HAHAHAHHA. Brilliant.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
And when the fight gets to the ground, Brian Stann goes and takes a coffee break, or what?
Shnak - February 21, 2012
That's his pee break.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
I’m sure Stann is more than capable of calling the action on the ground. He’s not a BJJ or wrestling superstar, but he’s not clueless. He’s been training full-time in those particular disciplines for nearly five years. I am sure he is well versed in the basics.
Steve4192 - February 21, 2012
No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
James Brady - February 22, 2012
I consider an event a fight.
Let’s not play semantics, here.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Kenny has done enough shows to have the skills down
not perfected or anything, but after 9 events you should start to settle in also Kenny has that gig on MMA live so he has a ton of experience.
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
I completely disagree.
Especially when he’s had little to no real training since he was still fighting and was doing this as a side job for the most part.
I don’t think anyone realizes that it’s a really hard job to be a good color guy. Takes a lot of work. Kenny has the talent for it. Just needs some more experience.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Kenny has done much more of it than Randy and yet Couture is awesome at it.
If anything Kenny should have a chin up on Rogan. Sure, Joe has all kinds of martial arts experience, but Kenny has been in there on a high level and is also a coach himself. SO all that paired with his experience he should be just starting to pick at his proformance to adjust things, but overall he should have it down.
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
Yeah, but Randy's also done acting, etc.
So he has a ton of experience speaking.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Back when he called the UFC 75 he had little to no acting experience back then. Kenny has covered major events that have been major events and also on MMA love doing his thing, so he has more experience than couture
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
So perhaps Randy is more of a natural.
;)
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Ba-Dum-Tish
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
And, frankly, Kenny's fight analysis is far better than Rogan's.
It’s just he speaks out of turn sometimes and can speak over Anik.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
you do?
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
Sure. Why not?
When I go out, I tend to say I’m going to watch “the fight.” Not watch “the event.”
And it was obvious I was referring to entire cards and not a single fight. SS was just playing a game of semantics.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Why not add an “s” and say the FIGTHS?
I didn’t think anyone else than Dana White actually did this. It annoys me to no end when he’s referring to 10 fight events as “the fight” or “a fight”. Doesn’t make any sense.
Horselover Fat - February 21, 2012
A lot of people do it.
Do I give a shit? Not really.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Fine. I consider it lazy and stupid, but opinions differ of course.
Horselover Fat - February 21, 2012
And I consider anyone who'd get pissy about saying fight or fights to be an asshole.
It depends on where you’re from. I’ve always heard people say “going to go watch the fight” in Jersey and now out here in WV. It’s not exactly something uncommon.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
not hating
but you just sited new jersey and west virginia to support your arguement. just sayin’
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
Ain't nothing wrong with either state.
Other than the occasional red neck out here.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
As a guy from NJ
Most people I talk to say “watching the fights this weekend” or “going to the fights.” Going to the fight event just sounds kind of awkward.
Genki Sudo's Choreographer - February 21, 2012
FIGTHS!
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
Damn.
Horselover Fat - February 21, 2012
huh. i say im going to watch the fights
or just tell my wife its time for some ultra-violence.
fight seems weird to me. tomatoes, tomahtoes.
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
Regardless, SS knew what I was saying and wanted to play a game of semantics.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
I actually find it difficult to tell who is who between Anik and Florian
Un Sandpiper - February 22, 2012
I am a huge fan of Randy's,
but his color commentary is pretty goddamn bland. Not to say he couldn’t improve, and he does have some good comments, but he just isn’t talkative enough to be a great commentator.
Personally, I don’t get why everyone makes such a big deal about the commentators. Rogan is good at what he does IMO, and isn’t really as biased for certain fighters, or biased for certain techniques (like low kicks, for example… yes, he points them out when a fighter lands a good low kick, but he also points out when a fighter is landing good knees/ elbows/ punches/ etc.
ElliotMatheny - February 21, 2012
Honestly
I believe it is a drawback of the sport. IN other stick and ball sports the guys in the booth may like one or two players, but due to their being so many other players it is a little hard to see the dias and also their commentary does not really matter when it comes to the preception due to the score board telling the tale. There is come grey area when it comes to small things like a guy being safe or out, but overall a run is a rn.
In MMA it is easy for guys in the booth to get attached for fighters because they see and talk to them on a consistant basis, more so Rogan who does a lot of press and other funtions for the UFC with fighters. I think it would be nearly impossible for the guys calling to action to dodge bias completely, but work their hardest to hide it.
Pat done a great job when he called the Lawler fight a while back.
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
He doesn't emote very well
His genuine moments of shock and surprise come across as deadpan sarcasm.
discoandherpes - February 23, 2012
He's had some really off fights
Condit/MacDonald, Garcia/Phan II, Shogun/Machida I, ect. He also gets very dismissive of what is actually going on in the cage sometimes (Edgar/Spencer is a first that comes to mind).
discoandherpes - February 23, 2012
i agree that he's very biased
i just don’t think it’s particularly toward bjj fighters. i think he just gets behind the fighters th ufc is trying to push. i don’t mind the bias so much (in Chicago the Bulls’ home announcers are so blatantly biased they don’t even attempt to be objective and I actually like their passion). the problem i see with Rogan is that his bias leaks into his analysis of the fight. Machida/ Shogun he was clearly mentioning Shogun’s strikes primarily, which impacts fans’ perception of who won. it’s fine to back a fighter, but call the fight like it is.
lordrubbish - February 21, 2012
Rogan on the podcast is different from Rogan on the UFC
Not just conspiracies and swearing more, but seriously, if you listened to Aldo/Florian on the broadcast, you’d have thought Florian was beating Aldo at least 48-47. The only person who had Florian winning was actually Subo.
He’s objective most of the time bust some times he has obvious bias, especially with fighters he’s trained with or worked with like Florian and Couture.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
what i found interesting was that he said he thought Diaz beat Condit
after the fight, i’m assuming on his podcast, whereas during the broadcast he said he thought Condit won.
lordrubbish - February 21, 2012
After he watched it..
as in not live but on a TV he felt that Diaz won. There is nothing wrong with that.
Crazynutts - February 21, 2012
I never said there was anything wrong
I just thought it was interesting. For me it was more the other way around. 1st time I thought it could’ve gone either way, like really 50/50. 2nd time I saw it 3/2 Condit. I thought the judges who had it 4/1 Condit were way off. Thing is I just rewatched the same taping of the fight whereas Joe had 2 different points of view.
lordrubbish - February 21, 2012
Agreed...
100%….Rogan said nothing.
Taiter - February 21, 2012
what dk said. rogans a boss.
side note-listened to my first jr experience podcast a few days ago (with deadmau5) and it was pretty entertaining, with the exception of eddie bravo, who sounded like a ritalin-addled attention whore. dude should become a silent monk.
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
Eddie was HAMMERED that ep
they all were
LRaunThaDamaja - February 21, 2012
but he was the only one that made me want to kill something innocent.
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
I agree with you just pointing out the alcohol factor
Anytime you got a
DJartist in studio for an interview and you spend for than 15 seconds discussing your own musical “achievements”….that’s a bad lookLRaunThaDamaja - February 21, 2012
not to mention
Rogan has said a 100x more positive things about Quinton than analytical observations.
As much as I love him Rampage can be a bit of whiner.
TheCode - February 21, 2012
This
Loving Rampage as a fighter doesn’t mean you have to side with every one of his bizarro rants.
Dave Strummer - February 21, 2012
Yeah when he heard them
His reaction was this:
Martin Arredondo - February 21, 2012
That facial expression is similar to mine whenever I hear Goldie say something
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
I'm surprised your face isn't permenantly like that then.
pud333 - February 21, 2012
It's hard to fix my face into a normal position
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
The love plot thickens.
This is like highschool all over, but in HD.
yonsson - February 21, 2012
Rampage doesnt slam because no one is going to fall for it at this point.
Ricardo Arguello - February 21, 2012
Also no stomps or soccer kicks
menckenstein - February 21, 2012
My thinking exactly.
He tried against Machida, who saw it coming a mile away.
Jeflee - February 21, 2012
plus he's not the biggest guy in his division anymore, nor the youngest
lordrubbish - February 21, 2012
i dont think that matters all too much. He’s still strong enough to lift a guy up and slam him down
Ricardo Arguello - February 21, 2012
i'm sure he is
what i think he lost is speed and explosiveness, making his slams easier to defend.
still, i hope he gets a slam or two before he retires. a KO slam win over Bader would blow the roof off in Japan!
lordrubbish - February 21, 2012
and it wasn't like he slammed people 3 times per fight
it didn’t happen very often at all, it’s like saying “why don’t nick diaz gogoplata people any more?”
the guy with the big nose - February 21, 2012
reply fail
should be a response to Ricardo Arguello
the guy with the big nose - February 21, 2012
*doesn't
the guy with the big nose - February 21, 2012
Rogan is far from perfect
which helps make him a great color commentary guy. Give me guys like Rogan and Bas over some besuited communications major. Some day he’ll be gone, they’ll replace him with some dull, unbiased drone and we’ll all miss him greatly.
Goldberg, on the other hand …
Bookhouse - February 21, 2012
this
agree 100%. especially the goldberg part…
the guy with the big nose - February 21, 2012
Erm, why the hell would you want a non-fighter as a color guy?
The color guy, in sports, is supposed to be a former professional of that sport with a wealth of information who can speak well. Rogan is neither. One day they will replace him with a fighter who actually knows what he’s talking about and we’ll al be amazed.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Rogan is a former kickboxing competitor and Tae Kwon Do national champion
It’s funny how people shit on Rogan for not being a pro fighter yet marvel at anything to do with Stephen Quadros bar his skeletor face.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
I don't like Quadros at all.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
I get the feeling Rogan is a former kickboxer like Dana White is a former boxer, as in hanging around a gym and never taking part in an actual fight. Tae- bo baby, tae-bo!
sheikybaby - February 21, 2012
Actually he was a champion in TKD.
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
He did tons of full-contact TKD, which is basically guys standing around with their hands down kicking each other in the head.
Horselover Fat - February 21, 2012
With his Karate, TKD, kickboxing and BJJ background, Rogan is more than qualified, maybe even more than most fighters currently in the UFC. Add to that his experience with cameras and stand up comedy, it’s hard to find a more capable color analyst.
Shnak - February 21, 2012
It's pretty easy to find a more capable color analyst
Give me Florian any day of the week over him.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Florian isn’t horrible, but he’s no Rogan.
Shnak - February 21, 2012
He's no Bisping either.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
Haha I knew this would come.
Shnak - February 21, 2012
that's what she said
colonel panic - February 21, 2012
How about the guy get some experience first?
Rogan’s been doing it for a long time now. He’s learned how to be a color guy. Florian is completely green right now.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
that's neither here nor there
Rogan has experience and is better.
Florian will get better and will be great for the FX and Fuel events. Anik will also be good as he gains experience.
F'n Clownshoes - February 21, 2012
Even then, it's still a somewhat silly argument
Phil Simms is one of the best QBs in Giants history yet doesn’t know shit from shinola when commentating.
Meanwhile Mike Mayock, who barely had any experience in the NFL, is widely regarded as one of the best analysts in the sport.
Of course, anyone can understand football, but I don’t think you need to have a ton of credentials to be a proper analyst.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
I can't stand Mayock and I think he frequently fucks up.
I don’t think Simms is bad at all. His only problem is that CBS makes him be such a huge fucking Jets homer.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Mark Sanchez is amazing and you know it!
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
I can't stand what CBS has done with Simms.
It’s disgraceful.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
Phil Simms stated that Tim Tebows mechanics are almost a mirror of Tom Brady
And no one but Dan Dierdorf can more confidently come to false conclusions like Phil Simms when watching slow motion replays.
joker24 - February 21, 2012
"For it to be a forward pass, the ball has to go FORWARD"
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
Not everyone is technical and a student of the game
discoandherpes - February 23, 2012
Florian gets tongue tied often.
He isn’t bad as a commentator, but I definitely prefer Rogan.
ElliotMatheny - February 21, 2012
This...
I’ll take a biased Rogan that is an exuberant fan with true knowledge of the sport and a good gift for gab vs. a professional multi-sport announcer that has to study up on MMA before the broadcast because he doesn’t love the sport like Rogan does.
Snake_Pliskan - February 21, 2012
Exactly, or some fartball wearing purple lipstick
Skoobs - February 21, 2012
I remember when people used to trash on Chick Hearn's color commentary.
Now we look back on the greatest ever. People just want to bitch and prove how cool they are. Such is the nature of hipster/hardcore/cool-guy types. Joe Rogan is hands down the best MMA analyst on the planet. he has his flaws, but so does everyones mom.
Everyone needs to get over their cool-ass selves and admit what Joe means to MMA.
While I’m pissed, I’m going to punch the next person that uses the term “efforting”
Skoobs - February 21, 2012
efforting?
The Lethal Haze - February 21, 2012
sl
Steve4192 - February 21, 2012
shenanigans?
Snake_Pliskan - February 21, 2012
I'm still wondering wtf efforting means, and where it was said
The Lethal Haze - February 21, 2012
Rogan is biased as hell
Just like when rampage defied all odds and beat machida biased ass Rogan interviews rampage after the fight trying to promote a rematch like he was dana or something.. Rampage spoke the truth about Rogan and the haters that try to fade him
psychoblack - February 21, 2012 via mobile
I agree with everything you just said.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
Rampage himself said he thought he lost the fight and offered machida a rematch so psychoblack has just been faded
benten20 - February 21, 2012 via mobile
Bullshit. You can never fade psychoblack.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
Rampage faded himself is what you are saying.
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
First off slap yoself
And rampage said he thought he lost the fight at first because of how the 3rd round played out he believed he won the 1st two rounds.. And that’s all I got to say about that.. you should read my signature
psychoblack - February 21, 2012 via mobile
Rampage probably should have lost that fight, but judges gave it to him so oh well
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
but i just did fade you so the unfadeable has been faded.
second he himself said that machida can have a rematch anytime he wants
benten20 - February 21, 2012
Slap yoself twice
The only reason why rampage said he can have a rematch is because it was a close fight and machida feels like he won even though he didn’t.. You can’t fade what can’t be faded
psychoblack - February 21, 2012 via mobile
i conceded defeat below if you can see
benten20 - February 21, 2012
Two time two time
Jonathan. - February 21, 2012
ElliotMatheny - February 21, 2012
Because he is unfadeable.
Sugel Mendoza - February 21, 2012
No one is unfade-able.
As long as the banhammer exists!
UK MMA MAN - February 21, 2012
They can’t ban psychoblack. There would be riots!
Horselover Fat - February 21, 2012
City on fire
ElliotMatheny - February 22, 2012
benten, i love you
BUT SLAP YO SELF!
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
if your telling me to then i must do this
benten20 - February 21, 2012
I agree, psychoblack
What’s your favorite King’s X song?
menckenstein - February 21, 2012
Nice! I just pulled out Tapehead on the way to work today
Shaun32887 - February 21, 2012
Great album
Underrated band.
menckenstein - February 21, 2012
love the new sig p.b!
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
I love how he decided to own the persona he was given.
Sugel Mendoza - February 21, 2012
Rogan goes off on things about the fight sometimes, i’m not sure if it’s a bias or he gets attached to a story line of a fight and beats the shit out of it. One fight i can think of when he was fully bias was the Horn/ Paul Harris fight, he was bad in that fight.
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
Worst bias was Garcia/Phan II
I have no idea what that shit was about.
“If you don’t like Leonard Garcia you’re not a fan of the sport”.
SSreporters - February 21, 2012
Well Garcia has the judges under his spell as well, so i can kinda give joe a pass.
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
Honestly, I think that is a pretty fair comment by Rogan.
People hate Garcia because he “robs” people, when in reality, he has nothing to do with. He goes out there to put on a show, and it is very entertaining. He is sloppy as fuck, but he puts it all out there. If you hate him because a few of his fights were judged poorly, then you are way more biased than Rogan.
Warbreezy - February 21, 2012
never thought of it like that! recd.
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
Still, it's possible to not like him and still be a fan of the sport
But I do agree that most of the animosity he receives is a result of the judges scoring for him, rather than anything he himself has done.
Shaun32887 - February 21, 2012
Of course it is possible.
Joe was being a bit hyperbolic. But if your opinion of a fighter is swayed by something that is completely out of their control, I don’t think you really are a fan of the sport. Behaving that way makes a person look like a petty douche bag.
Warbreezy - February 21, 2012
I also thinks rings more true post-Condit and Diaz. Condit has been destroyed by fans for how he fought that fight, while Garcia’s main attribute is his heart and pace. Garcia is the anti-gameplanner.
GogoPlatter - February 21, 2012
That's not the only reason people don't like him
People don’t like Leonard Garcia because he’s a bad fighter and shouldn’t be wasting a roster space in the UFC. He should be on a nine fight losing streak.
discoandherpes - February 23, 2012
The worst part of Rogan anouncing that fight
Was that he interviewed Garcia instead of Phan.
Thats some serious horseshit right there. Inviting the loser into the winner’s post fight speech and then not even letting the winner speak. Rogan has some serious balls on him to do that.
The Lethal Haze - February 21, 2012
rogan is a fanboy...
of just bleed type fighters, he goes crazy over guys like rampage, diaz bros, penn, etc. so i dont know where this B.S is coming from, if anyone has a reason to hate on rogan, its sonnen.
watching sonnen/spitsping on mute, it was a landslide victory for sonnen, rogan ignored all the shots sonnen landed, kept repeating “bisping is holding him against the cage” for no good reason, in rd 1 bisping did zero damage against the cage, in rd 2, he landed short elbows, so i gave rd 2 to bisping.
and the shit he said after the fight was more ridiculous, it looked like dana paid him to turn into a bisping fanboy for the night.
carmine99 - February 21, 2012
I luv rogan
but ive noticed his bias’ alot…In the Franklin/Wand, the Aldo/Florian, Shogun/Hendo, Diaz/Condit fights to name a few…I always like to rewactch fights with no commentary. K-flo was doing the same thing in the ellenberger sanchez fight, he had nothing good to say about jaygo
JonBon Joey - February 21, 2012
Any time a fight is close....
i watch it again on mute, these guys can call themselves, Analysts, Objective, Commentators or whatever, im no fool to fall for it, deep down everyone is a fanboy.
carmine99 - February 21, 2012
Rogan is just commentating on the fight, not scoring the fight or telling you how it should be scored.
Everyone thought Chael would have a definitive wrestling advantage going into the fight, but Bisping improved his grappling by leaps and bounds. If you’re scoring the fight, that really doesn’t matter as Chael still won the round. But if you’re commentating on the fight, Bisping’s ability to hang with Chael in the grappling department is something that obviously should have been talked about.
Balrog - February 21, 2012
not when they are playing....
tag with their knees up against the cage, also what grappling ? he held him against the cage late rd 1 and didn’t do anything, and rogan acted like that won him the round, before that, sonnen landed hard on the feet, took bisping down and beat him silly like he was a boy, all of that was ignored by rogan. his biased commentating goes a long way in shaping perceptions of the audience.
carmine99 - February 21, 2012
Sonnen was a massive favorite, and was expected to take Bisping down at will and hold him there. That didn’t happen, and that was the more important fight storyline than Chael beating Bisping in a pretty competitive round (Bisping out-landed him from striking distance, Chael had overall striking with clinch and ground striking added in, as well as two takedowns that Bisping got up from fairly quick).
It’s obvious you don’t like Bisping (I don’t either), but because Rogan didn’t say the exact thing you wanted him to say didn’t mean he did a bad job. He did a solid commentating job in describing the overall flow of the fight; his job is to create an interesting narrative, not to render a scorecard.
Balrog - February 21, 2012
Part of what he said is true
sometimes rogan goes off on stuff and neglects the other things that happen. As i stated earlier i believe Joe gets attached to a storyline in the fight and he rides it for the entire fight. Example being Bisping’s ability to stay on his feet vs Sonnen, or Shogun’s ability to land on Machida. Joe tends to go off the rails about one thing and over states it sometimes.
Still one of the best in the business
Riley_96 - February 21, 2012
im not taking sides here based on hate for someone...
also i would like to see some stats about the strikes, i think overall sonnen landed more, in rd 1, he went toe to toe with mike, tho his weren’t very technical, they landed nevertheless.
and the 2 TD’s, bisping ate shots before he got up, besides, the point isn’t about sonnen, he didn’t destroy bisping like was expected, its the delusions of grandeur displayed by rogan as he left his table muttering “that was a controversial fight”, what did bisping do to win that fight ?
what did rogan see to sway in his side so much ? the fact that he wasn’t getting beat up like was expected ? how does that help you win rds ? watch the fight on mute, you will see the clear difference. that biased commentary misguided lots of people, and it was evident in the arguments here on BE next morning.
carmine99 - February 21, 2012
Stats at fightmetric
I’ll have to go back and listen to the entire commentary again, but from what I remember it wasn’t like Rogan said it was a robbery or anything, just a close fight. I scored it 29-28 Sonnen, round 1&2 were fairly close and 3 was Chael’s round.
Again, Rogan’s job is to describe the fight in an entertaining way, getting super worked up about his perceived scoring is counter-productive.
Balrog - February 21, 2012
1st rd wasn't close at all....
this is a prime example of how heavy rogan’s commentary can lay on ppl.
rd 1 started off, they boxed for a while, bisping landed some crisper shots, sonnen answered all of those, a bit harder imo, then got the TD, pushed mike in the cage and did some effective GnP before mike got up, it was around 3.30 of the rd where bisping got him pressed, pretty much did nothing for the remainder 1.30. no way that can be a bisping rd.
he used the same method, landed some good short elbows, some dirty boxing, and clearly stole rd 2, and rd 3 was all chael. it was a close fight, and i see you point about rogan’s methods, whatever maybe his reason, you simply cannot focus on one fighter, and ignore everything the other guy is doing, its very misleading.
carmine99 - February 21, 2012
Again, I said it was close, not that I scored the first round for Bisping. If things Bisping got in a little more offense or stuffed one of the takedowns I would have scored it Bisping, just like if Sonnen had scored another takedown or done more damage in the 2nd I would have scored it for him. Rogan commented on the takedown and strikes from Chael when they happened, it’s not like he totally ignored them.
Think about it this way, if someone was fighting Werdum and surviving in his guard for most of a round, that would be the biggest think to comment on. In most fights it wouldn’t be worth mentioning too much, but being able to work against an opponents main strength is the biggest thing that needs to be commented on. It absolutely is the thing that needs to be talked about the most as an announcer, even if you thought the round in general went to Werdum.
Balrog - February 22, 2012
Just because a guy does better than expected
Doesn’t mean he won the fight.
discoandherpes - February 23, 2012
No it doesn't. I scored it 29-28 Chael.
But Joe’s job isn’t precision scoring, its providing engaging commentary to what’s happening. If you need someone to tell you what to think as far as judging, just get all your mma results from fightmetric updates.
Balrog - February 26, 2012
And then he said Wand is his favorite all-time -
Which is just funny since he was trying to clear things up with Rampage, and then immediately brings up his biggest rival in history.
CBrey - February 21, 2012
i too think that was intentional on Rogan's part, lolz
kinda like a backhanded insult.
carmine99 - February 21, 2012
I'm pretty sure Rampage was just messing in that interview.
And if he wasn’t, maybe he should listen to some of Rogan’s advice – there is no element of suprise with Rapage’s game. Yeah, he’s dangerous in the pocket, but fighters have him worked out before they even step foor in the Octagon.
Still love watching him fight though.
@KatanaClothing - February 21, 2012
there was an article this morning.....
on mania, read some like “im a streetfighter, not a martial artist” about rampage, i didnt read it, but that line pretty much explains his stagnation as a MMA competitor, there are others in the UFC with same stubborn attitude, i wont name names, but we all know who they are, and where they will end up.
carmine99 - February 21, 2012
Today, I Learned
That Joe Rogan is biased.
RobtWeaver - February 21, 2012
I didn't realize
there was more to this story than simply Quinton Jackson being an over sensitive baby. The guy is immature, crass, and called acting “gay” when the A-Team bombed at the box office after so many positive things to say about the experience. He’s right about Rogan (though I think Rogan’s bias stems from the narratives he creates around a fight more than the fighters themselves), but to extrapolate criticisms to be insults is stupid, and childish. Only a complete dunce would think Jackson’s response was somehow pointed.
David Castillo - February 21, 2012
Why Rampage doesn't slam anymore Why Rampage doesn't slam anymore Why Rampage doesn't slam no more
A) people know that it’s coming from Rampage when they go for an armbar or triangle from guard so they either let go (ex. Machida) or they don’t attempt them.
B) You don’t see Rampage in people’s guards much recently.
Robust23 - February 21, 2012
When I watch that video, I close my eyes and pretend that other guy is GSP.
Because that would be awesome.
McKinley B. Noble - February 21, 2012
when i watch any video that involves men on the ground
i pretend both of them are gsp.
gspmademegay - February 21, 2012
perfection.
Body Triangle - February 21, 2012
Then watch Joe with GSP here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3N5Rnx37O0
sexysassytravismmafan - February 21, 2012
It's always amusing to hear people being critical of someone....
….without getting their facts straight.
Just the mere fact that Rampage qualified his statement that he “would beat the hell out of Rogan” with “as long as he didn’t get it to the ground” is enough proof that Rogan has enough combat experience to be able to do the job very well.
On the Ronda Rousey episode of the JRE podcast they were all talking about Rogan’s knowledge and I think Eddie Bravo was like “you are top notch when it comes to jits and kickboxing, your american wrestling knowledge is okay and your weak point is your judo and greco”
So part of why Joe says so much about jits and leg kicks is that he is very comfortable with those two disciplines. He isn’t as comfortable with wrestling and judo, so when it’s a wrestler on top and a JJ guy on bottom, he’s just going to gravitate towards describing what the JJ guy is doing because he knows it so well.
Luke Nelson - February 21, 2012
Rampage and Rogan are both awesome
And the fact that they challenge each other is even more awesome.
By the way, GSP Vs. Diaz must happen!
Bill P. - February 21, 2012
Yeah, quite a mature and well argued response from Rogan
He does a decent job, not sure if screaming out load for a minute occasionaly counts as objectionaly analysing the fight tbh, but you gotta have some passion. Saying that the fight’s over too early and perhaps bigging up fighter’s evolution as mixed martial artists a little too much, bigging up guys for title shots too early are occasional flaws, but he’s fine. That fellow he’s partnered with who shares the name of a former world champion professional wrestler has the habit of hyping people and fights up to even more ridiculous levels.
UK MMA MAN - February 21, 2012
commentate?
Yeesh.
Sure, sure, it’s a linguistic back formation that’s been around for a long time, but it just makes ya sound like a goober.
icastico - February 22, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bloody Elbow to post a comment.