Cain Velasquez is the new UFC heavyweight champ because he kept his cool under pressure while Brock Lesnar did not.
Cain Velasquez looked like a champion Saturday night.
The newly crowned Mexican-American kept himself composed during the UFC 121 main event when the action got frantic, whereas Brock Lesnar was flying, flopping and flailing and ultimately turtling on his way to relinquishing the UFC heavyweight belt.
Though it begs the question: was Brock Lesnar ever really that great?
After Lesnar dethroned Randy Couture in November 2008 to become the title-holder in just his third fight in the Octagon, many had him firmly planted in their pound-for-pound Top 10 lists (including myself).
He was powerful, he was athletic and he looked unstoppable. Frank Mir's face could attest to that.
Then Lesnar met Shane Carwin, and the opening to that bout was almost a carbon copy of Saturday's. If a different referee had been working that July bout, it might have been Carwin we saw fighting Velasquez in Anaheim.
But Lesnar managed to survive, and thanks to Carwin's over-eager approach (not that you could blame him) he had no energy left when Lesnar was able to rally for a submission. And we all praised Brock's resilience.
Yet after watching it develop similarly for Velasquez, who didn't make the same mistake that Carwin did, it raised doubts about whether Lesnar ever was the well-rounded MMA fighter some made him out to be.
To really know I think we need to see how he does in his next appearance, but I don't think the rumoured trilogy fight against Frank Mir will accomplish that. While it may be very marketable, what do we learn if Lesnar does what he did to Mir the last time they met (utterly dominate him)?
Mir is coming off a lacklustre showing against a has-been like Mirko Cro Cop, so I don't see any reason why it would end any differently.
There are also hints that Lesnar wants to take some time off, so would Mir be willing to wait? What I would really like to see is a rematch between Lesnar and Carwin, but the latter is now going to be sidelined for a while after an injury has forced him to pull out of his Jan. 1 fight against Roy Nelson. As an alternative, Lesnar vs. Nelson would do just fine (because we know from the dos Santos fight, Nelson has a great chin).
Either way, the mystique around Lesnar is gone.
(But I hope that doesn't mean The Undertaker will have his way and we'll see Brock back in the WWE…)
For a bonus anecdote regarding Lesnar, go to (Big Game) James Brydon's Twitter account.
Veterans in danger?
Tito Ortiz and Patrick Cote are no strangers to each other, having fought to a decision six years ago. But they have more than that in common. Both were absolute top contenders just two years ago, shortly after going on five-fight win streaks. Both had to take about 18 months off in the timespan since due in part to injuries.
Now each has lost three straight. Could a pink slip be in their futures?
Including a draw against Rashad Evans, Ortiz has actually gone five fights without a victory, a record that would put your average fighter in much more precarious shape. Not to mention the man who holds the record for most successful UFC light-heavyweight title defences doesn't seem to have the killer instinct any more.
But he is still The Huntington Beach Bad Boy and still has marketability. Love him or hate him, it seemed most of the Anaheim crowd had one feeling or another for him, and that's always good for business.
Cote, on the other hand, is in much bigger danger of being cut. The Rimouski, Que., native is one of the most exciting strikers in the UFC, when he's on. But I wonder: in the year-and-a-half that Cote was sidelined after he blew out his leg in his title fight against Anderson Silva, did the game pass him by?
Cote got a big unlucky in his return fight in May, feeling he was illegally spiked by Alan Belcher on a slam moments before he was submitted. But against Lawlor, Cote simply had no answer for the American's wrestling.
He needed a better game plan. Instead of looking for the knockout blow and exposing himself to the takedown I believe he should have guarded against the takedown first and tried to push Lawlor into a standing clinch situation where his opponent would be unable to smother him on the ground and neutralize his striking.
Whether or not Cote made any tactical mistakes in the fight, I think he made one regarding his career two years ago when he decided not to pull out of the bout against Silva, hoping his knee would hold up even though he had re-injured it in training just a few weeks prior. It would have been an extremely tough decision to potentially sacrifice your title shot. Yet instead he lost the championship fight, and has had to play catch-up in his UFC career since.
And he may about to be bumped out of the race.
Shields does his thing in UFC debut
One man who didn't make a tactical mistake in his fight career is Jake Shields, who opted to abandon his perch as Strikeforce middleweight champion for a chance to become a contender in the UFC.
Not that it was difficult to choose to come to "the biggest show in town." Could he have made more money had he stayed with Strikeforce? Maybe initially. Before he left the organization he also said on record he couldn't complain about headlining fights on CBS.
But he could never have been the star there that he's capable of being now that he's with the UFC.
He didn't exactly make an overwhelmingly great first impression, earning a split decision over Martin Kampmann that many fans thought should have gone the other way. Even UFC co-owners Dana White (Shields) and Lorenzo Fertitta (Kampmann) were split on who they thought clearly won.
But I felt Shields won two of the three rounds simply by doing what he does. Get on top of his opponent, control him and dominate positions.
Does he still deserve a welterweight title shot? I think so. Fifteen straight wins is still 15 straight wins. And White seemed to suggest the same in the post-fight press conference, effectively giving Shields a mulligan because it's tough fighting for the first time in the UFC.
"I don't think any differently about (Shields) today than I did yesterday," White said Saturday night.
Shields may not have the cachet that GSP does. But to his detractors, I ask, is Shields any more boring than Georges St-Pierre? (Not that I think GSP is boring.) I say no.
And if he were to beat him (or Josh Koscheck, should he become champ) … well, then Shields will become just as big a star.
