twitter google

Ten Reasons Why Miesha Tate Shouldn’t Rematch Ronda Rousey

April 13, 2013; Las Vegas, NV, USA; Cat Zingano reacts to defeating Miesha Tate during the TUF 17 Finale at the Mandalay Bay Events Center. Mandatory Credit: Gary A. Vasquez-USA TODAY Sports

Former Strikeforce champ Miesha Tate will be coaching TUF 18 opposite reigning UFC champ Ronda Rousey – a gig that will inevitably lead to a clash in the Octagon. But we’ve seen these two fighting femmes go at it before, and it ended in pretty conclusive fashion. In fact, it ended in such a way as to leave no doubt as to who’s the superior fighter. Since then, Tate hasn’t exactly been tearing up the competition to earn herself another shot – and yet here we are, with top contender Cat Zingano out with a knee injury and Rousey in need of a dance partner. I don’t know about you, but I can think of ten good reasons why Tate shouldn’t get that rematch with Rousey. And here they are!

  • soundspawn says:

    Most of those are decent (a few repeats) but I have to object with #7. That is an argument, if anything, for why we should disband the women’s 135 division; and a poor argument at that. No one can beat her, so Tate should not get a shot?

    If you say “No one *has* come close” and “As long as she’s *been* competing”… but no, you claim that as long and Rousey chooses to compete, no one will ever even get close to beating her… If that’s how you feel, perhaps you would give me 100:1 odds on each of Rousey’s next 10 fights?

  • MCM says:

    So Miesha shouldn’t get the rematch cause she gets hit during fist fights or be she shouldn’t get the rematch cause it’s a….well….Rematch? Aside from #10 there aren’t any other “reasons” given for why she shouldn’t get a rematch. I don’t understand this article.

  • AlphaOmega says:

    I agree with MCM and soundspawn, cool pictures, but there’s few reasons, each fight had 3 pictures of the same fight. Reasons why I think Tate shouldn’t get a rematch/coaching gig…1 she didn’t earn it, 2 shes coming off a loss, 3 I don’t see her being a good coach because she’s almost as obsessed with Ronda as Mir was with Brock, I can’t think of any more, but there really doesn’t need to be more.

  • AlphaOmega says:

    Oh thought of another one, which isn’t really against Tate but more the UFC. There’s other women fighters who are coming off a win or a win streak, but the UFC picked Tate because they know how much drama there will be between the two of them that’s it. I mean they made it more obvious when they opted to not tell Ronda that it happened, and instead video her actual reactions to walk out into the gym and see her standing there there instead of Zingano.

  • fanoftna33 says:

    All stupid reasons. Tate is the best pick for the UFC and for womens MMA. There first fight was fun and the way these ladies feel for each other will generate great heat on tv and in ppv revenue. Sure Sara McMann would have been a great replacement and they could sell the hell out of two undefeated former olympians going at it but at this point Tate has more recognition that Sara and that means more money. Tate has been around wmma for a long time so I feel that she will have a lot to give out there as a coach as well as Rousey so coaching wise it should be pretty even.

  • Jim Genia says:

    Once upon a time, the best would challenge the champ.

  • MCM says:

    When? When Cain and JDS only had to have one fight after complete bearings? Or when Jones fought 2 MWs in a row? Or Aldo defending twice against fighters that never fought in his division, one if whom was on a two fight skid?
    More “Once upon a time”, when Anderson fought Cote or GSP fought Serra (not evening mentioning Diaz) or when Hughs fought Penn when he was coming off a loss? How bout when a retired Couture fought Sylvia for the belt?

    We like to think fighters getting undeserved title shots are new, but they’ve been around as long as the sport itself. At least Tate really is one of the “best” getting a title shot.

  • Richard Stabone says:

    I don’t think Jim is suggesting this type of marketability-focused matchmaking is unprecedented, but rather that it’s become more & more common. When it comes to putting fights together, there’s always going to be a subjective angle to it… but this has gotten ridiculous over the past year or so. Forget about Cain & JDS getting title shots after just one victory, we’ve recently seen multiple title fights where the challenger is coming off a friggin LOSS.

    When it comes to marketability vs. legitimacy, the UFC has tilted the scale towards maximizing revenue even at the risk of sacrificing legitimacy. I have to think the FOX investment/partnership has played a role in this. If FOX could get the NFL to give the Dallas Cowboys unwarranted appearances in the Super Bowl, they’d be thrilled. Of course, it would jack with the legitimacy of how teams vie for that spot to compete for a title, and fans would be up in arms about it… but things get much more tangled in MMA/boxing, giving promoters like Dana White room to do silly stuff. And since the fans–generally speaking–don’t seem to mind the gimmicky matchups at all, why wouldn’t they continue to do whatever is gonna sell the most? Let the pigs get fat.

  • MCM says:

    But how is this any different than when BJ Penn got a title shot after losing to GSP at UFC 58 (7 years ago, not recently)? In both cases two combatants fought for #1 contendership and a shot at the reigning title holder. In both instances the winner of the fight got injured and was unable to contend for the belt. In both instances the loser of the bout, who would be considered the #2 contender, was then asked to fill in. Again, how is this any different.

    Remember, unlike Chael and Frankie’s title shots (the only two fighters to get them coming of losses) this pairing is the backup plan. It’s OK if things aren’t perfect with the backup plan, that’s why it’s the backup.

  • Richard Stabone says:

    Again, no one is suggesting it’s unprecedented to see a guy get a questionable/undeserved title shot. You’re absolutely right — several years ago, when the depth of talent was nowhere near what it’s rapidly evolved to today, a guy who’s long been considered one of the elite talents of the sport got a title shot even though he’d lost his previous fight. There were some injury circumstances involved, and no other good replacement options (Fitch, Kos and Diego were then up-and-comers with only a couple fights in the UFC, and hadn’t yet earned #1 contender status). But yeah…it’s happened before.

    But things have gotten downright wacky where it’s now a regular occurrence. I mean, we’re talking about the 4th UFC fighter who has “earned” a title shot coming off a loss….in 2013 alone!!

    First it was Frankie Edgar, who got the FW title shot despite coming off a loss and never having even competed at 145lbs. Lamas would have been a perfectly reasonable challenger for Aldo.

    Then it was Diaz, coming off a loss and drug suspension, being awarded with a title shot even though it was painfully obvious Johny Hendricks was the clear-cut #1 contender.

    Next up was Chael Sonnen, which was again a complete joke of a championship matchup. Timing was not an issue, as this crapfest was planned months in advance. There were several guys who would have been far more deserving of a title shot than Chael that the UFC simply decided to overlook, in order to execute its plan intended to provide a jolt to sagging ratings on the UFC reality show.

    Now we’ve got Tate coming off a loss (and having dropped 2 of 3) swooping in for her title shot, which of course also comes attached to the reality show gig.

    Obviously FOX has a vested interest with the reality TV show, and they no doubt have a loud voice in these matters, putting pressure on the UFC decision makers who used to have full autonomy. And overall I’m thrilled the UFC/FOX deal happened, as we now get loads of “free” fights on TV, with high quality production. Plenty of good has come out of the deal. But the trade-off has been lots of desperate money-grab maneuvers that, in my opinion, gradually chip away at the legitimacy of the sport.

  • MCM says:

    You’re comparing apples to oranges. This is not Chael Sonnen, Frankie Edgar, or Nick Diaz (whom I overlooked in my previous post). This situation is almost identical to the one Penn, Hughes, and GSP found themselves in, with the exception of a TV show. And this shot, like that one wasn’t “earned” but bestowed out of lack of a better opponent. Like you said……

    “You’re absolutely right — several years ago, when the depth of talent was nowhere near what it’s rapidly evolved to today, a guy who’s long been considered one of the elite talents of the sport got a title shot even though he’d lost his previous fight. ”

    Can you honestly say that today’s womens BW division is DEEPER than that WW division? Tate is a former world champion, long time top 10-5 female fighter and has a history with the currant champion. Can you seriously name a better Substitute than her (that’s currently on the UFC roster)? I don’t think you can.

  • AlphaOmega says:

    What about McMann? Undefeated olympian just like Ronda, does it have the same drama and hate that Tate and Ronda will have? No, but there’s an angle there with both of them giving the other their first defeat, and seeing which was better during the olympics.

  • Richard Stabone says:

    Truth be told, I’m still lukewarm on WMMA so I don’t have too much of a gripe about this latest episode. If we hadn’t seen all the other nonsense in recent months with guys using a loss as a springboard to a title shot, I’d care even less. But string it all together and it’s becoming a trend I really don’t like.

    If there was no TV show, then you have to give Sara McMann–a fellow former Olympian with an unblemished MMA mark that includes an opening round finish in her Octagon debut–the next title shot over a fighter who’s coming off a loss *and* got dominated by Ronda a short time before that.

    Only when you start to factor in reality TV and ratings and name recognition does Tate become the pick. And that kinda stinks. Like a pair of Tim Sylvia post-fight trunks.

  • MCM says:

    McMann is not a former world champ (in MMA), not a long considered and elite, and doesn’t have a history with the champ. To continue my analogy, think of her as the Josh Koscheck to BJ Penn. Although I don’t think many people would have complained had she gotten the shot, the truth is she’s just now making a name for herself in WMMA and starting to get the recognition she deserves.

    “If we hadn’t seen all the other nonsense in recent months with guys using a loss as a springboard to a title shot, I’d care even less.” – Richard

    That’s the crux of it right there. This is just bad timing coming off the heels of Chael, Frankie, Diaz and even Vitor. Had none of those fights just happened or had this situation arose in a year from now after all this had passed, I doubt it would be considered an issue at all. Tate is the most logical choice for a replacement, but when you look at it in context with 2013 as a whole, it can appear to be favoritism over proper matchmaking.

  • Screenplaya says:

    I secretly hope that his matchup was made ONLY to build interest in the TUF series, and Miesha will “mysteriously” pull out of the fight after the show has aired. I don’t need to see Miesha take another beating.

  • SBERG says:

    I kinna just want to see Ronda slap the shit out of Tate’s boyfriend after the fight…..that would be pure gold…lol

  • AlphaOmega says:

    Yay for resurrecting old articles and making me go through them before realizing it is old. Also Screenplaya, this match up was made just for TUF and the coaches drama, with how long it took to film it, then to air it, then training, I think Cat would of been healed up enough for the fight.

  • SBERG says:

    It’s all about the sell…


You must be logged in to post a comment.