RealGM

A new category for year 4.

Not sure this needs to be a category.

I think its fair to add this category but the contenders are limited compared to the mens side. I voted for Davis. With all due respect to Rousey but she loses points for one of her two wins being a much tougher rematch of a woman she had previously dominated (although she was still dominant in the rematch if that makes any sense). I don't know. It just seems more like Davis has established real momentum in her career while Rousey seems to be treading water despite improving her skill set. Rousey set a pretty high bar that isn't going to be easy to match from here on out.

CPT wrote:Not sure this needs to be a category.

It was either this or Bellator Fighter of the Year. But, I thought Bern would get mad at me when I nominated all former UFC fighters.

Joanne Calderwood. Not exactly ranked opposition but still a great year.

Voted for Hanchak on the poll

I wasn't going to vote, out of protest, but after reading the thread I voted for Rousey, because some of you are being ridiculous.

This isn't like men's fighter of the year, where you have a ton of guys fighting in different weight classes and you have to weigh their accomplishments in a kind of pound for pound manner.

Women's MMA is shallow and concentrated around a few weight classes (only one in the UFC). Rousey had two fights, against top competition (kinda), and won both in dominant fashion.

Anybody who picks someone else is just trying to be cute.

I really don't think its THAT silly. Alexis Davis for example has one more win, shares Carmouche as an opponent. So the difference would be Tate vs Baszler/Sexton for the resume.

Honestly, Tate schmate. She was maimed by Ronda, almost beaten by Kedzie, ktfo brutally by Zingano's knees, and then thrown more times than any human has ever been thrown in mma by Ronda again.

I didn't vote because I'm not educated enough in wmma, but it doesn't seem like it'd be stupid to not vote for Rousey. It probably just depends how you define it right? I mean if you look at resumes and only resumes, that is different than if you look at accomplishments (Rousey fight ufc champ, first female tuf coach, etc.).

I realized in the Fighter of the Year thread that I pretty much said you couldn't give it to anyone who only fought twice, but I do think it's different for women.

Nobody's going to look back at 2013 in WMMA and think of it as the year of Alexis Davis.

Well publicity wise no one beats Rousey obviously. But Honchak beat the #2 and #3 ranked fighters in her division (though admittedly Eye moved up). Rousey fought an opponent who only has one win against an opponent with a winning record, and the loser of a title eliminator.

CPT wrote:I realized in the Fighter of the Year thread that I pretty much said you couldn't give it to anyone who only fought twice, but I do think it's different for women.

Nobody's going to look back at 2013 in WMMA and think of it as the year of Alexis Davis.

So your criteria for fighter of the year isn't just based on what is done in the ring/cage then? I think that's fine, but its not silly to disagree.

REDDzone wrote:

CPT wrote:I realized in the Fighter of the Year thread that I pretty much said you couldn't give it to anyone who only fought twice, but I do think it's different for women.

Nobody's going to look back at 2013 in WMMA and think of it as the year of Alexis Davis.

So your criteria for fighter of the year isn't just based on what is done in the ring/cage then? I think that's fine, but its not silly to disagree.

It's a mix of factors. I think it's certainly a good test to say "the year of ________" and see if it sounds ridiculous. "The year of Barb Honchak." GTFO.

The greatest WMMA fighter currently and probably of all time just had the biggest year of her career. The award belongs to Ronda Rousey.

CPT wrote:I realized in the Fighter of the Year thread that I pretty much said you couldn't give it to anyone who only fought twice, but I do think it's different for women.

Nobody's going to look back at 2013 in WMMA and think of it as the year of Alexis Davis.

I think that's a silly way to look at things. Rousey is the female champion of the UFC and has all their marketing muscle behind her. She sucks up all the attention in Female MMA. What scraps of attention are left are given to Holly Holm. But that's not how you judge who had the biggest year. With all due respect to Rousey but she and Davis shared an opponent. While Davis went the distance with Carmouche and Rousey finished her in a round I would argue that Carmouche gave Rousey more trouble in that one round than she gave Davis in all 3 rounds of their fight. And Tate, while she's hot and tough as hell has struggled a lot. Before her rematch with Rousey she had lost 2 of her previous 3 fights and she getting busted up in the one fight she won before she pulled off an armbar. And with respect to Kedzie her loss to Tate was the second loss in what became a 4 fight losing streak so it isn't as if Tate's one win came against a buzzsaw of an opponent.

I can see the argument for Rousey but there is plenty good reason to give another girl the nod if you actually base it on in cage accomplishments.

skflives wrote:

CPT wrote:I realized in the Fighter of the Year thread that I pretty much said you couldn't give it to anyone who only fought twice, but I do think it's different for women.

Nobody's going to look back at 2013 in WMMA and think of it as the year of Alexis Davis.

I think that's a silly way to look at things. Rousey is the female champion of the UFC and has all their marketing muscle behind her. She sucks up all the attention in Female MMA. What scraps of attention are left are given to Holly Holm. But that's not how you judge who had the biggest year. With all due respect to Rousey but she and Davis shared an opponent. While Davis went the distance with Carmouche and Rousey finished her in a round I would argue that Carmouche gave Rousey more trouble in that one round than she gave Davis in all 3 rounds of their fight. And Tate, while she's hot and tough as hell has struggled a lot. Before her rematch with Rousey she had lost 2 of her previous 3 fights and she getting busted up in the one fight she won before she pulled off an armbar. And with respect to Kedzie her loss to Tate was the second loss in what became a 4 fight losing streak so it isn't as if Tate's one win came against a buzzsaw of an opponent.

I can see the argument for Rousey but there is plenty good reason to give another girl the nod if you actually base it on in cage accomplishments.

I agree with this. Rousey is great, but it will always be the year of Rousey as long as the UFC is pumping her up. She didn't fight the toughest competition this year. Carmouche was hand chosen to make her look good and Tate was coming off a distruction by Zingano.

Rousey is awesome, but I think you can absolutely make an argument for others winning this.

Cammo101 wrote:I agree with this. Rousey is great, but it will always be the year of Rousey as long as the UFC is pumping her up. She didn't fight the toughest competition this year. Carmouche was hand chosen to make her look good and Tate was coming off a distruction by Zingano.

Rousey is awesome, but I think you can absolutely make an argument for others winning this.

I didn't see us falling on the same side of this discussion but I agree 100%. I think its possible that the next couple of years will expose Carmouche and even Tate as somewhat meh fighters. Especially are more hungry women work their way up the division.

REDDzone wrote:

Cammo101 wrote:I agree with this. Rousey is great, but it will always be the year of Rousey as long as the UFC is pumping her up. She didn't fight the toughest competition this year. Carmouche was hand chosen to make her look good and Tate was coming off a distruction by Zingano.

Rousey is awesome, but I think you can absolutely make an argument for others winning this.

I didn't see us falling on the same side of this discussion but I agree 100%. I think its possible that the next couple of years will expose Carmouche and even Tate as somewhat meh fighters. Especially are more hungry women work their way up the division.

I agree with that, but it's going to apply across the board, not just to Carmouche and Tate. Some women considered big names are already slipping (Baszler, Modafferi, Sexton).

Rousey is so clearly the woman performing at the highest level in MMA that we don't need to pick apart records to see it.

CPT wrote:I agree with that, but it's going to apply across the board, not just to Carmouche and Tate. Some women considered big names are already slipping (Baszler, Modafferi, Sexton).

Yea but aren't Shayna and Roxanne kind of considered the first generation of women's fighters? They are older and have more fights and have been in the game longer than Meisha/Carmouche (idk anything about Sexton). Not quite as surprising to see them dropoff after all the fights and as they age. I think Meisha for example is actually pretty young.

Really big fan of Jojo Calderwood... she'll be in TUF20, but Rousey wins it easily. Shame that Zingano was sidelined... there wasn't much competition otherwise.

I always found Modafferi unbearable to watch.. especially after the last TUF. Great personality... but not a good draw as far as fights goes.

rousey for sure. looking forward to mcmann fight. but they should really do the cyborg fight, that s**t would be amazing. sell so many pay per views, those two hate each other. would be crazy hype.

http://mmacult.blogspot.ca/2014/01/rond ... antos.html