Sean Strickland is the Same as Michael Bisping 10 Years Ago?

That's a little too insulting to Michael Bisping.

Boy... that's a sentence I thought I'd never say.
 
Gabe said:
Consistent top 5-10 middleweight with no punching power, always in shape, beats anyone outside the top 7,
Click to expand...
  1. 8Gegard Mousasi
  2. 9Uriah Hall
  3. 10Derek Brunson
  4. 11Thales Leites
  5. 12Dan Henderson
  6. 13Tim Kennedy
  7. 14Rafael Natal
  8. 15Thiago Santo

Mousasi and Kennedy would beat Bisping. It's a disgrace he was 10-8 and nearly koed by Henderson.
Could maybe get nuked by the big punchers here too


8 Derek Brunson
9 Roman Dolidze
10 Jack Hermansson
11 Kelvin Gastelum
12 Nassourdine Imavov
13 Brendan Allen
14 Andre Muniz
15 Chris Curtis

I see Sean winning against most guys or at least having a decently close decision . Beside Dolidze maybe, nobody should be able to wipe the floor with him.


I think Sean wins more fights in his respective top 7-15 but not by much.
 
StonedLemur said:
Have you figured out why sir?...im curious lol
Click to expand...

The short version is that I've always been less impressed by Bisping than most fans...but the same is true only more so for Strickland.

The medium version is that my thoughts on Bisping are complicated....but regardless of my thoughts about him, he's no jab-and-parry-rinse-and-repeat specialist like Strickland.

Bisping may have been overrated (IMO) but he was a game fighter who was good (if not great) everywhere. Whereas Strickland is certainly a puzzle and hard to beat, but he's also not a game fighter who's willing to compete wherever the fight may take him.

Just because both of them fight at 185, both were pretty hard to beat, and neither of them have one-punch-ko-power, comparing their fighting styles is very poor analysis. IMO.
 
Last edited:
SeattleFightFan said:
The short version is that I've always been less impressed by Bisping than most fans...but the same is true only more so for Strickland.

The medium version is that my thoughts on Bisping are complicated....but regardless of my thoughts about him, he's no jab-and-parry-rinse-and-repeat specialist like Strickland.

Bisping may have been overrated (IMO) but he was a game fighter who was good (if not great) everywhere. Whereas Strickland is certainly a puzzle and hard to beat, but he's also not a game fighter who's willing to compete wherever the fight may take him.

Just because both of them fight at 185, both were pretty hard to beat, and neither of them have one-punch-ko-power, comparing their fighting styles is very poor analysis. IMO.
Click to expand...

Damn, that was a great reply and it even made sense... can't hate on that sir lol.
 
Masturbin said:
  1. 8Gegard Mousasi
  2. 9Uriah Hall
  3. 10Derek Brunson
  4. 11Thales Leites
  5. 12Dan Henderson
  6. 13Tim Kennedy
  7. 14Rafael Natal
  8. 15Thiago Santo
Mousasi and Kennedy would beat Bisping. It's a disgrace he was 10-8 and nearly koed by Henderson.
Could maybe get nuked by the big punchers here too


8 Derek Brunson
9 Roman Dolidze
10 Jack Hermansson
11 Kelvin Gastelum
12 Nassourdine Imavov
13 Brendan Allen
14 Andre Muniz
15 Chris Curtis

I see Sean winning against most guys or at least having a decently close decision . Beside Dolidze maybe, nobody should be able to wipe the floor with him.


I think Sean wins more fights in his respective top 7-15 but not by much.
Click to expand...
To be honest Mousasi is a bit overrated. I mean a great fighter top 5-10, but he underperformed do often, lost fights due to being passive or just looked off, it could be nad against volume cardio machine like Bisping. Mousasi also wasn't the hardest puncher. I picked Mousasi against Weidman for example. I think Bisping could beat Kennedy in rematch. There's a reason why Bisping was relevant for so many years, while some fighters had very short prime and were washed
 
michi972 said:
I don't think everyone was injuried. Probably only Bisping was willong to take this fight on such a short notice
Click to expand...
I don't remember all the details but there was an uproar on Sherdog about that fight. Bisping didn't deserve it, he'd already been badly beaten by Rockhold, nobody gave him a chance or wanted to see that fight. And someone made a big thread explaining why Bisping was the best choice because everyone else was injured or had fought too recently or whatever. Probably not all were injuries but there were many more deserving fighters who just weren't ready to fight.
 
michi972 said:
To be honest Mousasi is a bit overrated. I mean a great fighter top 5-10, but he underperformed do often, lost fights due to being passive or just looked off, it could be nad against volume cardio machine like Bisping. Mousasi also wasn't the hardest puncher. I picked Mousasi against Weidman for example. I think Bisping could beat Kennedy in rematch. There's a reason why Bisping was relevant for so many years, while some fighters had very short prime and were washed
Click to expand...
I think Mousasi would beat Bisping. He may have had a better jab than the count matched with his iron jaw he could walk Bisping down.
 
NoContest said:
I don't remember all the details but there was an uproar on Sherdog about that fight. Bisping didn't deserve it, he'd already been badly beaten by Rockhold, nobody gave him a chance or wanted to see that fight. And someone made a big thread explaining why Bisping was the best choice because everyone else was injured or had fought too recently or whatever. Probably not all were injuries but there were many more deserving fighters who just weren't ready to fight.
Click to expand...
That's the price fighters pay id they are on Johny Hendricks mod between fights. Bisping was ready to fight through whole year and it paid off, he was also on a 3 fight winning streak and was in top 10 for years. Pena got ts against nunes after one win. His whole fighter CV was why he deserved a title fight. 145 today is built of fighters who "don't deserve ts". Max smoked almost everyone, but he lost to Volk 2 times
 
They fight kinda similar, lots of powder puff punching. Bisping has much better wins though
 
mkt said:
Nope, Rich was objectively a better fighter. He beat the same Wand twice who beat Bisping. He also went to a close SD with prime Hendo and forced him to go back to his D1 days. The same Hendo sent Bisping to another dimension in the opening minutes of the fight. Those were all fights roughly in the same era. Both also got KO's by TRT Belfort. And please don't bring up a 40-year old, gimp leg Anderson whom Bisping barely beat. Rich fought the absolutely best version of Anderson who would've pulverized Bisping.
Click to expand...
<TrumpWrong1>
 
mkt said:
Nope, Rich was objectively a better fighter. He beat the same Wand twice who beat Bisping. He also went to a close SD with prime Hendo and forced him to go back to his D1 days. The same Hendo sent Bisping to another dimension in the opening minutes of the fight. Those were all fights roughly in the same era. Both also got KO's by TRT Belfort. And please don't bring up a 40-year old, gimp leg Anderson whom Bisping barely beat. Rich fought the absolutely best version of Anderson who would've pulverized Bisping.
Click to expand...

Bisping destroyed Cung Le right after Cung Le 1 shotted Rich Frankin. Rich also had 2 working eyes when he got folded by Cung Le. Bisping beat him with 1.
 
I think Bisping was a clean fighter in the pre-usada era. That alone makes his record more impressive. You can argue that certain fight outcomes, against known PED users, may have been different. Oh and the one eye thing.

Bisping better than Strickland any day.
 
If Dricus upsets Izzy, I could see Strickland beating him for the belt, then Usman moving up and beating Strickland.
 
mkt said:
Nope, Rich was objectively a better fighter. He beat the same Wand twice who beat Bisping. He also went to a close SD with prime Hendo and forced him to go back to his D1 days. The same Hendo sent Bisping to another dimension in the opening minutes of the fight. Those were all fights roughly in the same era. Both also got KO's by TRT Belfort. And please don't bring up a 40-year old, gimp leg Anderson whom Bisping barely beat. Rich fought the absolutely best version of Anderson who would've pulverized Bisping.
Click to expand...
Nothing objective about this take at all. Anderson was a “gimp”, but no mention that Bisping fought him with 1 eye. If you hate Bisping just say so. No need to write an essay attempting to belittle his performances and accomplishments.
 
Last edited:
michi972 said:
That's the price fighters pay id they are on Johny Hendricks mod between fights. Bisping was ready to fight through whole year and it paid off, he was also on a 3 fight winning streak and was in top 10 for years. Pena got ts against nunes after one win. His whole fighter CV was why he deserved a title fight. 145 today is built of fighters who "don't deserve ts". Max smoked almost everyone, but he lost to Volk 2 times
Click to expand...
I'm all for giving people shots when they don't deserve them. You never know when a random fighter will just match well with the champ. Dillashaw is another example, even though in his case PEDs played an important role, as we know.

But there were definitely people ahead of Bisping at the time and they were put on hold as he went on to fight Henderson - also ranked abysmally low - and then GSP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,680
Messages
55,508,728
Members
174,800
Latest member
kechan123

Share this page

Back
Top