Petition For Evan Tanner

[Tapout2GJJ]

Petition to posthumously induct Evan Tanner into the UFC's hall of fame. Before you begin to say "he is not hall of fame worthy", please remember Ken Shamrock is in there, and his only notable UFC win is Dan Severn.

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/evantanner

[36thDisciple]

#4585

[Crax]

Ken shamrock is in because he was one of the early "pioneers of mma". I don't think you can use that criteria for everyone. What reason would you be putting Tanner in for? One time champ? Should Carlos Newton be in the hall?

I'm not trying to hate on Tanner, but that would make the criteria pretty weak for getting in. I guess if everyone that has ever been a champ gets in, he should be in there, but it's hard to say he deserves it based on his fighting accomplishments.

[Merlin]

Is a petition necessary? Do you know that the UFC has no intention of posthumously inducting him already?

Do online petitions ever work? That's rhetorical, but I'll answer it anyway: no.

[chuck]

I dont think he is deserving of a spot.

[MilkChan]

I dont think he is deserving of a spot.

this

[S.R.]

Is a petition necessary? Do you know that the UFC has no intention of posthumously inducting him already?

Do online petitions ever work? That's rhetorical, but I'll answer it anyway: no.

Didn't a petition get one of the UFN's to be a 3hr time slot when it was originally scheduled for a 2hr time slot? Maybe I'm shady on that. I drink.

I don't think Tanner should be inducted into the hall of fame. Shamrock was a pioneer of the sport and paved the way for everyone else, so his circumstances are a bit different.

I'd like Evan to be recognized, though. No doubt. Maybe dedicate one of the events to him, or have an in memoriam during an event and reflect on his career for a few minutes.

The HOF should be for the absolute best and the trendsetters.

[chuck]

this

you just touched me Lara.








I liked it.

[Whining Pussy]

i think the only reason i stay is because they think i'm tru life stupid. but really i make better comic boox so they gonna burn in hell.
haha
amma go write a thread about it
uh oh
comic boox
lol
?
in the evan tanner petition thread
and tell them to move it to bare knux
please move this to bare knux. my bad.

[heckyl]

i think the only reason i stay is because they think i'm tru life stupid. but really i make better comic boox so they gonna burn in hell.
haha
amma go write a thread about it
uh oh
comic boox
lol
?
in the evan tanner petition thread
and tell them to move it to bare knux
please move this to bare knux. my bad.


im not moving it. everybody should see this.

[S.R.]

From Dave Meltzer:

"--Dana White said this morning that they will be dedicating Wednesday night's live show on Spike from Omaha, headlined by Houston Alexander vs. Eric Schafer, to Evan Tanner and that they will be airing an Evan Tanner TV tribute show on Spike. White said they've also put together 30 second tribute spots for Tanner that will be airing soon."

This is perfect. Good on Zuffa.

[36thDisciple]

Good enough.

[dragomort]

+1 for Zuffa

[kcb]

Yeah, good for Zuffa.

I would like to see Evan get in based on the fact that he was a title holder and one of the first true mixed martial artists. By that, I mean he was dangerous wherever the fight went and could finish fights by submission, GnP, and had decent striking as well. Unfortunately, his long and public alcohol induced hiatus did a lot to tarnish his legacy, I think. Instead of him getting back on the horse and making noise in the MW division while he was still one of the top 5 MW's in the UFC, he chose to drink and then write MySpace blogs about it.

He also had 17 UFC fights which I think is some kind of record or something, right? Anyway, he went 11-6 in the UFC, but could have easily been 12-5 as the pre hobo Tanner would have walked through Kendal Grove easily.

Those reasons are flimsy, I think, but I'm not 100% convinced of Shamrock's and Coleman's HOF status, either. All Shamrock has given the UFC is embarrassing "super fights". Coleman pioneered the head butt, getting kicked in the face, and gassing out.

All I'm saying is the UFC HOF obviously isn't reserved for the pioneers, so Evan should be considered based on his accomplishments. If he never gets inducted, though, I could definitely see why.

[chuck]

Yeah, good for Zuffa.

I would like to see Evan get in based on the fact that he was a title holder and one of the first true mixed martial artists. By that, I mean he was dangerous wherever the fight went and could finish fights by submission, GnP, and had decent striking as well. Unfortunately, his long and public alcohol induced hiatus did a lot to tarnish his legacy, I think. Instead of him getting back on the horse and making noise in the MW division while he was still one of the top 5 MW's in the UFC, he chose to drink and then write MySpace blogs about it.

He also had 17 UFC fights which I think is some kind of record or something, right? Anyway, he went 11-6 in the UFC, but could have easily been 12-5 as the pre hobo Tanner would have walked through Kendal Grove easily.

Those reasons are flimsy, I think, but I'm not 100% convinced of Shamrock's and Coleman's HOF status, either. All Shamrock has given the UFC is embarrassing "super fights". Coleman pioneered the head butt, getting kicked in the face, and gassing out.

All I'm saying is the UFC HOF obviously isn't reserved for the pioneers, so Evan should be considered based on his accomplishments. If he never gets inducted, though, I could definitely see why.

yeah but thats one of my UFC highlights. go chef!

[Mad Processor]

Although I liked Tanner, he does not deserve a HOF spot imo.

[J@ckson]

If he was alive today, he wouldn't be considered. That being said, it`s still sad that he`s not.(alive)

[Bruisiful Punch]

I signed but dare I say that I am not sure he deserves to be there ? It was tragic what happened to the guy but lets not let his death sugar coat his achievements. Hypothetically speaking if he was alive today and inducted I am pretty sure most people would be "WTF?!?!?". Thats the yardstick that should be used in my opinion. Its best to keep the criteria tight on something like a hall of fame as its makes it all the more illustrious when people are inducted.

Having said that I wont have a problem with him being inducted just that it might be on account of him dying as apposed to his achievements in the cage which is slightly questionable.

Perhaps a tribute of some kind. An Ultimate Fight Night in the same vien as the Andy Hug thing.

EDIT : Just read the thread. They are doing that. Much more befitting.

[adamn]

Petition to posthumously induct Evan Tanner into the UFC's hall of fame. Before you begin to say "he is not hall of fame worthy", please remember Ken Shamrock is in there, and his only notable UFC win is Dan Severn.

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/evantanner

Ken Shamrock did alot for the sport, and look at his record before he fought Tito. He was respectable.. I personally think he should be inducted, the first ever middleweight champion, are you kidding me? He's was with the UFC for longer than most fighters could ever dream of being, he was one of the better gate keepers IMO. If you could beat Tanner you had a place in the sport.

[Bishop]

old, been posted once already :mad:

damn time warp/worm hole

[Ratt]

4688
RIP

[Sir Gibbs]

Tanner's got a great story behind him, and was a very likeable guy. But he wouldn't be inducted into the HOF if he was alive, so why should it happen just because he's died? It's pretty patronising if anything.

If he gets in just because he was a champ at one point, then I want to see Dave Menne get in first.

[adamn]

he wouldn't be inducted into the HOF if he was alive, so why should it happen just because he's died? It's pretty patronising if anything.

you're just prejudice against dead people!

You're probably right, but first MW champ is something worthy of being inducted, maybe not now, but eventually.

[kcb]

How do we know he wouldn't have been inducted if he was alive? You can't say that with any certainty. Who is to say that he wouldn't have retired and worked the booth for the UFC for a few years and then been inducted?

[holden636]

Even Tanner should, without question, be in the UFC hall of fame. Watching Machinemen's highlight video (http://blip.tv/play/Ac2bPI3dPA) makes you remember everything that Evan accomplished. After he had been away from the sport for a while, i sort of forgot how long his career was.

[dopefish]

I think almost all modern Zuffa UFC champions should be in the hall of fame. They won the fucking title. That should be enough. It's pointless to have a hall of fame with only 5 people in it. Lets let the people in who should be remembered. Thats what it should be for.

[Sir Gibbs]

Seriously, did anyone see Tanner as a future hall of famer before the story of his death broke? I didn't and don't remember anyone else discussing him as such.

You think about the current guys who would go into a future general mma hall of fame, Fedor, Wandy, Chuck, Randy, (already in UFC one obviously) Tito, Sak, Hughes etc. They all have far and away greater legacies then Evan Tanner. Maybe I'm just being to elitest? Perhaps Carlos Newton should join him in the HOF?

Evan had a long career from the early days in the UFC and won a title, but seriously who were his biggest wins? Baroni twice, Terrell on his 2nd UFC fight, Lawler on his first fight at MW fresh off a KO loss to Diaz. Tanner didn't even defend his title.

He seemed to be a great guys and everything, RIP and all that. He was a good capable fighter, just not a great one. Randy, Wand or Sak's stories are woven into the fabric of MMA, Tanner's isn't. I can imagine telling my grandkids about the time Tanner triangled Justin Levens.

[S.R.]

I think almost all modern Zuffa UFC champions should be in the hall of fame. They won the fucking title. That should be enough. It's pointless to have a hall of fame with only 5 people in it. Lets let the people in who should be remembered. Thats what it should be for.

No, it's not. UFC (current era, not that shoddy early era) has only been around for a few years. In order for the HOF to uphold it's integrity, the amount of people in it need to be small. What's the point of a HOF if any Tom, Dick or Jane is inducted?

[adamn]

We should kill Jason Lambert so he can be inducted..

[Sir Gibbs]

We should kill Jason Lambert so he can be inducted..

Too much effort, why not just induct Gilbert Aldana?

[dragomort]

Talking up the legitimacy of the HoF as being to pure for Evan when he trained himself into MMA and into a champion of the sport in the big show is a bit much. Especially when you consider how magnificent Coleman, Severn and Shamrock's legacies are.

[Crax]

So you are saying a one time champ should be in the HOF? What about a two time champ? Should Bustamante be in the UFC hall of fame? He only fought 3 times I think in the UFC, but won the title and defended the title which is more than Tanner did as a champ and Lindland is a better win than any of Tanners.

What about Barnett? Newton? Menne? Should they get in?

Ignoring the side stories, Tanner was a one time champ in an extremely weak division at the time he won it.

[dragomort]

So you are saying a one time champ should be in the HOF? What about a two time champ? Should Bustamante be in the UFC hall of fame? He only fought 3 times I think in the UFC, but won the title and defended the title which is more than Tanner did as a champ and Lindland is a better win than any of Tanners.

What about Barnett? Newton? Menne? Should they get in?

Ignoring the side stories, Tanner was a one time champ in an extremely weak division at the time he won it.

I'm just saying don't make the HoF into a paragon of virtue and validity. I could make a case for Tanner as easily as over half their HoF roster. Whether Tanner should be in depends more on what their standards are that day than if he is truly an all time great or not. I don't mind him not getting in, but I'd like to hear a reason that doesn't throw Coleman, Severn and/or Shamrock under that same logical bus to be run over. The only thing that really clearly seperates them now is Tanner coming in slightly later than the others and weighing less.

[Crax]

I think in any hall of fame like baseball, football etc, it is easiest for the beginning guys. Some of the numbers the old time players put up probably wouldn't get them in the hall if they put them up today.

I don't think you can quite make the comparison of Tanner to those earliest guys. I can go along with the reasoning for Shamrock etc as it's not something you can keep using for criteria. When you compare Tanner to other fighters of the same era, he doesn't stand out. You can at least make the case of Shamrock standing out during his initial timeframe.

[S.R.]

Guys like Royce, Shamrock, Severn and Coleman were the trendsetters. They were the best at the time and set the way for the greats right now. You look at the greats right now like Anderson and Fedor, and in 10-15 years, they may not look as good either because the new guys will be EVEN BETTER.

[kcb]

Seriously, did anyone see Tanner as a future hall of famer before the story of his death broke? I didn't and don't remember anyone else discussing him as such.

I understand what you're saying and see where you're coming from, but think it's a little unfair. Discussions about future HOF'ers are sparse in general and it takes tragedies like this or even retirement to spark such a discussion. Not inducting him based on "well, no one talked about it while he was alive" is pretty weak, I think.


Evan had a long career from the early days in the UFC and won a title, but seriously who were his biggest wins? Baroni twice, Terrell on his 2nd UFC fight, Lawler on his first fight at MW fresh off a KO loss to Diaz. Tanner didn't even defend his title.

Baroni was 5-2 and 5-3 at the times he fought Tanner and was considered a major threat to anyone in the division. It wasn't until many years later that it was discovered that Baroni is a complete joke.

Dave Terrell was hyped as the second coming of Rickson after knocking Matt Lindland out. Sure, now we know that he's just an injury prone Jiu Jitsu guy, but give credit to Evan for going in there and beating the snot out of him.

Robbie Lawler was 8-2 and thought to be the next big thing out of the Miletich camp. Currently he's like a top 10 MW, so yeah, another good win for Tanner.


He seemed to be a great guys and everything, RIP and all that. He was a good capable fighter, just not a great one. Randy, Wand or Sak's stories are woven into the fabric of MMA, Tanner's isn't. I can imagine telling my grandkids about the time Tanner triangled Justin Levens.

What stories are you going to tell your grandkids about Dan Severn, Mark Coleman or Ken Shamrock?

[dragomort]

I think in any hall of fame like baseball, football etc, it is easiest for the beginning guys. Some of the numbers the old time players put up probably wouldn't get them in the hall if they put them up today.

I don't think you can quite make the comparison of Tanner to those earliest guys. I can go along with the reasoning for Shamrock etc as it's not something you can keep using for criteria. When you compare Tanner to other fighters of the same era, he doesn't stand out. You can at least make the case of Shamrock standing out during his initial timeframe.

True enough. He stood out a bit to me, but not as some epic force by any means, just as entertaining and inspiring when you think about being self-taught like that. I don't think there were too many at all from the second generation that did stand out though save very few and I doubt you'll get a better chance to start ushering that era in than now. I wouldn't be displeased or find it all that wrong if he wasn't inducted honestly, but he's worthy of consideration at least.

[Crax]

What stories are you going to tell your grandkids about Dan Severn, Mark Coleman or Ken Shamrock?

I think we've covered that a few times already, Pioneers of a sport get in any hall of fame easier than the later guys. Cousy, Barry, etc would probably get thoroughly abused by the guards of today, but that's not who they are compared against. They were the best at the time they played.

Tanner was a title holder for all of 4 months before losing it to a guy he already had a loss against. As much as you want to try and hype up Baroni, only the most blind were calling him a great fighter even when he won a few fights in the UFC. He was 3-2 in the ufc before tanner beat him twice. Hardly the best around at the time.

[chuck]

Guys like Royce, Shamrock, Severn and Coleman were the trendsetters. They were the best at the time and set the way for the greats right now. You look at the greats right now like Anderson and Fedor, and in 10-15 years, they may not look as good either because the new guys will be EVEN BETTER.

doesnt make sense. you can only be measured relatively and in your time.

and one problem with coleman, ken annd severn etc is they didnt make enough money in their day and so continue fighting thereby threatening their status. and continue to be given chances when they shouldnt.

[S.R.]

doesnt make sense. you can only be measured relatively and in your time.

What do you mean?

[dragomort]

What do you mean?

History has a way of shading events according to the present outlook. Trying to retroactively rate things accurately given that is a harsh task at best. Plus, there's a certain inaccuracy in trying to mentally put future fighters in with past fighters and come out with a truly accurate picture by any stretch of the imagination. Things are always changing in reality and perception, so segregating everything into the timeline is an important aspect in accurately quantifying results.

[kcb]

I think we've covered that a few times already, Pioneers of a sport get in any hall of fame easier than the later guys. Cousy, Barry, etc would probably get thoroughly abused by the guards of today, but that's not who they are compared against. They were the best at the time they played.

Tanner was a title holder for all of 4 months before losing it to a guy he already had a loss against. As much as you want to try and hype up Baroni, only the most blind were calling him a great fighter even when he won a few fights in the UFC. He was 3-2 in the ufc before tanner beat him twice. Hardly the best around at the time.

How in the mother of fuck is Coleman a pioneer? All he did was follow the wrestling blue print Severn drew up 3 years earlier. Oh yeah, and he head butted people.

I feel the same way about Shamrock. What did that guy bring to the UFC to consider him a pioneer? He gave us multiple boring super fights and his two biggest wins were against Kimo and Severn. Did he even win a UFC championship? That's a serious question, because I really don't know.

Did he bring superior technique or ability? No, in terms of submissions he did nothing we hadn't seen from Royce. Suffice to say, he's not exactly known for his striking or wrestling, either. He was just a beefcake with a good reputation from Pancrase.

The only true pioneers or elite fighters in the HOF are Royce Gracie and Randy Couture and Dan Severn. The rest are just as borderline as Evan Tanner.

[Johnny Toetags]

Here's my take on it.


It's called a Hall of Fame.

Fame.

Is Gracie famous?

Yes.

Is Shammy? Is Coleman? Is Severn??

Sure. To us fans. For better or worse, they're famous. Legendary.

Is Tanner?

Yup. To us fans.

It's not the Wall of Best Legitimate P4P Fighters Eva.

It's the Wall of Fame.

Besides, it's not like MMA has many candidates and much legitimacy yet. And ANOTHER point, it's the UFC's hall of fame. Not the MMA hall of fame.

Did Tanner accomplish alot in the UFC? Yup. Did he put on good fights? Yes. Was he a memorable figure? Damn right he was. Was he a champ? A headliner? For a while, yeah.

I have no problem with him being included.

Get off your high horses people.

[kcb]

Here's my take on it.


It's called a Hall of Fame.

Fame.

Is Gracie famous?

Yes.

Is Shammy? Is Coleman? Is Severn??

Sure. To us fans. For better or worse, they're famous. Legendary.

Is Tanner?

Yup. To us fans.

It's not the Wall of Best Legitimate P4P Fighters Eva.

It's the Wall of Fame.

Besides, it's not like MMA has many candidates and much legitimacy yet. And ANOTHER point, it's the UFC's hall of fame. Not the MMA hall of fame.

Did Tanner accomplish alot in the UFC? Yup. Did he put on good fights? Yes. Was he a memorable figure? Damn right he was. Was he a champ? A headliner? For a while, yeah.

I have no problem with him being included.

Get off your high horses people.

That's it, you're getting repped.

[Crax]

Sweet, I can't wait to start my Carlos Newton petition. The ONLY DBJJ practitioner to hold a title in the ufc and he held it 50% longer than Tanner too. A whole 6 months!

If the criteria is "have a lot of fans", than Tanner is a shoo in and maybe Nick Diaz can make it too.

[kcb]

Sweet, I can't wait to start my Carlos Newton petition. The ONLY DBJJ practitioner to hold a title in the ufc and he held it 50% longer than Tanner too. A whole 6 months!

If the criteria is "have a lot of fans", than Tanner is a shoo in and maybe Nick Diaz can make it too.

Comparing Carlos Newton to Evan Tanner is a little newbish and to be frank, you're better than that.

[Crax]

Well, obviously my opinion of a HOF fighter is different than some others here. Going by fighting record/accomplishments, why does Tanner deserve it?

If you want to go by FAME as in famous like JTT does, then ok, Tanner probably would qualify and I don't need anymore explanation. I just don't buy it by fighting accomplishments in the ring/cage.

Would Bustamante have been better for you? Famous for being on the wrong side of split decisions? Best at convincing 1 out of 3 judges he was winning? Only guy to sub someone twice in one UFC match?

[kcb]

Well, obviously my opinion of a HOF fighter is different than some others here. Going by fighting record/accomplishments, why does Tanner deserve it?

If you want to go by FAME as in famous like JTT does, then ok, Tanner probably would qualify and I don't need anymore explanation. I just don't buy it by fighting accomplishments in the ring/cage.

Would Bustamante have been better for you? Famous for being on the wrong side of split decisions? Best at convincing 1 out of 3 judges he was winning? Only guy to sub someone twice in one UFC match?

You've compared Busta and Newton to Evan who collectively don't have as many wins as Tanner did. Why so biased? So far all you've done is compare apples to oranges.

[chuck]

Started a good discussion in the end. Unfortunately, along with the entry of guys like Ken, the HOF is more of a promotional tool for the UFC so far than a genuine HOF as yet.

[Crax]

No, apples to oranges would be Tanner to Severn or Shamrock. Bustamante had less UFC wins but better ufc wins and was a two time title holder. I'm trying to get a clear picutre of your qualifications for getting in. I don't think Busta or Newton deserve to get in at all, but the outstanding qualification that Tanner has (title holder), they do as well.

If you want him in because he won some, lost some, and held the title one time but you love him, then fine.

Chuck, Hughes, Couture, Ortiz wouldn't even have me question their place in a UFC hall of fame. Having Tanner get in seems to be setting the qualification bar on the low side.

[kcb]

No, apples to oranges would be Tanner to Severn or Shamrock. Bustamante had less UFC wins but better ufc wins and was a two time title holder. I'm trying to get a clear picutre of your qualifications for getting in. I don't think Busta or Newton deserve to get in at all, but the outstanding qualification that Tanner has (title holder), they do as well.

If you want him in because he won some, lost some, and held the title one time but you love him, then fine.

Chuck, Hughes, Couture, Ortiz wouldn't even have me question their place in a UFC hall of fame. Having Tanner get in seems to be setting the qualification bar on the low side.

Busta went 3-1 (a whole 4 fights) with the UFC with his biggest win over Matt Lindland.

Newton went 3-3 (6 fights) with the UFC with his biggest win being against Pat Miletich.

They were both title holders, but very much non factors considering they had 10 fights between them.

Evan gave us 17 fights. He did more than "win some, lose some". He was a top contender for much of his career in the UFC and win, lose, or draw he put on good fights and were in some good wars. He had a storied career with the UFC. He made his debut at UFC 18 as one of the few complete mixed martial artist in existence.

So yeah, you're comparing apples to oranges. You compared Carlos fucking Newton to Evan Tanner with a straight face.

Comparing apples to apples is finding the obvious similarities in borderline HOF statuses between Coleman and Shamrock and Evan Tanner.

[dragomort]

I really used to like Carlos Newton (note the past tense) :(

[Bruisiful Punch]

Started a good discussion in the end. Unfortunately, along with the entry of guys like Ken, the HOF is more of a promotional tool for the UFC so far than a genuine HOF as yet.

You do have a very valid point there. If Shamrock is in there then Tanner has just as much of a claim along with a long list of others.

[Bruisiful Punch]

I really used to like Carlos Newton (note the past tense) :(

Thats because somewhere back in doldrums of history long before he decided to become a can he was a very good fighter :D

http://i11.tinypic.com/8a0vki9.gif

http://i27.tinypic.com/2n7nq11.jpg

[dopefish]

I think in any hall of fame like baseball, football etc, it is easiest for the beginning guys. Some of the numbers the old time players put up probably wouldn't get them in the hall if they put them up today.

I don't think you can quite make the comparison of Tanner to those earliest guys. I can go along with the reasoning for Shamrock etc as it's not something you can keep using for criteria. When you compare Tanner to other fighters of the same era, he doesn't stand out. You can at least make the case of Shamrock standing out during his initial timeframe.

How? What did Shamrock do? Shamrock became famous because the UFC wanted him famous. He LOST ufc1 remember. He also had some horrible fights. Dan Severn 2 was horrible. Royce Gracie 2 was horrible. He was pure marketing.

[Sir Gibbs]

I understand what you're saying and see where you're coming from, but think it's a little unfair. Discussions about future HOF'ers are sparse in general and it takes tragedies like this or even retirement to spark such a discussion. Not inducting him based on "well, no one talked about it while he was alive" is pretty weak, I think.



Baroni was 5-2 and 5-3 at the times he fought Tanner and was considered a major threat to anyone in the division. It wasn't until many years later that it was discovered that Baroni is a complete joke.

Dave Terrell was hyped as the second coming of Rickson after knocking Matt Lindland out. Sure, now we know that he's just an injury prone Jiu Jitsu guy, but give credit to Evan for going in there and beating the snot out of him.

Robbie Lawler was 8-2 and thought to be the next big thing out of the Miletich camp. Currently he's like a top 10 MW, so yeah, another good win for Tanner.



What stories are you going to tell your grandkids about Dan Severn, Mark Coleman or Ken Shamrock?

I'm not saying anyone has to of directly said, "hey, I think fighter A will one day make the hall of fame" for someone to get inducted in the future. But you do get a general vibe when talking about fighters, everyone knew Randy was going in way before the event happened. And that's not my only point, from another perspective, I don't think looking at his career now he's HOF worthy.

I see what you're saying, I think fundamentally it boils down to me having a higher expectation list from a HOF'er than you.

You also have a funny way of bending the facts to suit your opinion. You're quick to point out how high Baroni & Terrell were pre-Tanner fight and ignore them afterwards. But when it comes to Lawler, you decide it's important to factor in the success he's had post-Tanner fight. Baroni, Terrell & Lawler are good wins, just not HOF wins.

Coleman & Severn both won multiple UFC tournaments & the superfight/heavyweight belt. They deserve their HOF spots. Shamrock sucks.

[Bruisiful Punch]

Here's my take on it.


It's called a Hall of Fame.

Fame.

Is Gracie famous?

Yes.

Is Shammy? Is Coleman? Is Severn??

Sure. To us fans. For better or worse, they're famous. Legendary.

Is Tanner?

Yup. To us fans.

It's not the Wall of Best Legitimate P4P Fighters Eva.

It's the Wall of Fame.

Besides, it's not like MMA has many candidates and much legitimacy yet. And ANOTHER point, it's the UFC's hall of fame. Not the MMA hall of fame.

Did Tanner accomplish alot in the UFC? Yup. Did he put on good fights? Yes. Was he a memorable figure? Damn right he was. Was he a champ? A headliner? For a while, yeah.

I have no problem with him being included.

Get off your high horses people.

It might well be called the Hall of Fame but this is just a term of phrase and not necessarily indicative of its purpose. There also isnt any hall or not one that I am aware of. Oddly enough the term "Best Legitimate P4P Fighters Eva" that you use actually rings far more accurate as to the actual purpose of sporting hallsl of fame.

If we are to believe that its to garner the same prestige as the International Boxing Hall of Fame then it cant be letting guys in on sentimentality which is basically what this is. They induct fighters post humously but not simply because they happened to die and also be a boxer. They have to have achieved something within the sport which stands out as head and shoulders above what is the norm.

Also Brock Lesnar is a famous MMA fighter. A washed up Roy Jones Jr making a crossover would also be known to all MMA fans and non fans alike. Tank Abbott is just as well known if not more well known that Coleman Upon your rationale of simply being famous or a householad name surely these guys fit the bill too right ?

A hall of fame isnt simply how entertaining, how big your mouth was, how well marketted you were or that you died in a tragic manner. It should be an honor that is saved only for the best within the sport who set a benchmark in talent, achievement or both. Something for fighters to strive to. It certainly shouldnt be used as some kind of memorial because that simply isnt its purpose.

I wont have a problem with him being inducted as I dont really care too much about the UFC HOF but history will remember it as a sympathy vote and nothing more.

[Bruisiful Punch]

How? What did Shamrock do? Shamrock became famous because the UFC wanted him famous. He LOST ufc1 remember. He also had some horrible fights. Dan Severn 2 was horrible. Royce Gracie 2 was horrible. He was pure marketing.

I agree with this completely. Shamrock is more famous for crushing defeats and horrendously boring fights than anything else. He has some good wins in Pancrase. Everything outside of this has been pure hype.

[TheSandman]

Wow, I was always told this was a "nice" forum. lol I believe the idea behind inducting Evan is the amount of fights he fought in the UFC or at least that is what I have heard. Evan was truly a warrior inside and out of the cage. With that being said, the UFC does not just create a Hall of Fame induction ceremony. It is a thought out production and process that happens every so often.

[dragomort]

Wow, I was always told this was a "nice" forum. lol I believe the idea behind inducting Evan is the amount of fights he fought in the UFC or at least that is what I have heard. Evan was truly a warrior inside and out of the cage. With that being said, the UFC does not just create a Hall of Fame induction ceremony. It is a thought out production and process that happens every so often.

Depends on who's talking :p Thanks for joining though! I noticed you never said whether he should get a spot in the HoF in your opinion... ;) It's a touchy subject in weird ways.

[TheSandman]

It isn't a touchy subject for me and in truth it doesn't matter if I believe he should or so and so believes he shouldn't. We are all given the right to an opinion but that's what it is-an opinion and the decision is left to someone else.


However, I believe he should be inducted because Evan lived his life as a warrior. I don't know the requirements they go by to induct someone but at one time or another in Evan's life I am sure he has met all of them.

[dragomort]

It isn't a touchy subject for me and in truth it doesn't matter if I believe he should or so and so believes he shouldn't. We are all given the right to an opinion but that's what it is-an opinion and the decision is left to someone else.


However, I believe he should be inducted because Evan lived his life as a warrior. I don't know the requirements they go by to induct someone but at one time or another in Evan's life I am sure he has met all of them.

If we can't whine about our opinions we wouldn't be on the internet ;) I'd agree with your assessment more or less though.