This evening, Anwar Perez made his Column debut here on the Torch with an argument that Rashad Evans should have been the one to face Lyoto Machida next, and that a combination of his pride to face Quinton "Rampage" Jackson after TUF 10 and Rampage's decision to film the A-Team movie is the reason that bout may not take place in 2010.
While it's clear that the Rampage departure delayed that particular bout, the fact of the matter is that Evans was not next in line had he fought Rampage in December, and would have likely needed another fight in 2010 before getting to a Title bout as it was.
The face time that went into the coaches feud during this season of the Ultimate Fighter necessitates that their bout take place as soon as possible. Mr. Perez makes a valid point that this bout has less significance in May than it would have last month, but it is not nearly to the level of the injury riddled debacle that became Hughes vs. Serra.
As to the issue surrounding Lyoto Machida's Light Heavyweight Title, it was not Rampage's acting turn that has kept Evans from being next in line, it was, quite simply, Mauricio "Shogun" Rua's performance at UFC 104 and the injuries suffered by Machida that have pushed Evans chance at a rematch back in time.
Most watching UFC 104 in October believed Rua won the bout, and at the very least believed it was such a close bout a rematch was in order. Dana White was one of them, and thus it was Rua being given another shot. With Machida needing surgery following the bout, the rematch has been pushed back to the expected May 1st date.
With that bout the next to happen, at the very least Evans would likely take a fight in the interim rather than take a six to eight month layoff to await the readiness of that fight's winner. With him, as Perez argues, deserving of a Title bout, if he is to take a fight in that timeframe it should be against no one less than Rampage.
This isn't pride taking over for Rashad Evans; he has no control over what match ups the UFC throws his way, as Anwar concedes. No, this is Rashad being a smart fighter and taking the only logical fight for him to take to get that shot to regain the belt he lost to Machida. With him fighting the same night as that Title fight, should he win, he will get the next Title fight as he would have won two straight since losing his belt. There's no other clear fighter to overtake him in the division at this moment and fighting Rampage is anything but detrimental to his career.
Well put! Rampage is really the most logical fight. It makes perfect
sense to me, and like you said Evan's does not really have a choice. Plus,
the hype a few weeks for the fight will be anything but bad for the
business. This is the type of fight casual fans and hardcore fans alike
will be excited t see.
Jared
06 Jan 2010, 13:01
Why should Rampage have to even fight Rashad now? He was supposed to get
that title shot against Rashad but Rashad said no, now Rashad NEEDS to
fight Rampage more than Rampage needs to fight him.
Jared
06 Jan 2010, 14:05
"Why should Rampage have to even fight Rashad now?"
Maybe cause it was an advertised fight that was built up for months.
"He was supposed to get that title shot against Rashad but Rashad said no"
Are you saying that Rampage was supposed to get a title shot against Rashad
and Rashad refused? Cause that's not true. Rampage became "no. 1 contender"
after UFC 96, but was injured. So he dropped out of the proposed fight, and
Machida stepped in. (All of which was covered in the original article)
"now Rashad NEEDS to fight Rampage more than Rampage needs to fight him."
That's true, cause Rashad is working his way back up to a title shot, and a
victory over Rampage would get him there. If Rampage is going to re-retire
after the fight, then of course Rampage doesn't "need" to fight him.
Tony
06 Jan 2010, 17:12
It has been stated that Rashad Evans turned down a fight with Rampage while
he had the title. Rampage even brought it up during TUF.
Jared
06 Jan 2010, 19:15
Seriously, it was common knowledge that Rashad AS CHAMP CHOSE to turn down
the Rampage fight.Seeing how Rampage defended his belt twice, he deserved a
quicker shot, but Rashad thought Machida was a scrub. Notice how on the
show when Rampage mentioned how Rashad turned down the fight in front of
Jardine, and credited Jardine for stepping up, Rashad said nothing. Instead
he fought a guy who is a gatekeeper risking number 1 contender status.
Can't you see how Rampage was screwed in all of this? Since when does the
number 1 contender and 2 time champion have to fight the guy who JUST lost
the belt, AFTER that guy ducked him? Rampage was supposed to fight for the
belt, not for some bad blood they made up by making Rashad get in Rampages
face. Rashad even said White told him to do that.
terrence
07 Jan 2010, 01:54
"it was common knowledge that Rashad AS CHAMP CHOSE to turn down the
Rampage fight."
actually it was Rampage that turned down the fight. Dana wanted him to
fight Rashad at UFC 98 but he pulled out talking about how he needed
surgery on his jaw, its on video too
"Rashad thought Machida was a scrub."
Rashad even said in a interview that he though Machida was better than
Rampage, & everybody knows Machidas better than Rampage
James
07 Jan 2010, 04:17
These two blogs have been about how rampage will be a stepping stone to
rashad's next title shot or how it will affect his title shot. Rampage is
no pretender, he's a contender in his own right. Had this fight happened
last month the winner would have got the next title shot. What happens if
Rampage wins? does he get the next shot?? i would like to think so. sure
rampage has had a long time between fights but hes a top fighter and one of
the next in line, why is it assumed rashad will walk past him and get a
title shot??
Jared
07 Jan 2010, 13:31
Dude are you serious? RAMPAGE WAS SUPPOSED TO FIGHT RASHAD AT UFC 96 BUT
INSTEAD, HE CHOSE NOT TO. After saying no, OF COURSE he has no choice but
to take the fight. Champs who do that lose their belt. If Rashad would've
just taken that fight when he was supposed to, Rampage could've gotten the
surgery afterward. Rampage was the number 1 contender, Rashad chose not to
fight him but had no choice after he beat Jardine. Now Rashad knows in
order to move ahead of the guy he was ducking he has to beat him. Im tired
of arguing with uninformed people.
Jared
07 Jan 2010, 13:32
I meant to say instead Rashad chose not to fight rampage at ufc 96.
Jared
07 Jan 2010, 14:06
To me, it's somewhat irrelevant what happened before UFC 96. Rashad was
going to fight Rampage at 98, but even more recently, at 107. That's why
Rampage "NEEDS" to fight Rashad; that's a fight he agreed to.
I'm not saying that Rampage's issues with Dana are unsubstantiated, but no
matter what valid reasons he had, he accepted a non-title fight against
Rashad at 107. A similar situation happened with Henderson not getting a
title shot against Silva. The difference is that Henderson addressed the
issue immediately. Now personally, I would've loved to see Henderson fight
Marquardt. However, Henderson didn't accept the fight because he felt he
was due a title shot. If Rampage would've done the same thing, I would
agree that Rampage doesn't need to fight Rashad. But Rampage didn't do
that. He agreed to fight Rashad, in a fight that was promoted for months.
Should Rampage have had a title shot at 96? Yes. Could he have claimed that
he was no. 1 contender after Rashad lost and been set up to fight Machida?
Yes. But since he didn't, and he accepted a fight with Rashad, I think it's
his job to do what he agreed to.
