Topic: Brandão vs. Chope
Brandao vs. Chope
Anonymous Mode
You are not logged in to Tapology. When browsing anonymously, profanities and images are automatically removed from the forum.
02.19.2014 | 6:29 PM ET
Prediction: Brandão | Decision
This is the official discussion thread for Brandao vs. Chope. Let's see what you've got.
"This is the droid you're looking for."
Responses Page 3
03.23.2014 | 5:07 PM ET
Prediction: Brandão | KO/TKO | Round 1
To be fair flying_frontkick, that ref was quite the ****.
This user is suspended from posting until 4 years, 3 months, 4 days, 14 hours, and 44 minutes from now.
03.23.2014 | 5:27 PM ET
Prediction: Brandão | KO/TKO | Round 1
And you guys wonder why I despise Dana White so ******* much...
"الله أكبرl"
03.23.2014 | 9:01 PM ET
Ok some of you need to get some **** cleared up.
The headline on ESPN was that the UFC cut Chope for GETTING DISCHARGED. Not for threatening to stab his wife. He got discharged for threatening to stab his wife. See what I mean? So the whole Brandao double standard argument has zero relevance. Secondly, LMAO at you guys trying to compare Brandao to Chope. Y'all are grasping at straws to criticize Dana White/UFC. Brandao threatened a guy who gets paid to hurt people, Chope threatened to stab his wife. A defenseless civilian who he lives with, not a trained fighter who he'll be spending 15 minutes in a cage with a referee with. Under that logic, why don't we cut every fighter who says **** like: "I'm gonna retire him, I'm gonna snap his neck, etc." Also guys like Yvel, Brandao weren't formally charged with assault, CHOPE WAS. See the difference?
So you guys saying "oh no why'd they do this to Chope they have a bunch of other people who committed assault" argument is shiite. So unless you can prove the UFC has active fighers who have also been discharged, there is no double standard.
The UFC wants to maintain a good relationship with the military (fight for the troops, etc) so why keep a no name who lost his first fight on the payroll, when he could potentially damage a good, long standing relationship?
The UFC terminated featherweight Will Chope's contract on Sunday after learning the fighter was discharged from the Air Force in 2009 for assaulting his wife. - headline from ESPN.
The headline on ESPN was that the UFC cut Chope for GETTING DISCHARGED. Not for threatening to stab his wife. He got discharged for threatening to stab his wife. See what I mean? So the whole Brandao double standard argument has zero relevance. Secondly, LMAO at you guys trying to compare Brandao to Chope. Y'all are grasping at straws to criticize Dana White/UFC. Brandao threatened a guy who gets paid to hurt people, Chope threatened to stab his wife. A defenseless civilian who he lives with, not a trained fighter who he'll be spending 15 minutes in a cage with a referee with. Under that logic, why don't we cut every fighter who says **** like: "I'm gonna retire him, I'm gonna snap his neck, etc." Also guys like Yvel, Brandao weren't formally charged with assault, CHOPE WAS. See the difference?
So you guys saying "oh no why'd they do this to Chope they have a bunch of other people who committed assault" argument is shiite. So unless you can prove the UFC has active fighers who have also been discharged, there is no double standard.
The UFC wants to maintain a good relationship with the military (fight for the troops, etc) so why keep a no name who lost his first fight on the payroll, when he could potentially damage a good, long standing relationship?
The UFC terminated featherweight Will Chope's contract on Sunday after learning the fighter was discharged from the Air Force in 2009 for assaulting his wife. - headline from ESPN.
* Edited at 03.23.2014, 9:15 PM ET *
03.23.2014 | 9:23 PM ET
Prediction: Chope | KO/TKO | Round 3
Wut.
"She be curvin all the locals, must like foreigns and this is when I had the Martin, I was just like Lawrence so wassup"
03.23.2014 | 9:25 PM ET
Prediction: Brandão | KO/TKO | Round 1
The correlation people are drawing is that they have both made violent statement's about stabbing people, that's all that matters. Which is the only real relevant part to discuss about that in my opinion.
This user is suspended from posting until 4 years, 3 months, 4 days, 14 hours, and 44 minutes from now.
03.23.2014 | 10:00 PM ET
@mikeyg
Yea but you can't just make a generalization without context and criticize the UFC for it. Again, they didn't cut Chope b/c of his violent statements, they cut him b/c he was discharged for making those statements. There's a huge difference. And even if they did cut him for those violent statements, he was formally charged and prosecuted for them. Again, a completely different situation from the Brandao/Yvel events. I actually don't see how people don't understand how you can't compare the situations.
Yea but you can't just make a generalization without context and criticize the UFC for it. Again, they didn't cut Chope b/c of his violent statements, they cut him b/c he was discharged for making those statements. There's a huge difference. And even if they did cut him for those violent statements, he was formally charged and prosecuted for them. Again, a completely different situation from the Brandao/Yvel events. I actually don't see how people don't understand how you can't compare the situations.
* Edited at 03.23.2014, 10:01 PM ET *
03.24.2014 | 6:37 AM ET
Prediction: Brandão | KO/TKO | Round 1
I wasn't here for that part of the discussion about what the UFC should do with Chope or any dirty fighter they may sign. But I say good riddance to anyone who's threatening that kind of **** on people so no double standard from me Just saying that they are equally similar situations in terms of a crime. Threatening to stab anyone is just ****** up.
This user is suspended from posting until 4 years, 3 months, 4 days, 14 hours, and 44 minutes from now.
03.24.2014 | 8:19 AM ET
Prediction: Brandão | Submission | Round 1
I've pointed it out on here before but Jeremy Stephens name doesn't fit with the others listed. He goes over details on an episode of Joe Rogan's podcast, and you can see from court transcripts, but basically at a homecoming party in his name (a bar in Iowa having a party `with UFC fighter Jeremy Stephens in attendance`), a guy was beat really badly. In what was basically a police `shakedown` on the guy arrested, all they were asking was about `UFC fighter Jeremy Stephens` until they felt "yeah, he was there that night" was enough to issue a warrant.
Stephens was charged with felony assault and burglary. Stephens rejected multiple plea deals instead wanting to go to trial as he didn't witness the crimes and didn't even know of them the night they happened. He was only brought into the mess because it was his party at a bar and he was billed as a fighter so that's where the police took the case.
Stephens had over 10 eyewitnesses ready to take the stand that he was not even in the same room where the crimes happened and had no knowledge of them. On the first day of trial, the prosecutor knowing there was no way to win a case the Iowa police force unsuccessfully tried to play connect the dots on and failed, and Stephens knowing the trial would be won but would cost more than he could come close to affording, they agreed on a deal for the state to save face and Stephens to save money. They dropped all felony charges and Stephens took a misdemeanor disorderly conduct, of which he didn't do, but the state had to give something and Stephens knew he couldn't afford the trial he'd win.
This misdemeanor disorderly conduct had nothing to do with the person assaulted that night as the state conceded and only carried a $315 fine and 5 years of no contact with the person who was assaulted at a party in his name that he didn't even know happened that night. It was basically a "we ****** up and realize shoddy police-work got you charged and you have a dozen witnesses so here's the lowest charge we can do to avoid trial" with no post-plea jail or even probation. Just $315 and no contact with whoever was assaulted.
Stephens only took that $315 misdemeanor disorderly conduct because he was probably looking at over $10k to win the trial so $315 with no further consequences even knowing he didn't even commit any disorderly conduct, that was just what had to be done.
Just had to clear the air on the Stephens situation since he's always name-dropped when people talk about fighters who are violent law offenders or have skeletons in their closet from the past. Stephens had nothing to do with the felonies he was charged with as he was completely cleared of any felony assault/burglary with a dozen eye-witnesses ready to take the stand which the state badly didn't want to happen. It was bad police work to just assume a party at a bar for a UFC fighter where someone was badly beaten obviously meant the fighter did it.
Stephens was charged with felony assault and burglary. Stephens rejected multiple plea deals instead wanting to go to trial as he didn't witness the crimes and didn't even know of them the night they happened. He was only brought into the mess because it was his party at a bar and he was billed as a fighter so that's where the police took the case.
Stephens had over 10 eyewitnesses ready to take the stand that he was not even in the same room where the crimes happened and had no knowledge of them. On the first day of trial, the prosecutor knowing there was no way to win a case the Iowa police force unsuccessfully tried to play connect the dots on and failed, and Stephens knowing the trial would be won but would cost more than he could come close to affording, they agreed on a deal for the state to save face and Stephens to save money. They dropped all felony charges and Stephens took a misdemeanor disorderly conduct, of which he didn't do, but the state had to give something and Stephens knew he couldn't afford the trial he'd win.
This misdemeanor disorderly conduct had nothing to do with the person assaulted that night as the state conceded and only carried a $315 fine and 5 years of no contact with the person who was assaulted at a party in his name that he didn't even know happened that night. It was basically a "we ****** up and realize shoddy police-work got you charged and you have a dozen witnesses so here's the lowest charge we can do to avoid trial" with no post-plea jail or even probation. Just $315 and no contact with whoever was assaulted.
Stephens only took that $315 misdemeanor disorderly conduct because he was probably looking at over $10k to win the trial so $315 with no further consequences even knowing he didn't even commit any disorderly conduct, that was just what had to be done.
Just had to clear the air on the Stephens situation since he's always name-dropped when people talk about fighters who are violent law offenders or have skeletons in their closet from the past. Stephens had nothing to do with the felonies he was charged with as he was completely cleared of any felony assault/burglary with a dozen eye-witnesses ready to take the stand which the state badly didn't want to happen. It was bad police work to just assume a party at a bar for a UFC fighter where someone was badly beaten obviously meant the fighter did it.
"I Stab Waterbeds!"