"And really, when was the last time Lindland finished anything in the first round?"
lol, now that was funny......
Lindland wins round 1...
Let's see what Tony has for round 2!
Insidefighting.com is loving this!
Tony,
Once again, you seem to be forgetting(never knew?) the core virtues of a journalist: impartial, objective, factual reporting of an event.
It isn't speculating, making unsupported assertions or getting into debates with the subjects of your articles. Frankly, Matt isn't held to the standards of journalism, because he isn't claiming to be a journalist. He is a fighter who you wrote a slur piece on by making undocumented assertions about his popularity, his fan base, his lack of growth as a fighter, etc.
Here are two things in your last post I found amusing:
"Someone did mention the high percentage of MMA fans who are a presence on the internet. I actually address this topic in my response, and use numbers to back up the truth. There is a very big silent majority with regards to MMA, and the numbers don't lie. At very best, internet MMA fans only make up around 1/4 of the total fan base, and that is using the numbers from the second worst PPV out of the last five (43 which had 40,000 buys)"
The term 'silent majority' is used to mean a less vocal group who has different beliefs than an active or vocal majority. Unless you have done a poll of non-internet using fans of MMA or have some formal data about them, you shouldn't be speculating and certainly shouldn't be stating that their outlook or fighter preference is in any way different from those who use the internet. Frankly, the sampling size of the active internet fan base on a single site like MMA.tv is an unusually large on for professional sport. You won't see 25%+ of professional NFL fans hanging out on any one internet forum.
Your most telling line was:
"I have the balls to take whatever anyone can dish out via the internet"
This being said re: getting into an online spat w/ a real fighter who has the balls to take whatever folk can dish out in a ring is kinda laughable. Flame wars have been going on for decades. I don't know you, but you sound like a kid who thinks this is something you can win. You can't. Matt is acting completely within his purvue as a fighter who has had a piece of shoddy writing published as him which could affect his livelihood. If you want to act like a journalist, instead of some kid who gets to post on a website, then the only valid response to refute Matt's post is to write a followup where you simply provide refences and resources for the #s and the claims made. Any attempt to get into an internet fight proves Matt's claim that you aren't a journalist and nothing you wrote has merit.
ttt for The Law
I just wish everybody would get off Matt's sack and let him respond for himself. This thread is getting too cluttered with fanboys...
Well, as one of the relativly silent observers, I think I will take a minute to actually give my opinion. Tony, fisrt of all, stop saying you are gonna rebuttle, and just rebuttle already! Stop building up the hype for it or it will never live up to our expectations!
Just so you know, I clicked on this thread, not because it mentions Baroni, or InsideFighting, but because it mentions Lindland. A man who I respect as a fighter, and enjoy watching as much as I enjoy any fighter out there. In fact, three of his fights are among my top fight picks. His last two wins were as exciting as any fight I have seen. I personally don't like fights that end via "punchers luck" in the first few seconds.
I have no idea how the impression of Lindland as a "boring fighter" got started but I DO see how it has continued. It is because of one sided journalism like yours. I can't see how people could watch the Couture vs. Ortiz fight and the Lindland vs. Vitale fight and not see the similarities in the exciting style of these two teammates! I loved both fights! Dominating results in both situations.
What I would like to know is, how do the morons who assume Lindland is gonna have a boring fight and use it as an oppourtunity for a beer break have ANY say in the matter whatsoever?! Didn't they miss the fight? Thier loss.
"internet MMA fans only make up around 1/4 of the total fan base"
Based on what? Did Sherdog, MMA.TV and every other site contact you? I KNOW that you're wrong simply because you don't have the methods to poll each site for their number of hits. People registered to the site don't neccessarily make up the 'total' fan base.
I really can't believe that Michael is letting you run rampant like this though. I realize it might be some press for the site but ultimantly when you get trounced again it's just going to take away credibility. If I may use an analogy you seem like Baroni with a keyboard, never knowing when you are beaten and never knowing when to shut up.
Of course you'll never win anyone over, we can smell your ego through the screen. We WANT Matt to beat you even more badly because you haven't a humble bone in your body. I really wish this would all go away.
Tony,
You are an ass. You voice your OPINIONS and claim they are fact. When you write your articles speak for yourself, not the "silent majority". I am a Lindland fan. I see the man improve each time he steps into the ring.
Unlike Phil who throws haymakers and hopes to connect each time out. Each fight with Phil is a repeat of the last. If he gets put on his back forget it, he is done. I like Phil's heart but that is where it ends.
Like I said before you are entitled to your own opinion. But you should be more respectful of a man who is currently the best 185lb fighter in the UFC.
"Unless you have done a poll of non-internet using fans of MMA or have some formal data about them, you shouldn't be speculating and certainly shouldn't be stating that their outlook or fighter preference is in any way different from those who use the internet."
I think half the crowd booing when Lindland fights is a pretty good indicator...but I love the Law, and want to see him back.
To think that a majority of UFC fans REALLY want to see him fight is a little hopeful...
I think it's Hilarious some clown that makes 12gs a year at most from this occupation thinks his opinion is so important. Tony, isn't about time for you get back to your other job mowing lawns?
You don't make any money from sitting on the internet all day, why shouldn't anybody put you on ignore?
"I like insidefighting.com, and Michael DiSanto, and I think Michael is a top notch journalist....But the other clown has got to go. Matt Lindland OWNS him, and he should pack up his unattainable goals of ever being a journalist, and keep his day job."
Pitmaster is correct once again....
it is shocking that Michael doesn't have control over his own staff and leting him make a fool out of his site like that. In my eyes, Insidefighting is a 3rd rate site.
Ironlung,
I'm the boss, so I can come on here:). Look how many posts I have since 2001, Im hardly here all day.
TTT for Lindland!!! WOW! That is beautiful! I love it. . .
Tony: "And LoL@ Ring Girl, just because I have to LoL
@ her at least once a day."
Oh, I am simply cowering in the shadow of your
superior wit, Tony. How can I possibly reply to such
comments toward me such as 'chicky,' 'fangirl' and now
the dreaded 'LOL'?
Keep shooting your mouth off, Caiazzo. You make itn
easy for everyone on this thread, because you make
yourself look so ridiculously unprofessional all on
your own.
ttt for lindland.
--hyper
what a maroon....
what a maroon....
Tony...if you were easily KTFO in the ring, we, in the fight biz, use the colloquialism "owned", but since you are/were/wanna-be in the journalism biz, and you got KTFO, figuratively of course, then I am right in saying you are owned by Matt "The Law" Lindland. True, you may try in vain again to get over on Matt, which is what you tried to do all so surreptitiously with that first piece of bogus shit you spouted/wrote. But if you do try again to slander The Law, Matt will simply respond in kind...and OWN you again. It is very hard to recover after the beating you took at the hands/keyboard of The Law, just go home and count your lucky stars you only got a virtual KTFO.
- How can you say Lindland's made the "classic chump's mistake" by committing the crime he's condemned when you insult his response for including personal attacks and mention his hairline? I'm not really a fan of Lindland's (nor am I a fan of Baroni's), but you don't speak for anyone. You need to realize that. If you had framed your original article as being just one man's opinion, it still would have been unbecomingly biased for a "journalist," but it would have been much more forgivable.
- Lindland has so far proven to be much more articulate and much clearer in his criticism than you have in yours. That has to cut deep.
TTT!