Random thoughts:
Round one is a close 10-9 for Haynes. Round two is 10-10, or possibly 10-9 Fletcher. I agree with Dana, it should have gone to a third round, but if someone had to win based on those two rounds, Haynes was definitely the right choice.
Despite the protestations of a few UG morons, there was no shame in Haynes' crying. That being said, I can't imagine outing my deepest pains and feelings to a national TV audience.
Tait came across this show as an honest, genuine guy with a decent sense of humor. I actually found myself liking him. In contrast, Josh, despite his tearful my-son-is-a-cancer-survivor story, lost personality points when he kept talking about killing Tait. I understand that some people think it gives them an edge to work up feelings of hatred and loathing toward their opponent, but that doesn't make it any less stupid.
Similarly, I actually found myself feeling a little sorry for Shamrock, who appeared for the first time to have invested energy and real effort into training his guy for the fight. In contrast, Ortiz came across as a jerk when he took a low blow at Shamrock over the results of a close fight.
When a bigger, stronger guy picks on a smaller, weaker guy just for the fun of it, the bigger guy is a bully. When a smarter guy taunts a guy who isn't as smart just for the fun of it, the smarter guy is a bully. I think Tito is a bully.
That is not to say Ken is stupid. He isn't. He just doesn't have the "coaching smarts" that Tito has. I don't fault Ken for that. (I do fault him for neglecting to train his guys, though.)
Tito also does a much better job of cornering his guys. That might actually have been the difference in this fight; Ken's cornering consisted mostly of shouting encouragement and obvious things -- "Go for the submission!" -- where Tito gave his usual good instructions.
Tait's knee hit Josh near the navel, so unless his testicles haven't descended yet, that was no groin shot.
TUF coaches, most to least likeable: Tito, Rich (tie), Randy (tie), Chuck, Ken, Matt.
TUF coaches, most to least effective: Tito (tie), Matt (tie), Chuck* (tie), Rich, Randy*, Ken.
So Randy was the least effective likeable coach, and Matt was the most effective unlikeable coach.
*I don't think Randy's poor TUF coaching record is a reflection of his coaching; I think he just picked the wrong guys. Similarly, I don't know that Chuck was that great of a coach so much as he had a great eye for talent.
Cardio is sooooooo important in the UFC, but I think the two-round TUF fights minimize that aspect.
Question: Is it more important to spend your time working on your weak points (e.g. Tait on his standup) or working toward your strengths (e.g. Tait on his takedowns for submission)? I think in the long term it's more important to strengthen your weak points, but in the timeframe of the TUF show, you really have to work to your strengths and just pick up what you can on your weak points.