UFC Quick Quote: Liddell trainer denies reports about verbal agreement to fight Silva
"This is news to us. As of this evening [Wednesday], we have not been notified by the UFC."
-- John Hackleman, the trainer for former UFC light heavyweight champion Chuck Liddell, denied reports via FightNetwork.com that a fight between his fighter Wanderlei Silva had been verbally agreed upon for UFC 76 on September 22 in Anaheim, Calif. This statement makes it seem like the much anticipated showdown was perhaps not as close to happening as many thought. It also bolsters the latest news from Yahoo!Sports that the deal is indeed dead. I still don't understand the reason Silva had the announcement posted on his official site. Something isn't right -- just not sure what it is at this time.
0 recs |
26 comments
Comments
Some mess, Dana just needs to kee his mouth shut and untill the deal is signed, then he should speak.
by "Mr. NC-17" on Jul 12, 2007 10:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i knew that lidell will fight in this event i didn’t think he would fight silva but at least we know he is the main event vs ? we don’t know maybe lambert or griffin
by bryant on Jul 12, 2007 10:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I will never believe this fight is happening until I see the two in the Octagon, waiting for Bruce Buffer to make the announcements. It is sad, really, as this has been one of my most anticipated fights for a long time, now
by Yohnstoppable on Jul 12, 2007 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i knew that lidell will fight in this event i didn’t think he would fight silva but at least we know he is the main event vs ? we don’t know maybe lambert or griffin
Lambert and Griffin don’t belong in the cage with the likes of Liddell. As soon as Griffin would do his classic duck-the-head-and-throw-wild-punches move, Liddell would knock him out. And as for Lambert, the only time he had any success with his standup, was when Babalu threw a flying knee with his hands down. Liddell keeps his distance, so the short hooks and uppercuts will never come into play.
by Mahde on Jul 12, 2007 10:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I mean Silva said he wasnt gonna fight until next year.???
Dana is probally gonna make it sound like Silva didnt want to fight “Chuck” instead of he didnt want to fight period.
by Billy Gamble on Jul 12, 2007 11:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I still think their should have been an immediate rematch between chuck and rampage. Such build up for that event and it was just a freak knockout. happens in mma but cmon now. chuck defended his belt plenty of times and on any given night u can lose but usually with a lucky knockout like that they should have done a rematch and then brought in Dan Henderson. anyways now that chucks not fighting silva im not sure who should get in the ring with him.
by stunnalator on Jul 12, 2007 11:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dude they better get this fight. After the Tito/Evans performance they owe us this fight
by Stafo on Jul 12, 2007 11:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dana is trying to claim Wandy is backing out. Ican’t believe Silva would back out of this fight. Dana must make this happen
by Stafo on Jul 12, 2007 11:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I still think their should have been an immediate rematch between chuck and rampage. Such build up for that event and it was just a freak knockout. happens in mma but cmon now. chuck defended his belt plenty of times and on any given night u can lose but usually with a lucky knockout like that they should have done a rematch
That fight WAS the rematch. Chuck is now down 2 fights against Rampage. Why should Rampage have to defend his title against a guy he’s beaten twice?
by TD on Jul 12, 2007 11:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m starting to wonder if anyone knows what the hell is going on with this fight.
by All American on Jul 12, 2007 12:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dana is trying to claim Wandy is backing out. Ican’t believe Silva would back out of this fight. Dana must make this happen
Theres no way Wandy backed out. If this is truly in negotiation there is no way Wandy would back out. Especially since the announcement or verbal agreement was posted on Chute Box website
by Stafo on Jul 12, 2007 12:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
im sick and tired of the back and forth talk between these 2…i mean their fightin then there not fightin! Dana even made the announcment awhile back so y not just DO IT!! im wit u Yohnstoppable, i wont belive it until i see the 2 of’em squarin off in the octagon. But i’ll still dream of this fight happenin, it would be SICK!!
by CanadianFighter on Jul 12, 2007 12:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I wonder if they don’t want to pay Wandi what he deserves. They might be trying to lowball him because of his lower profile in the US and his recent losses.
A Liddell v Silva fight would be the biggest fight of the year unless Fedor fights this year for the UFC.
Everything else is a lower priority to me, belts or no belts this is the fight to see.
by Brian on Jul 12, 2007 12:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Frest would stand a chance against chuck and does any one know if the rematch between tito and rashad will be free like the third tito and frank fight was i hope it is?
by chuck fan on Jul 12, 2007 12:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If they can pay Tito 210 grand just cuz he can talk some smack and rake in some more viewers then they sure as hell should be able to pay Wandy well enuf. The sales on these 2 fightin would rack in plenty of cash!
by CanadianFighter on Jul 12, 2007 12:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well if not Silva, lets get right down to buisness and bring in Shogun Rua.
by JaCoB on Jul 12, 2007 1:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Or maybe a move up to heavyweight to challenge there.
by JaCoB on Jul 12, 2007 1:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
HOLY CRAP!!!!! UFC MANIA U HAVE GOT TO SEE THIS IF YOU HAVNT ALREADY!!! I THINK THE VIDEO JUST CAME OUT TODAY!! ITS FOR THE NEW UFC GAME COMING OUT ON THE XBOX 360!! IT LOOKS FREAKIN AWESOME!!!
http://www.ign.com/
by stunnalator on Jul 12, 2007 1:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That fight WAS the rematch. Chuck is now down 2 fights against Rampage. Why should Rampage have to defend his title against a guy he’s beaten twice?
First fight was a very memorable fight. Awesome freakin fight! Thats why there was soo much build up for that event. If it had been another war like the first fight and rampage won then yeah it would be stupid to put them up against eachother again. However, Chuck got one unlucky shot 2 minutes into the first round before any real battle had begun. Plus with chucks win streak and making one little mistake, they should have given him an immediate rematch…all im sayin is that if chuck were to get the opportunity again he would not make that mistake. he would have killed rampage if he didnt make that mistake.
by stunnalator on Jul 12, 2007 1:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
he would have killed rampage if he didnt make that mistake.
I’d have to disagree with this. If it wasn’t for that one mistake, the fight would have went very similar to their first fight. Or cocky Chuck would have simply made the same mistake later in the fight and get KTFO.
Rampage has Chuck’s number.
by ViolentMike on Jul 12, 2007 2:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
All you people who think Wandy would destroy Chuck are very wrong.Chuck is an awfull match up for Wandy and he knows it,he would get KOed by Chuck very quickly.He is not gonna come back from two KOs and fight Chuck.
by mcanena on Jul 12, 2007 2:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
First fight was a very memorable fight. Awesome freakin fight! Thats why there was soo much build up for that event. If it had been another war like the first fight and rampage won then yeah it would be stupid to put them up against eachother again. However, Chuck got one unlucky shot 2 minutes into the first round before any real battle had begun. Plus with chucks win streak and making one little mistake, they should have given him an immediate rematch…all im sayin is that if chuck were to get the opportunity again he would not make that mistake. he would have killed rampage if he didnt make that mistake.
The first fight was a good fight, but it was by no means a war. It was a 1 sided beat down the whole way through, and the second would have been the same had it not ended early.
I don’t see how anyone can call the rematch lucky after watching the first fight. I think it is just buying the hype that Chuck was the baddest man on the planet, when in reality he wasn’t. I’m not saying Chuck isn’t a beast, but there are better fighters out there, as evidenced by Rampage taking him out twice.
by Yohnstoppable on Jul 12, 2007 2:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If John Hackleman is saying that there never was a verbal agreement for Chuck/Wand, then Dana was obviously misrepresenting the whole possibility of this fight. It’s pretty obvious that negotiations never got out the gate with EITHER fight team.
Now, Dana is spinning it to make it look like Wand backed out. I think it’s closer to the truth to say that, for whatever reason, Dana doesn’t want this fight to happen at this time.
by Fred on Jul 12, 2007 3:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Chuck went to Pride, lost and then ran away from there to the lesser competition in UFC and had his winning series, then he faced Pride guy again, and lost. Coincidence? And he is awaited by Silva, Shogun, Henderson. Tough tough times for Chucky.
by Bulldog on Aug 3, 2007 9:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 












