Bo Nickal is extremely disappointed with the UFC’s commentary team over their take on his UFC 309 clash with Paul Craig this past weekend. The undefeated middleweight phenom picked up another win, taking a unanimous decision over the Scottish veteran to notch up his fourth UFC triumph.

However, there was quite a bit of criticism over Nickal’s performance, especially his reluctance to wrestle with Craig in the fight. In addition, his striking too, was criticized for being mid, even by the commentary team consisting of Jon Anik, Joe Rogan, and Daniel Cormier. And this predictably, didn’t sit well with the Penn State alum, who made his feelings known in an appearance on MMA journalist Ariel Helwani’s YouTube show.

“Something that was a little disappointing was the commentary and just kinda hearing the way that they were looking at the fight. And it made me feel like they didn’t really know what was going on as much. Because anybody that I’ve talked to, the people that I trust and I know shoot straight with me were like ‘dude, you like shut that guy out. Domination, flawless victory.” Nickal told Helwani.

A comment that stuck in Nickal’s craw was Daniel Cormier declaring definitively that he would be no match for fellow middleweight wrestler extraordinaire Khamzat Chimaev. The American, of course, has expressed his desire to compete with ‘Borz’ in the future, in a matchup that many predicted would be a cracker of a contest between two elite grapplers. However, Cormier, based on both men’s recent performance, feels Nickal still has a ways to go before he is at Chimaev’s level. This is something that displeased the former NCAA champion.

“And to hear things like ‘DC’ say ‘Oh, he’s not ready for Khamzat.’ I think he was trying to be respectful but also trying to like, I don’t know, maybe like set me done a peg. It was just weird to hear… But it was a little disappointing to hear some of those comments from people I respect a lot,” he added.

To be fair, the commentary was not too critical of Nickal, with Cormier admitting halfway through the second round that he was ‘impressed’ with how well the inexperienced Nickal was holding his own against the veteran. But the commentary did feel that the first two rounds were ‘very very close’, which is not how Nickal saw the fight at all. But it seems the commentary team had a better read on the fight than Nickal.

Stats show a close fight even as Bo Nickal cops criticism from many quarters for UFC 309

Immediately after the official decision was read out and Nickal was awarded a unanimous decision victory, the undefeated phenom was met with a chorus of boos and ‘overrated’ chants from the crowd. Even UFC CEO Dana White admitted at the post-fight presser that Nickal has got “work to do” before he comes through on the very high expectations of him.

UFC analyst Chael Sonnen (who is a fellow former NCAA D1 wrestler), on the other hand, was incensed that Nickal didn’t even attempt one takedown throughout the fight. ‘Uncle Chael’ felt this was a huge mistake on the three-time NCAA wrestling champ, and felt he had gotten bad advice from his team.

And all of these concerns do seem to have a lot of merit. While Nickal may insist his win over Craig was one-sided, the stats paint a very different picture. After all, even though Nickal managed to land more significant strikes on ‘Bear Jew’ in all three rounds, he did it just barely. The first and third rounds saw him land just three more significant strikes than Paul landed on him, in the second, Nickal landed 22 significant strikes to Craig’s 21.

In his defense, Nickal was far more accurate than the Scottish vet; but as far as landing scoring shots goes, there was barely any difference. What do you think about Bo Nickal’s problem with the commentary of his UFC 309 clash with Paul Craig?