It has been nearly a month since a major UFC event has taken place. The fight night events are enjoyable, but it’s these events that get me psyched up. I’m aware that this Fox card is weak in terms of big named fighters. I’ve always had this sentiment that you could never complain about a free card, even if it’s on Fox. Sure the name value isn’t great, but there are still appealing matchups.

Five questions for UFC on Fox 10

The main event features a guaranteed chess match in Benson Henderson versus Josh Thomson. It’ll be interesting to see how Henderson rebounds from losing his title in such a devastating fashion. Then you have Stipe Miocic versus Gabriel Gonzaga in a heavyweight battle of different generations. The old heavyweights are fighters, who rely on power and boxing such as Gonzaga. The new heavyweights tend to be former college athletes, who use their athleticism and speed to their advantage such as Miocic.

Thinesh John joins me this time around. He did an excellent job covering the UFC event in Singapore interviewing several fighters from a few weeks ago.

1. Which preliminary bout are you looking forward to the most?

Strk: I consider Fox events to be on the same level of pay-per-views in terms of quality fights. Obviously they won’t have a big title fight on there, but it will still contain fighters who you can easily see fighting on the main card of a pay-per-view. As for preliminary bouts, we’ve seen many good preliminary bouts over the past few months. This is the first one in quite some time, where there really isn’t any matchup that I’m truly looking forward to.

The predictable answer is Sergio Pettis versus Alex Caceres. That’s really the only answer, even though Eddie Wineland is fighting for the first time since losing to Renan Barao for the bantamweight title. Caceres has been very inconsistent over his career, but seems to have improved his standup and grappling from his last win over Roland Delorme. It’ll be a nice clash of styles against Pettis, who is very explosive, as we all know. It should be a high-paced bout that should get people excited. You never want to criticize a card, until after the event is over. I’m just not finding many appealing matchups here on the preliminary portion.

John: It’s not the best of undercards you’ll ever see but I’ll share my fair bit of criticism once the event is in the books. Although, as we’ve seen so many times, it’s usually the weaker cards that deliver. Nonetheless, the two featured prelim bouts look appealing though – You’ve got Sergio Pettis vs. Alex Caceres and Eddie Wineland vs. Yves Jabouin. The latter match-up gets my vote in this one; it’s classic striker vs. striker battle that’s sure to have fight fans on the edge of their seats.

Jabouin and Wineland are proven finishes and veterans in the MMA game. With the majority of their victories coming via TKO, I believe this bout will provide some sparks in the stand-up department. It’s got knockout written all over it folks. While Jabouin looks to make it 5-1, it’ll be interesting to see how Wineland rebounds after the defeat he suffered at the hands of champ Renan Barao in his previous outing.

2. Jeremy Stephens has been inconsistent throughout his career. He’s finally found some consistency winning his last two fights. Do you see his aggressive style being effective against a grappler like Darren Elkins?

Strk: Stephens is one of the toughest fighters to judge in the UFC. You want to believe in him because he’s rarely involved in a boring fight and has serious knockout power. He’s won his first two fights at featherweight, after fighting as a lightweight for most of his career. He’s got a black belt in BJJ and has shown decent takedown defense in the past. This fight will prove to be a nice clash of styles between grappler versus striker.

Will Stephens get over-aggressive and allow constant openings for Elkins to shoot for a single or double leg? Stephens tends to get wild, which is what concerns me the most about him. He’s never been someone to really go for submissions off his back. Elkins has proven he can smother heavy-handed fighters before such as his win over Diego Brandao. His style of smothering his opponent could prove to be detrimental for Stephens’ chances to continue his winning streak. It’ll be difficult for Stephens to close the distance without worrying about being taken down, which is why I don’t see his standup being very effective.

John: Yeah, for Jeremy Stephens, it’s always the question of consistency isn’t it? He does have a good striking pedigree which he puts to good use but against a formidable grappler like Darren Elkins, he may be in for a long night. Elkins has shown before that he’s capable of neutralizing good strikers as evident in his bouts with Diego Brandao and Steven Siler, where he’s used his grappling skills to garner victories.

Stephens has, without a doubt, knockout ability in his arsenal and he should be faster and more elusive now that he’s made the drop to 145-lbs. However, with that being said, in this classic grappler vs. striker match-up, I’m going to fancy the grappler like I always do. I think Elkins has the tools to nullify Stephens’ aggressive approach by way of takedowns and top control.

3. Everyone was scratching their heads seeing Donald Cerrone being matched up against Adriano Martins. Do you see Martins having a chance to pull off the upset here? Cerrone is prone to having off nights in the past most recently against Rafael Dos Anjos.

Strk: This is such an odd matchup. I’ve only seen Martins fight twice, so it’s difficult for me to truly rate his ability. Obviously his ground game is his most dangerous asset having a black belt in BJJ. He’s a two time world champion in BJJ, which shows you his credentials of how dangerous he is on the ground. This is a major set up in competition for him against someone as well rounded as Cerrone.  It was mentioned above how Cerrone has had off nights in the past and tends to either not fight with a sense of urgency or the wrong game plan. He let his emotions get the best of him against Nate Diaz. That led to him trying to brawl with Diaz, which led to him on the receiving end of a one-sided beating.

Then in the fight against Dos Anjos, he knew he was down by two rounds after taking too much damage. He didn’t look to attack Dos Anjos’ face very often. That’s the best way to knock someone out, yet Cerrone kept going for kicks attacking the body or legs. It’s those two moments that make me question his mindset before every fight now. Martins has a chance, especially since Cerrone isn’t afraid to go to the ground. It only takes one slip and Martins can set up an arm bar or triangle choke. If he doesn’t allow Cerrone to dictate the pace and consistently checks his nasty leg kicks, then he won’t need to rely on going for just submissions. Once again, this is a hard choice because I simply haven’t seen enough of Martins. He’s only had two fights in major promotions.  He’s got a chance, but I wouldn’t put my money on him.

John: I’ll be absolutely honest here: I’ve not seen Adriano Martins compete before. All I can say is that despite his prowess in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu where he’s a two-time world champ, he’s got more TKO than submission victories on his resume. That is absolutely incredible. I mean, seriously? This leads me to believe he’s not just another Demian Maia or Leandro Issa for that matter. This kid’s well-rounded and he knows what he’s doing both on his feet and obviously on the canvas.

But against “Cowboy”, he’s definitely a huge underdog. We know how Cerrone pounces on opponents with his textbook Muay Thai which can, might I add, be absolutely flawless at times. He’s got really good takedown defense too and he’s capable of pulling off submissions of his own once the fight hits the mat. It’s a good point mentioned about how he has his “off-nights” and such, which makes it difficult to know which Cerrone is going to turn up on fight night.

I think Martins has a good chance but don’t bet on it.

4. Gabriel Gonzaga has had issues in the past against heavyweights who are long, rangy, and athletic. Does his recent career resurgence make you optimistic that he can break that issue?

Strk: Gonzaga’s boxing has clearly improved, since returning to the UFC. He’s become more of a counter striker and that has made him successful in his past two victories. While his boxing has improved, he is still relatively the same fighter that he was three years ago. He’s still pretty slow and doesn’t look for takedowns, despite having one of the best ground games in the UFC. Gonzaga tends to become too one-dimensional with his striking, similar to how some wrestlers fall in love with their striking rather than do what they do best.

People tend to under estimate Stipe Miocic’s power. He’s not huge for a heavyweight, but his athleticism and precise striking has propelled him in becoming a top ten heavyweight. He’s in the same mold as Travis Browne and Brendan Schaub being around 240-245 pounds, who are two fighters that soundly defeated Gonzaga. If he can utilize his speed advantage and not get reckless like Shawn Jordan did, it will be his fight to lose. Gonzaga does have scary knockout power in his punches and kicks, so you never want to fully count him out. I’m just not convinced he can last against someone who fights at a high pace like Miocic. He doesn’t respond well to taking damage either.

John: Miocic represents a new breed of Heavyweight fighters making it big into the MMA landscape. Strong, tall, athletic and with a well-rounded skill-set. We saw him pick apart Roy Nelson with his boxing where he timed his punches impeccably along with using his footwork. And against Gonzaga next, I think we’ll see more of the same, with Miocic just using his range and getting away from the Brazilian’s power shots.

Gonzaga has an underrated ground game and I honestly would like to see him use more of it. He’s so confident in his stand-up abilities that he wants to keep the exchanges on the feet all the time. He’s racked up a nice run in the UFC but against a taller guy like Miocic, who has arguably power in his fisticuffs as well, I don’t fancy him picking up a victory.

5. The main event on this card is quietly one of the most intriguing main events announced so far in 2014. Do you see Benson Henderson coming out more aggressive? It seemed like he was becoming timid and fighting not to lose, while being champion.

Strk: Henderson has a point to prove on his quest to earn another title shot. I’m always in awe of his ability, but he was becoming the epitome of the term “point-striking” and being ultra conservative. While his striking is unpredictable and has more volume than most lightweights, you rarely see him connect with a power strike. Besides the first fight against Frankie Edgar and his dominant win over Nate Diaz, it never seemed like he was going to finish any of his opponent’s over the past three years.

Both fighters are very well rounded, which is why this main event is so intriguing. It’s hard pressed to see either of them truly dominate in one certain aspect. The difference here is that Henderson will be more aggressive looking to overpower Thomson in the clinch, take him down, and dictate the pace of the fight. He’ll look to throw a left upper cut or hook after a jab compared to past title fights, where he would only throw a leg kick or go for a takedown. He’s gotten a harsh reputation from fans for being “boring”. That’s silly to say about a tremendous fighter, who is so dynamic and nearly impossible to finish. I’m expecting this to be one of the best main events of 2014, where Henderson will look to exchange strikes with Thomson and look towards finishing the fight.

John: I don’t think Henderson’s the sort of fighter that likes to press the issue just because he needs to get back in the win column. He’s the sort of fighter who’ll finish opponents if the opportunity presents itself; he’s not going to force anything in my eyes. In his title affair with Pettis, he got caught. He knows it was a foolish mistake and you can bet on him returning with more fire in his belly.

I foresee Henderson shooting for more takedowns in this tilt as opposed to standing up and trading with Thomson. Not that he doesn’t have the skills and ability to strike with Thomson – I just think Henderson has an edge in the mat department and he could grapple his way through to a submission victory or decision. Either way, I won’t count Thomson out by a long shot. The AKA stand-out possesses flamboyant strikes (as does Henderson, actually) and he could have a trick or two up his sleeves.

You can follow us on twitter at @Allen_Strk  & @ThineshJohnMMA