UFC 319 'Embedded,' No. 3: What DDP and Chimaev said during 'respectful' first meeting
UFC 319 (pay-per-view, ESPN, ESPN+) takes place Saturday at United Center in Chicago.
In the headliner, middleweight champion Dricus Du Plessis (23-2 MMA, 9-0 UFC) puts his title on the line for the third time when he meets unbeaten – and favored – challenger Khamzat Chimaev (14-0 MMA, 8-0 UFC).
In addition, wrestling standout Aaron Pico (13-4 MMA, 0-0 UFC) makes his highly anticipated UFC debut after years in Bellator when he takes on unbeaten featherweight Lerone Murphy (16-0-1 MMA, 8-0-1 UFC) in the co-main event. Plus, the popular Michael Page (23-3 MMA, 2-1 UFC) meets former middleweight title challenger Jared Cannonier (18-8 MMA, 11-8 UFC) and more in the home of the Bulls and Blackhawks.
The third episode of "Embedded" follows the headliners and featured fighters while they get ready for fight week. Here is the UFC's description of the episode from YouTube:
Champ Dricus Du Plessis visits Barstool sports and plays cricket with his teammates; Khamzat Chimaev has striking practice; Carlos Prates has an intense conditioning session; Michael 'Venom' Page arrives in Chicago; Kai Asakura has strength and conditioning training; Champ Dricus Du Plessis and Khamzat Chimaev run into each other in the athlete hotel lobby.
Previous UFC 319 'Embedded' episodes
UFC 319 'Embedded,' No. 1: Dricus Du Plessis gets first taste of the 'Friendly Confines'
UFC 319 'Embedded,' No. 2: Dricus Du Plessis takes in Michael Jordan's banners
This article originally appeared on MMA Junkie: UFC 319 Embedded 3: Dricus Du Plessis, Khamzat Chimaev show respect
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mom Corrects Mother-in-Law at Family Dinner After She Takes Credit for Baby's Name
The woman insists she was the one who chose her daughter's name, but her husband says the correction should have waited until they were alone NEED TO KNOW A woman says her mother-in-law took credit at dinner for naming her 11-month-old daughter She immediately corrected the claim, with her husband confirming the real story Her husband later told her she was right, but says she should have waited for a private moment A woman turns to the Reddit community for advice following an awkward family dinner where her mother-in-law took credit for naming her 11-month-old daughter. She explains in her post that she and her husband have been married for almost two years and that the name came from a beloved character in a 'very popular book/movie franchise' they both enjoy. 'When we found out we were having a girl, one of the names that was immediately top contender was the name of a character I really like,' she says. Over time, that name became the only one she wanted, and the couple eventually shared it with their parents. She remembers her mother-in-law questioning whether there might be an alternative spelling that could cause confusion. 'I had said no it wouldn't and had explained to her the subtle difference in pronunciation,' she recalls. 'It was a whole conversation I'd had with her.' Fast forward to a family gathering at her in-laws' home for dinner. Her brother-in-law and his wife were there as well, and everyone was watching the baby cruise around the room, laughing and glancing back to see who was watching. Her sister-in-law's wife remarked how radiant the baby looks and how she'd 'really taken to her name literally.' That's when her sister-in-law said it was a 'really good choice by my MIL,' leaving the new mom confused. 'I asked what she's talking about and my SIL said that my MIL had been the one to recommend the name, right?' she shares. Her mother-in-law then chimes in to agree, saying she'd said it was a good name. The poster remembers being 'literally stunned for a second' before speaking up. She made it clear she was the one who came up with the name, sharing how she knew of it and that her husband also recognized it from the franchise. She even turned to her husband for confirmation, which he gave — though uncomfortably. Her mother-in-law responded that 'names are a collective family effort, and everyone pitched in,' but the woman still pushed back. 'I still said this name was one that was very dear to me and it was one I'd come up with,' she explains. Later that night, when they got home, her husband started receiving texts from his mom and sister. While he told her she's correct in her version of events, he also said she was 'tactless.' 'He said we know it was my name, and our daughter has a beautiful name that suits her, why make it into something that causes bitterness,' she recounts. The next day, her husband had a routine phone call with his mother, and she asked if her mother-in-law is still upset. 'He said she was,' the woman writes. 'He said that he understood why I did it but it wasn't the time and place.' That's when she turned to Reddit to ask if she was wrong. One commenter calls out her husband's stance, quoting his words: ' 'He said that he understood why I did it but it wasn't the time and place.' Did he happen to share with you when would have been a better time to correct your mother in law's revisionist history and why he didn't have a word with her and correct her himself? Big fat, NTA.' Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. The original poster replies that her husband never gave a specific alternative moment. 'No, he didn't say it but he said it shouldn't have been clarified in front of an audience,' she explains. 'So I'm assuming he meant when it was just me with MIL.' She adds that if her mother-in-law had made the comment when they were alone, she would have corrected her then. 'I didn't enjoy saying it in front of others,' she admits. 'It's just that's when it was brought up.' Now she's left wondering whether defending the truth about her daughter's name in the moment was worth the fallout. Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is Packers QB Jordan Love in danger of missing Week 2 game vs. Commanders?
Could the Washington Commanders be facing a backup quarterback for their Week 2 showdown against the Green Bay Packers? In Green Bay's preseason opener against the New York Jets, quarterback Jordan Love tried to escape the pocket, and his left hand made contact with a New York defender's helmet, leading to a "ligament issue," per Packers general manager Brian Gutekunst. Love did undergo a procedure, and Gutekunst believes not only will Love be ready for Green Bay's Week 1 contest against the defending NFC North champion Detroit Lions, but that he'd return to practice next week. "Obviously, you guys saw him out there, he certainly was able to function," Gutekunst said, via Rob Demovsky of ESPN. "But as we looked at all the options and he did as well, the best option I think for him to get back the fastest and feel the best was to do this. He wanted to go out there yesterday to kind of see how it felt, and once we got through that, we made the decision." That's good news for the Packers, who have a tough slate to begin the season. Green Bay hosts Detroit in Week 1, and hosts the Commanders in Week 2 on Amazon Prime. The most encouraging part of this for the Packers is that Love's left non-throwing hand is involved. However, for a quarterback, the opposite hand is important, too. An injury to the non-throwing hand could impact Love's ability to receive the snap under center. The Packers believe that with Love undergoing the procedure, there will be no issues for Week 1, much less for Week 2. The Commanders were 12-5 last season and open the 2025 season against the New York Giants in Week 1. This will be Love's first meeting as a starting quarterback against Washington. It's also Jayden Daniels' first game against the Packers. This article originally appeared on Commanders Wire: Could Packers' injury impact their Week 2 vs. Commanders?
CNN
14 minutes ago
- CNN
NBA clears Boston Celtics' $6.1 billion sale to Bill Chisholm
A group headed by Bill Chisholm is set to take control of the Boston Celtics after the NBA Board of Governors unanimously approved the sale on Wednesday. The NBA wrote in a statement, 'The transaction is expected to close shortly.' The reported $6.1 billion valuation for the club makes it the second-largest sale price for a US sports franchise, behind the $10 billion valuation for the Los Angeles Lakers when Mark Walter purchased that team in June. Chisholm and his partners are buying at least 51 percent of the Celtics. The ownership stake will increase in 2028, according to the purchase contract, when Chisholm's group is scheduled to buy out the remaining minority shareholders at a $7.3 billion valuation. According to multiple media reports, Chisholm will take over as the Celtics' governor when the sale goes through. Outgoing owner Wyc Grousbeck is expected to serve as alternate governor and remain the CEO through 2028. Grousbeck will cede his role when he no longer has the required ownership stake of at least 15 percent. Chisholm, the co-founder and managing partner of the California-based private equity firm STG Partners, is a Massachusetts native and longtime Celtics fan. Grousbeck and the outgoing ownership group Boston Basketball Partners LLC purchased the Celtics for $360 million in 2002. During that group's tenure, the club won NBA titles in 2007-08 and 2023-24 – the latter representing Boston's league-record 18th championship.
