Hailey Cowan

Says plainly that if he's wrong about this pick, 'that will surprise me.' Moves through the breakdown quickly, saying he is not worried about this particular matchup.

Cowan has built her career on athleticism, which the analyst credits for a winning record despite modest tools. Her striking is decent with kicks to all levels, but her striking defense is called bad. Her grappling is decent, with decent takedowns and pretty good takedown defense helped along by that same athleticism. The analyst is openly skeptical she pans out as a long-term UFC fighter.

picks her almost at random

As of 2026-03-29, her striking earns a decent overall grade, though her guard on the feet draws a weak score; she throws good kicks at every level and her athleticism should let her be the forward-moving, pressuring fighter here. On the mat she is decent -- fine takedowns of her own and a fairly solid takedown defense, both credited partly to that athleticism. The analyst calls this his least confident pick on the card and openly admits he has no real read on who wins.

Names Cornolle outright ('Taking Cornell') and frames her as the clearly superior, busier striker. Still, he grants Cowan a believable takedown-based path to stealing a round or two and waves it off only mildly, then wraps up with a stock disclaimer about his own fallibility. A granted, barely-answered path for the opponent plus a closing disclaimer keeps this below clear.

A decent, kick-heavy striker whose striking defense is a real liability. She compensates with strength and athleticism, mixing in takedowns (also muscled rather than technical) and showing good takedown defense of her own. Coming off a 2-year layoff, so the read may be stale.

Explicit commitment: he says he is taking Cowan, reasoning from her size/strength edge over a naturally smaller opponent and her ability to grind out rounds on top. No qualifier placed on the win itself.

A true bantamweight built to out-muscle smaller opponents. He frames her as decent on the feet but much more dangerous once it is a size-and-strength contest: decent wrestling with real takedown volume, good takedown defense from a strong, athletic (gymnast) frame, and a plan to bully her way to a decision by grinding on top for 3 rounds.

He commits repeatedly ('leaning Cowan here', 'Cowan's gonna get this one done') but caps it himself: 'not my most confident pick' -- a qualifier on the win itself, not just method, so this does not reach 'clear'.

An athletic, powerful striker and wrestler who he says is still raw technically ('decent everywhere' but not great at any one thing) given her limited MMA background as a gymnast-turned-fighter. He is explicit that she has improved after every fight and expects her to look even better than her last outing.

He names Perez directly ('taking Perez here for... I'm gonna take Perez') but explicitly flags low confidence ('not... confident') on a live underdog price.

An athletic former gymnast who came up through the Contender Series and is described as decent across the board rather than excelling in any one area, with the analyst noting she seems to improve each outing even though she is still developing some things he feels a fighter should already have at the UFC level.