I don't think it's that clear cut. The only absolute advantage I give Conor is straight power.

Remember that until he beat Mendes, Conor had a number of very favorable matchups thrown his way. Remember he was granted a title shot after beating Denis Siver. He has proven his legitmacy as a member of the featherweight elite since but I wouldn't say he has been tested the way frankie has.

Conor getting in 6 early knockouts is impressive but consider their last ten opponents and the ridiculous experience Frankie has. Frankie had 7 consecutive title fights. I know his record isn't great in those fights but I do have faith the guy who 10 rounds with BJ (I won't factor in rounds 11-15 as particularly impressive), 9 with maynard, 10 with Bendo, 5 with Aldo, and has gone undefeated since.

Frankie's striking relies on far more nuance, but it's never been ineffective, even against the steep competition he's faced for years now. He moves a lot more than any of conor's wins. He's hard to hit and harder to KO. I really don't think Conor's striking is as advanced as he'd have you believe. We see a lot of power put into that left hand consistently and I wouldn't be surprised if Frankie could see read him at least as well as Nate could.

Conor has been really effective but his style is all x factor if you know what I mean. In the Diaz, when that early KO didn't come, he wasn't looking so magical. Conor has had few opportunities to show versatility and most notably has come up short.

Lastly I should say sorry. I could have been far briefer if I had just said that "HUGE advantage" might be hyperbole, but got sidetracked considering how their styles matched up and not how their accomplishments compared. Anyway I already wrote you my novel so I'm posting it.

Maybe I'll find a comment in this thread for which that response might make sense and drop it there but the real takeaway is don't sleep on Frankie, I've never seen him at a huge disadvantage against anyone.