There needs to be a Hierarchy when it comes to title shots. & champs need significantly higher pay

[Diogenes of Sinope]

We all know the belt means nothing aside from marketable clout. Title shots are awarded to the most marketable contender, instant rematches are ubiquitous and often the champ isnt even the best fighter in his/her division.

Each division needs a tournament to be awarded a title shot, similar to bellator's format. The champ needs to be promised a significant amount per fight as opposed to contenders (making the title be something of value other than a cute belt and something to put on your resume.)

if a long reigning champ loses the belt, thats it. back to the end of the line. no instant rematch UNLESS the fight was extremely controversial.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Didn t read.

 

[TapMachine]

We all know the belt means nothing aside from marketable clout. Title shots are awarded to the most marketable contender, instant rematches are ubiquitous and often the champ isnt even the best fighter in his/her division.

Each division needs a tournament to be awarded a title shot, similar to bellator's format. The champ needs to be promised a significant amount per fight as opposed to contenders (making the title be something of value other than a cute belt and something to put on your resume.)

if a long reigning champ loses the belt, thats it. back to the end of the line. no instant rematch UNLESS the fight was extremely controversial.

I agree with everything you've written aside from the tourneys, but try telling this to the pink goof.