Should Champions be stripped for pulling out?

Congress has eyes on the sport right now. The last thing a promoter is going to do is make it look like they are iincentivizing fighting while injured....
 
What needs to be done away with is these 6 to 8 week training camps.

That's where all the injuries are happening at.
 
I
Devilton said:
I wish the UFC would create a clear framework on how to deal with situations like that or guys like Conor holding up divisions. There should be clear rules.

--> Every champ should have to defend within 12 months
--> If they can't, strip them of their title without exception, whether they can't defend because of injury or are unwilling to defend
--> If someone lost their belt because of a long-term injury, rather than losing a fight, give them an immediate shot to fight for the belt again, the moment they are fit again. That would have been the right thing to do in the Dominick Cruz dilemma.
--> Idealistically all champs should be treated the same, big names should have more leverage to get more money, but not more leverage to hold up a division
Click to expand...

I like it. Only difference I would make is make it a 6 month time frame. 2 fights a year is completely reasonable.
 
ortizgnp said:
It's more money on the line nowadays. The sport as a whole is more legit. I think that's why fighters ( and a lot of champions) pull out more often nowadays compared to before. A fighter might have a small injury he can fight through if he wants to but decides it's not worth it because it's just too much on the line.

But yea, these undisclosed injuries are frustrating. It is what it is. It's a tough question. What do we do if a champion pulls out on fight day?
Click to expand...

I get that, but it's becoming unfair to the contenders that busted their asses to get to a title shot, only for the champion to sit out. For example, the situation at MW where you got guys like Romero and Jacare fighting out the rest of their primes because of how back loaded the division is, all because the champ is out. I think consistent title defenses is good for the sport, we need to keep things moving. There should be 3 title fights a year. Except for LHW and HW, I believe most divisions have enough high level contenders for this to be sustainable.

If the champ pulls out fight day, just postpone the fight another month. That's enough time for a small training camp, and for the fighters to peak again. If the champ still won't be ready by then, stripped. If the champ has already been out a year, then it should just be counted as a forfeit loss, and the belt would be awarded to the challenger and the next contender up gets the title shot. He busted his ass in a training camp only for there to be no fight, the least you can do is just consider him champion. Maybe it won't feel right, but it serves the other guy right for not preparing properly.

Sickness doesn't happen too often, so that won't be the case for multiple pull outs. If it does happen, then it's probably because they're cutting too much weight. In which case, they need to go up a WC.
 
Last edited:
Whittaker is someone I'd give the benefit of the doubt. Him versus Rockhold/Romero winner should be amazing for the summer.
 
I never pull out, but if I was UFC champion I'd pull out daily. What's the other option, lay and pray?
 
Dana has said of you don't defend in a year you are stripped. So he stripped Randy C...but the he signed to fight Brock a couple months later and Dana flip flopped and said he was champ.
 
DLX said:
Should Champions be given a One Pull-out allowance before getting stripped? Meaning they get one strike for pull outs, and the next time means they get stripped and the next two guys up fight for the title (The previous champ would get the next title shot once he's ready to come back from injury).
Click to expand...

I like the idea. I agree with it.

If you're constantly pulling out as champ, you're obviously not top of the division anyways. The idea of the championship title is to see who's the best guy in the division. Which is why you "defend" that title against challengers.
 
Confucius once say, "man who pulls out is no champion."
 
in the liver said:
1yf17k.jpg



pull out is acceeptable under the right circumstances
Click to expand...
The pull out couch he meant...

giphy.gif
 
DLX said:
This may sound radical, and probably unfair, but it seems as though every time we get a new champion, he gets injured and has to sit out for a year, holding up the division and creating useless interim titles. I feel like there's too much of a leeway for guys that get injured, and maybe punishing guys for it will force people to not train like dumbasses.

Should Champions be given a One Pull-out allowance before getting stripped? Meaning they get one strike for pull outs, and the next time means they get stripped and the next two guys up fight for the title (The previous champ would get the next title shot once he's ready to come back from injury).

This method keeps the divisions moving, and forces guys to either fight injured and risk losing their title, or learn to train effectively without tearing up their bodies. It also removes the injury factor when setting up potential title shots (Cain, Aldo, Weidman, etc...) because there's no risk of divisions being held up from the champion sitting out.

What say brodog? Should this be implemented or is it too harsh?
Click to expand...
I think if the champion is unable to defend or refusing to defend for up to a year or more, they should be stripped. And when they are fully healed they can get an immediate title shot however if you chose to sit out, you should be stripped and forced to fight a few fights to get back to a title shot.
 
giusti825 said:
Confucius once say, "man who pulls out is no champion."
Click to expand...

Confucius from that viewpoint, sure. But I look at it as "Contenders shouldn't lose out on an opportunity because man trains like neanderthal".
 
Buff said:
They should be automatically stripped after a year if they have been healthy and don't have a fight booked.

I've been saying it for the last 10 years. Since Matt Serra had the WW belt.
Click to expand...

I don't think Serra is a good example if you are saying he should have been stripped.

He was healthy and the UFC sidelined him for TUF then he got hurt and pulled out but fought 4 months later when the new interim champion GPS was healthy.
 
Merman said:
Dana has said of you don't defend in a year you are stripped. So he stripped Randy C...but the he signed to fight Brock a couple months later and Dana flip flopped and said he was champ.
Click to expand...

He never said that and he never came close to stripping Randy. They were in a legal battle where Randy was trying to leave to fight Fedor, keeping his as UFC champion gave them additional legal leverage.
 
Only if they keep doing it without confirmed injury/illness
 
This idea is absolute garbage.

If you start stripping champs for pulling out then you devalue the belt.

I mean if that was the case GSP would be like a 4 time WW champion, Jon Jones would have beeen stripped prior to the first DC fight.

DC would have been stripped like 3 times.

Anderson would be a 5-7 time champion.

Even Mighty Mouse would be undefeated in his weight class, the first champion and still would have to have won the belt multiple times due to a single injury.
 
No.

If you strip the champion, they will likely come back and beat the new "champion"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,980
Messages
55,459,077
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top