What are Your Thoughts on the BMF?

Adding a BMF belt to every weight class doesn't change the potential for big fights, whatsoever.

Same exact fighters still in the class, those level fights don't need a gimmick belt to sell.
The "claim" from 2 guys of being the best, usually only one has a belt, even if a 2nd class one, once its in the hands of a legit fighter then it opens the door for discussion, leading up to bigger fights, divisional titles are still marketing, they cant be defended against other champions.
 
Right we will turn BMF into a participation trophy.
 
I don't think we need one for every weight class.

But might be a cool thing to have one for 125 to 135, 145 to 155, 170 to 185, and 205 to 265 or something like that.

So, every weight class then?
 
They should make a separate BMF promotion with new BMF commentators, BMF refs, and a BMF matchmaker.
 
Bring back tournament style with no weight classes and legalize Keith Hackney low blows, back of the head shots, kicking downed opponent, and no gloves.
 
An honorary designation for some notoriety. Helps get fighters more pay since something to hype.
 
Hottest title right now, I want Max to defend it vs Do Bronx or the winner of Chandler vs Conor.
 
fun but kinda useless.

they could use the opportunity to have 'retired' fighters in there, with controlled juicing and more flexible weight rules. PPVs ftw
 
I like the idea of BMF trophies set aside for fan favorite fights that could be given to any weight class. Similar to early superhighway.
 
I've always been a fan of the BMF concept. It's a cool way to honor fighters who consistently go all out for the fans. I think it should stay separate from the championship belt and be defended on its own. It's the perfect setup for those epic, fan-favorite dream matchups. Making it open weight class would be even more badass.
 
I think the belt holder gets PPV points. So it's actually become a fair way to compensate HoFers like Gaethje and Holloway, who are much better than everyone outside of the top 3 but just can't beat the belt holders.

Not trying to attack your point here, but I'm just singling this take out because I've heard it a lot and to me it's like - who decides this? The UFC... right?

Cause to me, kind of like where "Only main events + titles = 5 rounds" has routinely been thrown in the trash to make great fights, the UFC could very similarly just pay PPV to non-title contenders who move the needle, no?

Are we really thinking Conor didn't get any PPV for his Cerrone fight bc he wasn't a champion?

Like, they don't really need a BMF title to give PPV, yeah? It's really just a gimmick, right?
 
Love it. Stand and bang fighters.

And gives fighters an opportunity to make more money.
 
Not trying to attack your point here, but I'm just singling this take out because I've heard it a lot and to me it's like - who decides this? The UFC... right?

Cause to me, kind of like where "Only main events + titles = 5 rounds" has routinely been thrown in the trash to make great fights, the UFC could very similarly just pay PPV to non-title contenders who move the needle, no?

Are we really thinking Conor didn't get any PPV for his Cerrone fight bc he wasn't a champion?

Like, they don't really need a BMF title to give PPV, yeah? It's really just a gimmick, right?

I agree with what you're saying, and yes, of course McGregor is the exception where everything is concerned, be it PPV points for headlining non-title fights, or being allowed to box outside the cage, or whatever.

The only thing I would add to your reply is that while putting 2 "needle-movers" in a headlining fight deserves PPV points, wrapping that fight in a "title" like BMF gives the UFC extra promotion value than just a plain headliner fight. I don't know what the number is, but just for speculation's sake, the fight between Gaethje and Holloway may have sold an extra 13% more PPVs because it was for the "BMF Title," rather than just a co-headliner between two fan favorites.
 
I personally don't mind it. The matchups so far have been good although the idea of defending the belt is a little lame.

When Buffer did his intro saying "The reigning, defending, undisputed BMF champ" it made me cringe a little.

Being a BMF is subjective so the whole idea of being a defending champ against curated opponents is a little weird.

IMO The BMF belts should just be something you fight for and "accumulate" Like trophies. Not "defend" if that makes any sense.

The BMF idea isn't bad but it should probably be a once a year thing. Hopefully they don't start throwing it in every other PPV.

What are your overall thoughts on it? Anything you would do differently now that it's here to stay?

That's a cool idea actually. Have a BMF fight every year between two all action fan favorites. That way you do can do it in any division, whichever one suits the moment and has the right fighters. Whoever wins can call themselves the 2024 BMF champion for the rest of the year.
 
Sure, but guys like Max and Justin also should've been in title fights anyways instead of fighting each other. Both of them had title shots in their own divisions. So they would've already been being paid more regardless just from the increased pay for title fights + had a chance for the real belt if they hadn't fought each other. Now Justin's taking a step back from both those things. He lost his BMF belt AND his LW title shot.

Justin wasn't in line for a title fight though. Oliveira was in front of him. And then Oliveira v Arman was booked as a number one contender fight. Since Justin doesn't take short notice fights he wouldn't have jumped in when Arman turned down the 302 fight so it still would have been Poirier. And Arman after that. Justin needed a fight to stay active or he wouldn't have fought for all of 2024.
 
Back
Top