UFC's GSP's MW defence clause was BS

Chuck

Chuck

Brown Belt
Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
4,477
Reaction score
62
Last edited:
congress gives no fuck about UFC, BRO
 
Dramovitch said:
Congress? How moronic can Sherdoggers get?
Click to expand...
You're not familiar with Congress questioning the UFC's ranking system?
I won't call you a moron...just ignorant.
 
Chuck said:
You're not familiar with Congress questioning the UFC's ranking system?
I won't call you a moron...just ignorant.
Click to expand...

I don't know anything about it either.

Links?
 
Chuck said:
I'm thinking the UFC threw that clause in there to cover their asses from congress.
They've been under some heat, and needed some substance contractually to pull the GSP/Bisping fight off.
We can claim that GSP had no intention of defending, but I suspect the UFC had no intention either.

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjn9dPZ4_bXAhUIXhoKHaEcC6oQtwIIJzAA&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJrBFumjzOw&usg=AOvVaw2q43xA9QrH3DE3IqbdJQx4
Click to expand...


I posted that video a month and a half ago..
 
Ceez said:
I posted that video a month and a half ago..
Click to expand...
Ya, Sorry Ceez...I couldn't find your post.
I wanted to include the thread link.
It seems obvious to me that the GSP clause was BS from the beginning.
 
Anyone up to pinning down footage of Dana and GSP saying that the contract stipulate that he has to defend the title if he wins it? lol
 
I think it was probably more of a verbal agreement but even if GSP signed in his contract that he has to defend the MW belt against Whittaker, you can't force him. Contractually, he can simply forfeit the belt and move on which was likely his plan from the beginning. Anything to sign the deal.
 
Doesn’t matter what the contract says. You can’t force someone to fight.
They can forbid him to fight in another org but if he wants to retire .. well

And if he fights for WW title then it’s been done with Dana’s agreement but it’s again a bad thing for the ufc in mid term
 
Senzo Tanaka said:
I think it was probably more of a verbal agreement but even if GSP signed in his contract that he has to defend the MW belt against Whittaker, you can't force him. Contractually, he can simply forfeit the belt and move on which was likely his plan from the beginning. Anything to sign the deal.
Click to expand...
The wink wink part would be verbal...but I'm thinking Dana and the UFC needed a contract to wave around.
 
I agree with the ranking system. Why have it... "Money-Fight" over #1 contender in the UFC today. Big St Pierre fan and I would rather see him test himself against Whitaker than drop back to 170 and fight Woodley.
 
I think you might be right TS. the whole thing stunk of BS and given the pressure they've been under this may have been what they needed to pull of the 'money fight'.

I hope they get what's coming to them. There's all these killas at WW and MW getting left out...Guys like Usman desperately calling everyone out. Romero never got a damn shot etc...

We just got to see 2 fringe top 10 MWs fight for the belt. The title fight before that was even more of a joke.

Let's hope the same doesn't happen at WW.
 
Kung Fu Tze said:
I agree with the ranking system. Why have it... "Money-Fight" over #1 contender in the UFC today. Big St Pierre fan and I would rather see him test himself against Whitaker than drop back to 170 and fight Woodley.
Click to expand...
I like the ranking system as well, but when the company wants superfights...all bets are off.
 
The UFC can take the belts off the table for "Super fights".
I think we're about to see a 4 champ weight division fight between GSP and Mac.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,956
Messages
55,456,953
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top