Worst champ in UFC history with minimum 1 title defence?

Why?
(just curious, not a fan)
frankie-edgar-ufc-on-fox-15-2-640x400.jpg
 
Still no one bringing up Ken Shamrock???

UFC SuperFight Champion...
Subbed Severn to earn it...went on a 30+min forgetable draw against Oleg...subbed Kimo...and losing the belt in one of THE MOST BORING fights eveeeer against Severn...
 
Lets see who all actually read the OP. Disqualifying Bisping because he will be the obvious pick for a lot of guys.

How does it disqualify Bisping? He has a minimum of one title defense...he need the pre requisites of this thread
 
I am talking about the title fights. And Woodley has a majority draw in his 1st fight as champ, a 2nd fight which was a snoozefest where the majority of people thought he lost, and that W against Maia, overall it makes him the worst champ imo.

You have to take into account who he is fighting - the best of the best.

I understand it's your opinion though, but I disagree that he is the worst fighter to ever be champion.
 
You have to take into account who he is fighting - the best of the best.

I understand it's your opinion though, but I disagree that he is the worst fighter to ever be champion.
The thread title doesn´t say "worst fighter" to ever be champ. It says "worst champ" , it´s 2 different things. He is a great fighter, but his reign as champion is the most boring one imo, it´s obvious he fights not to lose, and not to the best of his abilities. Bisping is a duck, technically limited and an asshole with the mike, but when he steps in that octagon you can clearly see he is doing his best to win the fight even though he sucks many times, but he is trying hard. Woodley isn´t.
 
The title doesn´t say "worst fighter" to ever be champ. It says "worst champ" , it´s 2 different things. He is a great fighter, but his reign as champion is the most boring one imo, it´s obvious he fights not to lose, and not to the best of his abilities. Bisping is a duck, technically limited and an asshole with the mike, but when he steps in that octagon you can clearly see he is doing his best to win the fight. Woodley isn´t.

Yeah I guess I interpreted the question differently as in who was the worst to ever become champion and defend.
 
Hate to use the word worst, but probably Maurice Smith as HW Champ

I think he would be the least effective fighter when ranked against the other champs with 1 defense on a p4p scale
 
Yeah I guess I interpreted the question differently as in who was the worst to ever become champion and defend.
Look, Woodley is a beast. Like DFW said, if we had a remote control for that guy.... But despite being a great athlete, I think a lot of people will remember Woodley this way
nkjVUpN.gif
 
HW - Maurice Smith
LHW - hard to say between Chuck, Machida, Rampage, Shamrock, Jon, DC and Tito.
MW - Bustamante
WW - Miletich
LW - also, very hard to say... probably Sherk, stripped for steroids
FW - none, only Max and Aldo, both are top fighters
BW - none
FLW - there can only be MM

From all these, probably HW Maurice Smith.




Why?
(just curious, not a fan)
Your list bro... Damn.

Smith is hard to argue with...
Jon Jones? Chuck? Rampage? Machida? The worst??? a those guys are all awesome
Bustamante... Ok.
Pat Militech was awesome.
LW - It's hard because there are so many options.
BW - None? Seriously? Not even Barao?
 
Look, Woodley is a beast. Like DFW said, if we had a remote control for that guy.... But despite being a great athlete, I think a lot of people will remember Woodley this way
nkjVUpN.gif

I agree if I am looking at the question the way you are. I am not a fan of his at all, and there is a legitimate reason why a lot of fans don't like him.
 
I'll go with no boxing defense Luke Rockhold.
 
Back
Top