It doesn't really make sense to call active fighters GOAT

[Noxcho]

Greatest of all time is gradually becoming a less and less meaningful phrase every time it is being thrown around for a different fighter.

Especially since one moment a fighter is the goat, but then he goes on to have a few losses and he is no longer the greatest.

In my opinion you need to wait until a fighter is retired to put him into the GOAT discussion. That way you can have a clearer picture of his career and how great he really was.

I'm on the fence about active fighters who are clearly past their primes and still fighting like Silva, or fighters who are semi-retired like GSP. I think it's fair to include them in the discussion.

But Khabib, Cejudo, Jones for example, it's too early to speak about them. It would be nice to wait until they have ended their careers.

Just my opinion.

 

[Congo66]

It doesn't make any sense to call any fighter GOAT until time ends.
GOAT discussions are pointless anyway you can't compare fighters from different eras.

 

[BROWNPRIDE]

Khabib is the 155 Goat!

 

[HHJ]

What does that make AskrenGOAT and GOATsvidal then???

 

[Satan's Daddy.]

Well it does, it's good for media, and it's good for goals.

Calling an active fighter goat, is just telling them they're among the elite.

 

[Sirwastealot]

It doesn't make any sense to call any fighter GOAT until time ends.
GOAT discussions are pointless anyway you can't compare fighters from different eras.

It does make sense if you don't get stuck in semantics. It's very obvious that we mean "until now" and are not predicting the future.

People make it more complicated than it has to be. It's just the way to discuss and compare the absolute best we have seen in our sport.

 

[Talon81]

TS, you, among many others, are making the mistake of assuming that late career losses ruin a fighters claim to being GOAT.
GOAT, as seems to be the consensus, is more about the height and length of a fighters prime. How impressive were their accomplishments? How dominant were they? How many times did they defend? How long was their prime?
If GOAT had anything to do with the depths of their career after their prime, then GOAT would be a contest about how quick a fighter gets out of the game rather than how good they actually were/are.

In other words, GOAT can be equally applied to active fighters as past fighters, if what they have ALREADY accomplished makes them more so than those who came before them. The only thing that should be able to ruin that is finding out later that they cheated, which could happen whether they retired or not.

 

[StraightleftKO]

Fedor

 

[jimmy dakine]

Greatest of all time is gradually becoming a less and less meaningful phrase every time it is being thrown around for a different fighter.

Especially since one moment a fighter is the goat, but then he goes on to have a few losses and he is no longer the greatest.

In my opinion you need to wait until a fighter is retired to put him into the GOAT discussion. That way you can have a clearer picture of his career and how great he really was.

I'm on the fence about active fighters who are clearly past their primes and still fighting like Silva, or fighters who are semi-retired like GSP. I think it's fair to include them in the discussion.

But Khabib, Cejudo, Jones for example, it's too early to speak about them. It would be nice to wait until they have ended their careers.

Just my opinion.

Thats probably because there is no such thing as a GOAT...it doesnt exist. Current or retired, there is no definition of GOAT, so until there is criteria that had to be met in order to qualify as GOAT, there will be no GOAT, and if there were criteria, that criteria would have to evolve over time, so ultimately, it doesnt really exist.

 

[TheChance]

Giat and p4p talks are a waste of time