Why shouldn't # of title defenses be the gold standard for determining GOAT status?

[FrankDux]

I ask this in good faith.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Because this thing called "context" exists.

 

[EVIL WAR GOD]

I think it is, that and quality of opponents.

 

[Dream Evil]

You KO'd like 56 dudes in one tournament, you shouldn't have to ask.

 

[BRASIL WAND]

Because:

1. Strength of schedule (Example: Bisping title defense against a 50 year old losing record Hendo is a joke) level of competition you fight is what it’s all about.

2. If that’s the main criteria then title fight LOSSES should also factor in: GSP has 2 of them, and he was finished in both.

 

[SharpasaRazor]

Constant arguments over GOAT status is lame af

Don’t know why fans so obsessed with it in MMA

 

[mooseman17]

It’s not just title defenses, but also against who, and your road to the title.

Clearing out the division en route to a title shot should be valued much more than getting one within a fight or two.

 

[sdpdude9]

While it’s not the only thing that matters, it’s probably the best thing one can have on their resume in my mind. I believe it’s the hardest thing to do in the sport, especially for a long time. Harder to keep the drive and motivation when you’ve already obtained the ultimate goal. Not to mention all the attention and pressure that comes along with it, lots of noise and distractions. The longer you keep the title, you also get challengers that have been looking at you and breaking down your game years before they were on your radar. In the end though, it’s all subjective and some take this topic too seriously.

 

[Masturbin]

Context,level of competition and what you did before getting a shot.

Dustin for exemple had an insanely good run before the Khabib fight(Max,Eddie,Gaycheese)

 

[Rajon Rondo]

Title defenses doesn't matter when we pick khabib as the goat but sure as fuck matter when we hate on Conor for not defending two titles

 

[ferrisjso]

It should be but it shouldn't be everything. Context matters and not all title defenses are created equal for example a good non title fight today is probably worth a bit more IMO than say a Hughes defense or most defenses from the early days.

In weak divisions the best fighter might just be able to compile defenses just by being there(Izzy cough Izzy) defenses should be the number one factor but defense counting is stupid it's what a fighter proved in those defenses that matters. This is why I considered Jones the GOAT back in 2012 and the fact he's broken all of AS's records are irrelevant to that opinion for me.

 

[r-harper-1]

Wins over quality opponents is my number one criteria.....Title defences are important , but if you’re defending against weak opposition , what does it really mean ?

 

[edbn30]

I think it is, that and quality of opponents.

Also the way in which the person defended the titles. If someone dominates all their opponents in the title defenses, it gives them much more credibility for GOAT than if they win by slim DEC

 

[Canadian fan]

Usman’s 4 title defences were against 4 guys with a total of 31 losses at the time he faced them.

 

[DoubleTrouble]

I ask this in good faith.

Strength of opposition matters more.

 

[DoubleTrouble]

Title defenses doesn't matter when we pick khabib as the goat but sure as fuck matter when we hate on Conor for not defending two titles

This is such an asinine point. The two things have nothing to do with each other.

 

[Deleted member 583968]

I think it is, that and quality of opponents.

I think Title defences mean something because of the quality of opponents. It implies, you are always fighting the next top contender. Not saying, that's what happens all the time though.

 

[Street Bishop]

LMAOOOO

 

[kflo]

there is never 1 criteria. people want to invent them, or act as if there is. but nope.

 

[Raymundo Alvarado Guevara]

It is easy to come to the top, the difficult part It is to stay there