How to solve UFC Matchmaking problem? Ranked fighters refusing fights...

DudeBroMMA

DudeBroMMA

Blue Belt
@Blue
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
691
Reaction score
1,825
"I want to fight someone ranked ahead of me" - Anyone getting sick of this cliche line?

It seems like things are getting out of hand with fighters refusing to fight opponents which are ranked below them. Besides holding up divisions, it makes it tougher for some guys to actually get meaningful fights and progress their careers.

I recently heard an interview with Beneil Dariush where he stated he doesn't believe he'll get a title with a win over Feguson and has no issues fighting someone ranked below him afterwards. This got me thinking...should the UFC implement an "unofficial rule" (one which is not enforced but loosely used) for ranked fighters where a ranked fighter will alternate fights with guys ranked above and below them..

Ex) if you're ranked #10 you might get matched up with #6. if you win that match and get a new ranking of #6, your next match up will be against someone ranked below you, perhaps #8.

This gives fighters a chance to both move up the rankings but at the same time, justify/defend their rank by beating someone ranked below them.
 
its a shit show cause its inconsistent

will always be that way cause

Business > Sport
 
The UFC controls the rankings, and therein lies the problem. How did Ortega sit out 2 years and not lose his ranking? Or how about Conor being ranked at all? It’s bullshit and the UFC is to blame for artificially controlling the rankings. Nothing is going to fix it unless there is a serious desire by the UFC to award rankings based on merit instead of the potential to sell a fight.

It is what it is and isn’t changing anytime soon. Because the UFC doesn’t want it to. Sitting out, or refusing fights should be punished, not rewarded.
 
TempleoftheDog said:
The UFC controls the rankings, and therein lies the problem. How did Ortega sit out 2 years and not lose his ranking? Or how about Conor being ranked at all? It’s bullshit and the UFC is to blame for artificially controlling the rankings. Nothing is going to fix it unless there is a serious desire by the UFC to award rankings based on merit instead of the potential to sell a fight.

It is what it is and isn’t changing anytime soon. Because the UFC doesn’t want it to. Sitting out, or refusing fights should be punished, not rewarded.
Click to expand...
Perhaps a more neutral arbiter :)
I say Sherdog should control the ranking :cool:
EvergreenImperfectAgouti-size_restricted.gif

I think we would be better than the UFC :cool:
 
The UFC controls it, so that is kind of where the problem is. I hate to say it, but i don't think it's gonna be fixed soon. You have company favorites who sit out, or stuff outside the octagon happens and they are still in the rankings. Or you have people who win 10 or more fights and don't get a title shot because of the "rankings". Then you have people who win 1 or 2 fights after losses and get a shot. I get it sometimes, but it is annoying at times. Lets just get rid of the rankings and i think some problems will go away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G10
Clementine said:
Perhaps a more neutral arbiter :)
I say Sherdog should control the ranking :cool:
EvergreenImperfectAgouti-size_restricted.gif

I think we would be better than the UFC :cool:
Click to expand...
We couldn’t be any worse. Well some of us could. I think the biggest thing is not punishing inactivity, and refusing fights that make sense. Nobody will fight down, so they don’t fight at all. For every month after 6 months that you don’t fight, unless you have an obvious injury. I think you should lose a ranking spot. At one year, you should be removed from the rankings entirely. Assuming that Covid, and travel restrictions aren’t an actual issue. People sure as hell wouldn’t be sitting out for a year or more. And they’d be fighting every six months if healthy.
 
Pay incentive for the higher ranked fighter to fight someone lower than them. Often the top 4 are booked for months later so you either sit and wait or fight lower ranks and get paid more. But bald goof is too greedy for that..
 
Easy. Just threaten to pull a fighter’s ranking when they behave like divas. The Dan Hookers and Colbys of the world will quickly fall in line.
 
Just strong arm certain fighters when they egregiously duck people.

guys like Colby, Felder, Hooker need to be taken from the rankings when they refuse fights.

UFC did it to Leon after he turned down Wonderboy and Khamzat. Do that more.
 
First thing to remember: The system involves each fight being negotiated independently, and Dana set up the system and keeps it that way it is because it helps him most. Unless you grok this, there is no reason to continue a conversation.

And fact is, Dana has no reason to add more stringency to his decision making power, and lot$ of reasons not to.

So TS, are you also proposing dumping the entire system as it exists? Or a proposing an "alternate universe" style tweaking of the current system?

Of course, dumping the entire system would probably involve an external force (CBA, judicial ruling, Congressional Act), so my guess is TS is just shooting from the hip here.
 
Last edited:
If you win you fight someone ranked higher
If you lose you fight someone ranked below
 
I believe the best incentive for this is money. inactivity should punished by lowering the fighter ranking. Simple as that.
 
Might be time to get rid of rankings. I liked the idea at first but reality of them seems to do more harm than good.

The transparency is nice, but UFC books who they want anyways, and it makes it harder on prospects, especially the ones that already have some hype around them, to get meaningful fights.
 
i think it is easy.. If you are out with no fights for 9 months..You drop 2 spots.. and then 2 spots every 3 months after that.
 
simple. you have a contract, you have to show up that day to fight whoever is out there.
you cant show up for (documented) medical reasons, ok.
you dont show up cause you dont want to fight that guy, you lose X ranking spots and X money.
fights based on rankings and recent history
 
It has zero to do with who runs the rankings or anything like that, everyone wants to fight someone ranked higher, that's how you move up any rankings. It's simply the culture of any rankings.
 
skylolow said:
It has zero to do with who runs the rankings or anything like that, everyone wants to fight someone ranked higher, that's how you move up any rankings. It's simply the culture of any rankings.
Click to expand...

True but you cant always be fighting up EVERY time. One guy is always fighting someone ranked below.
Essentially, we get a game of chicken, with fighters stalling and turning down dangerous opponents ranked below.

Just because you're ranked #7 doesn't mean you should fighter 1-6 next. Fight someone below and defend your rank.
Or just abolish bullshit rankings.
 
Just one more reason to only use Rankings as a 'Ballpark" figure and be sure to scroll thru a few.

Too many external factors keeping the dartboard active.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,994
Messages
55,460,023
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top