Could Tate vs Holm II actually make sense??

[DS7]

In normal circumstances a fighter who never defended the belt and got finished would never be considered to a immediate rematch, BUT...in the state in which the division is could we actually make a argument in Holly`s favor?? I mean with Ronda still out until November, if we look at the rankings only Amanda Nunes could make a a case for a titleshot, she is on a 3 fight win streak, but her last fight was not that impressive and she showed some big holes in her game to fight for the title yet. Not only Tate vs Holm II probably makes more money, Holm also was 2 minutes away of winning that fight with almost 4 rounds in her pocket. So my question is, It is so unreasonable to make that rematch?

 

[Thepaintbucket]

What's the point of having a belt and advertising it's greatness when the champion or contender gets an instant rematch. The belt is pretty much devalued in cases like this.

 

[jx820]

Yeah, there's a case to be made. It's as simple as someone will pay to see that fight, and no matter who wins a Ronda rematch will be huge.

From an athletic qualifications perspective, not at all. There's no controversy, no legacy, no unanswered questions.

 

[Sebg]

Instant rematches are having a marked negative effect on the fans' enjoyment of this fight promotion.

 

[Cheapshart]

Tate isn't stupid. She'll sit on that belt and wait for Ronda.

 

[camelfarmer1]

For me - give the next best person a shot at the belt and let ronda fight holly for the shot after that.

 

[Ceez]

Tate isn't stupid. She'll sit on that belt and wait for Ronda.

Nope not true she already said she wanted to stay busy. I bet she fights in the summertime again

 

[Cheapshart]

We'll see.

 

[Zefram Cochrane]

Ofc it makes sense, but giving the shot to the current n1 contender (Nunes) makes more sense.

 

[cigano]

In normal circumstances a fighter who never defended the belt and got finished would never be considered to a immediate rematch, BUT...in the state in which the division is could we actually make a argument in Holly`s favor?? I mean with Ronda still out until November, if we look at the rankings only Amanda Nunes could make a a case for a titleshot, she is on a 3 fight win streak, but her last fight was not that impressive and she showed some big holes in her game to fight for the title yet. Not only Tate vs Holm II probably makes more money, Holm also was 2 minutes away of winning that fight with almost 4 rounds in her pocket. So my question is, It is so unreasonable to make that rematch?

Only makes sense if the loser has to lick out the winner.

 

[Andzso]

the uruk hai shemale is coming!

 

[GordonMMARamsey]

No. Outside of the Ronda fight - Holly hasn't looked spectacular in the UFC. If you go back and watch all of her fights, none of them are as impressive as her win over Ronda. They're all pretty average performances. Just like her fight with MIesha up until when she lost. She had won more rounds, but it wasn't anything amazing. I'm not saying she sucks or anything like that - but I dont think she needs to be given a rematch. Have her fight Pena, Cat, or Nunes.

 

[Diggem]

Holm vs Tate does make the most sense. They are the two best fighters in the division and it was a close fight. A rematch is needed next.

 

[Diggem]

the uruk hai shemale is coming!

Ronda is not coming back.

 

[P0rkchop]

As a #1 contender you need to beat the champ twice in a row or it doesn't count. At least that's what it looks like in the UFC nowadays

 

[TheCryingElite]

In normal circumstances a fighter who never defended the belt and got finished would never be considered to a immediate rematch, BUT...in the state in which the division is could we actually make a argument in Holly`s favor?? I mean with Ronda still out until November, if we look at the rankings only Amanda Nunes could make a a case for a titleshot, she is on a 3 fight win streak, but her last fight was not that impressive and she showed some big holes in her game to fight for the title yet. Not only Tate vs Holm II probably makes more money, Holm also was 2 minutes away of winning that fight with almost 4 rounds in her pocket. So my question is, It is so unreasonable to make that rematch?