Debate: Should UFC be regulating their own titles?

[Edmond Rousey]

The system for Boxing is far from perfect, but one thing that is clearly different is:

Whenever Golden Boy or Mayweather Promotions (for example) promotes an event with a title fight, said title is regulated by a 3rd party (WBA, IBF, The Ring, etc.) - not by the promoter. These orgs generally stay out of matchmaking, but sometimes they do name a mandatory contender within a division.

Would such a change help MMA, or make things even worse?

Also...Boxers generally do not fight in leagues such as UFC & Bellator. Should MMA lose the leagues?

 

[Emjay]

UFC = WWE so no

Edit - I mean yes

 

[Zanmato]

The UFC will never hand that kind of control over to someone else, but perhaps they could introduce the idea of a 'mandatory challenger'. It would prevent the kind of fiasco we are having to endure now. It's not like it happens often, but if the UFC say 'we want this match' and a fighter turns up their nose to it, give them 'x' time to comply or strip them and have someone else fight for the title.

 

[whiteboycheckin**]

Boxing's model is terrible for this very reason. Decentralization in combat sports is a horrible idea. We wouldn't have gotten half the great matchups we've had using their model.

 

[xP]

MMA doesn't have enough depth for this to make sense. With only one org having all the top talent, it doesn't make sense for multiple belts like it does in Boxing.

Boxing's model is terrible for this very reason. Decentralization in combat sports is a horrible idea. We wouldn't have gotten half the great matchups we've had using their model.

I'm not sure if this is true. It makes sense but there are more boxers than MMA fighters and a lot more high level fighters globally. Multiple belts were made because deserving fighters weren't getting their chance at a belt. Belts get unified so the top guys still fight each other. Fights that don't happen in boxing seem to have more to do with different promoters (Top Rank vs GB) than it does the belts. That problem exists in MMA (UFC/Bellator) but is less of a factor because Bellator doesn't have as many top fighters and the ones they do have don't have the same marketing push and fan base.

It's an interesting subject to me and I understand where you're coming from. It can be confusing to fans to find out that there are 4-5 champions per division.

 

[Pittie Petey]

Those 3rd parties that regulate titles are controlled by the boxing promoters

 

[JKS]

I don't think it would work as well in mma

 

[JoeJohnston]

People like Don King would come around again

 

[spid3yo]

lol@manditory MMA challengers....why do you think a non UFC group could create them better than the UFC can?

 

[TKJ]

Dear god no. This is the exact problem with boxing.

The UFC has many faults, but for the most part we get to see the fights that need to happen.

In boxing we get the fights that... Mayweather wants. It's so fucking dysfunctional.

Why would you possibly want so many champions? The UFC currently has the undisputed best champion in each of it's divisions. why muddy the waters?

 

[Zanmato]

lol@manditory MMA challengers....why do you think a non UFC group could create them better than the UFC can?

why lol@?

i wasn't suggesting a 3rd party should pick the challengers, but if the UFC say "this guy is the next in line" then the offer should be made and the fight should be signed. "i don't want to fight him" isn't a good enough reason, so if a fighter goes down this track, tell them "this is the fight we're offering, sign it or we'll get someone else to take your place in the title fight"

 

[spid3yo]

why lol@?

i wasn't suggesting a 3rd party should pick the challengers, but if the UFC say "this guy is the next in line" then the offer should be made and the fight should be signed. "i don't want to fight him" isn't a good enough reason, so if a fighter goes down this track, tell them "this is the fight we're offering, sign it or we'll get someone else to take your place in the title fight"

Then the far better solution (and something I've advocated for) is the UFC simply stop naming "#1 contenders" so the fans don't have the ammo to use when there are hurdles.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Hell no. Why would anyone think this is a good idea for MMA? It's barely functional as is in boxing today.

 

[Zanmato]

Then the far better solution (and something I've advocated for) is the UFC simply stop naming "#1 contenders" so the fans don't have the ammo to use when there are hurdles.

i think that's a fair point because fighters can go from #1 to 2,3 or lower without even having a fight, which i believe happened to belfort (may be misremembering)

 

[Edmond Rousey]

why lol@?

i wasn't suggesting a 3rd party should pick the challengers, but if the UFC say "this guy is the next in line" then the offer should be made and the fight should be signed. "i don't want to fight him" isn't a good enough reason, so if a fighter goes down this track, tell them "this is the fight we're offering, sign it or we'll get someone else to take your place in the title fight"

This.

 

[XTREME POWER]

UFC is sports entertainment. Sanctioning bodies are for real sports like boxing.

 

[Osiris007]

No, everyone talks about fighter pay well for example in boxing the WBA takes 3% of fighter pay for title fights. So for example if a fighter is making $700,00 the WBA gets $21,000 for title fights. I'm not sure if that would be the case if UFC gave up control but whoever took control of title fights would have to make money somehow.

 

[K1HerosNakamura]

The UFC will never hand that kind of control over to someone else, but perhaps they could introduce the idea of a 'mandatory challenger'. It would prevent the kind of fiasco we are having to endure now. It's not like it happens often, but if the UFC say 'we want this match' and a fighter turns up their nose to it, give them 'x' time to comply or strip them and have someone else fight for the title.

I agree with this mandatory challenger idea, but let's not forget Gus has only one win since his last loss, and the opponent wasn't top ten. Sure he deserves a rematch, but I don't think it would be the end of the world if he fought again before fighting Jones. Manuwa wasn't even top 10.

 

[elzar]

we should have a general plebiscite of fans who belong to the UFC and MMA fan council. one would be like the senate, and the other the house of representatives. Dana as Vice President would cast tie breaking votes. Lorenzo would have veto power as president. and the fan congress could override vetos with 2/3 vote.

also we would need a fan supreme court (appointed by the president, approved by the fan congress) to determine the legality of new rules like UFC uniforms.

is this getting stupid enough for you? it's a private company interested in promoting marketable fights. zuffa gets the only say. but, it being a business, most often they will give fans what they want. even if it means promoting a title fight featuring someone who isn't the #1 contender. see chael sonnen if you aren't clear about what i mean.