Do a better job of criticising Nate's ranking removal.

Discussion in 'UFC Discussion' started by slowlearnerbjj, May 11, 2014.

  1. slowlearnerbjj

    slowlearnerbjj Yellow Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think you should remove fighters from the ranking because of contract negotiations but the criticisms I see of the UFC's actions are all off-point.

    Everyone is still going on about how x fighter is inactive like Nate and so if Nate has been removed, so too should x be removed.

    But the publicly stated reason for Nate's removal is that he is inactive and there's no indication when he's coming back, if ever.

    With Pettis there was always a reasonably predictable timeline as to his return. With TJ Grant, because of the nature of his injury, nobody knew how long he'd be out and there was reason to think it could be a really long time. Similarly, it's possible Nate might never fight again and so the UFC claims he fits this criteria.

    So if you wanna criticise the UFC's treating of Nate you can't just say "there's inconsistency because x is also inactive". You have to say something like:
    a. "x is also inactive and there's no indication of when they'll return, and they're ranked".
    b. "Nate doesn't fit the 'inactive for indeterminate amount of time criteria'"
    c. Something more general like "The UFC should have no influence over the rankings and should let the media-generated rankings stand as they are".
     
  2. theincognito

    theincognito Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2013
    Messages:
    3,186
    Likes Received:
    1,728
    To me, it is OK to remove fighters who won't take fights. They should also remove / strip the title from anyone after 365 days of inactivity.
     
  3. Jopo

    Jopo Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    2,589
    Location:
    Spinning backfist seminar in West Linn
    Stop following rankings you'll be happier.

    it is funny how petty the ufc is. They will keep a guy in the rankings if hes injured for over a year but if they don't like you? bye bye. The old rule was 1 year inactive and youre out. That changed when GSP became a cash cow.
     
  4. RedDevilFedor

    RedDevilFedor Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    On a Moonlight Drive.
    Meh the way Nate talks about UFC, how can anyone be surprised?
     
  5. M.V.C.

    M.V.C. Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    14,693
    Likes Received:
    2,983
    Nate is ducking fighting for the UFC.
     
  6. slowlearnerbjj

    slowlearnerbjj Yellow Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    0
    The whole point of the post is to remind people that the UFC's publicly stated criteria is "inactive and no clear idea of time of return". Keeping a guy in the rankings for slightly over a year doesn't contradict this.

    Again, I think Nate shouldn't be removed and I think a hard limit of 12 months inactivity for any reason should be the grounds for removal, but what I personally want doesn't mean shit. If we're going to disagree with what's going on we need to respond to it directly, as it's stated by those with influence, not just spew all the shit we idiots on the site would want or we'd have Nick Diaz fighting Connor McGoober for the title with 20-minute first rounds and nothing but soccer kicks and slaps permitted.
     
  7. Spearfish CA

    Spearfish CA Silver Belt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2007
    Messages:
    13,362
    Likes Received:
    4,220
    Location:
    Snorkilling
    I think the UFC DOES like Nate Diaz, but you can't stay ranked if you are refusing fights. It's not fair to the guys trying to fight their way up the rankings that you can just sit out voluntarily and stay ranked and keep those guys out of the rankings.

    Rankings are for contenders. If Nate doesn't want to contend, then he doesn't get ranked. Has nothing to do with "liking" you and it certainly isn't petty.
     
  8. Kalmah

    Kalmah Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2013
    Messages:
    16,964
    Likes Received:
    11,531
    He would be ranked if he actually fought.
     
  9. Emjay

    Emjay And again and again and again and ag.. zzzzzzzz

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,037
    Likes Received:
    12,066
    Rankings don't matter
     
  10. Charlestonboy

    Charlestonboy Blue Belt

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Charleston, Sc
    If you choose not to fight, then you're basically retired. Therefore, unrankable.
     
  11. Jesse James

    Jesse James Chastity Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Messages:
    10,389
    Likes Received:
    714
    Location:
    3rd Planet from the Sun
    I agree.....No fight - no ranking.....no belt....
     
  12. chaoticmayhem

    chaoticmayhem Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    3,840
    Likes Received:
    842
    Nate refuses to fight. He's turning down fights that are presented to him. Whereas others are trying to climb the ladder by taking whatever the UFC offers. Why should he be ranked at this point over others that are hungrier?

    I like the Diaz's but if you're a healthy fighter then you got to fight or lose your spot. That's my opinion.
     
  13. biscuitsbrah

    biscuitsbrah Black Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2013
    Messages:
    7,131
    Likes Received:
    3,066
    Not taking fights is the same thing as being inactive.
     
  14. Pinnacle

    Pinnacle Green Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    First rankings don't matter .
    Second , it's transparent how butthurt you are about Nate.
    But simple fact . He signed a new contract,and when he's offered a fight he says no I want more money or a new contract .
    Or dude just doesn't answer his phone .
    Fuck it . Drop him .
    I used to respect Nate and I liked how he was a company man, respectfully handled things and took any fight that came to him .
    Now ... He's not that same guy .
     
  15. hansy

    hansy Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    0
    i think you should stay in the rankings til a certain amount of time is over (like 1 year or 15 months or so) or you're officially no longer a ufc fighter.
     
  16. CRuck1980

    CRuck1980 Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    18,894
    Likes Received:
    1,866
    Location:
    Bel Aire, Ks
    Nate refuses to fight, therefore he's irrelevant
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.