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

slowlearnerbjj

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
150
Reaction score
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".
 
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.
 
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.
 
Nate is ducking fighting for the UFC.
 
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.

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.
 
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.

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.
 
He would be ranked if he actually fought.
 
Rankings don't matter
 
If you choose not to fight, then you're basically retired. Therefore, unrankable.
 
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.
 
Not taking fights is the same thing as being inactive.
 
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 .
 
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.
 
Nate refuses to fight, therefore he's irrelevant
 
Back
Top