Justin/Dustin vs Tony/Conor = rightful LW title holder

Dionysian

Dionysian

Gold Belt
@Gold
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
18,422
Reaction score
10,990
Do you agree?

Chandler doesn't belong in the conversation IMO. But IF you did it that way (winner of Justin vs Dustin fights the winner of Tony vs Conor for the undisputed belt) then I think the LW belt would actually mean something again.

If you don't do that, you'll have problems. Like Khabib said, Dustin and Conor both got choked out by Khabib. If you declare the winner of that one fight to be the champ, it definitely gives the "place holder champ that was finished by Khabib" vibe.

BUT if you made it a 4-man tournament (with the 4 top guys in the division) then the guy who wins twice would have enormously high stock. Only that way would they truly be the "undisputed" LW title holder.

What do you think?

EDIT: Dustin vs Tony winner against Justin vs Conor winner also works. Thanks Fahrenheit. That setup also features no rematches (Dustin vs Justin) for their initial stages as well. The important points are to utilize all the top 4 while avoiding the Tony vs Justin rematch trap and the "crowning a champ with just one fight" trap, which would degrade the belt's legitimacy. Both my OP suggestion and Fahrenheit's suggestion meet both criteria.
 
Last edited:
No @ 'conor'. He's only had 2 fights at lightweight and hasn't fought at lightweight in 2 years, he shouldn't even be in the discussion. At least Chandler is coming off a huge knockout win over former UFC lightweight champion Benson Henderson one of the toughest fighters in lightweight history.
 
TrevorLahey said:
No @ 'conor'. He's only had 2 fights at lightweight and hasn't fought at lightweight in 2 years, he shouldn't even be in the discussion. At least Chandler is coming off a huge knockout win over former UFC lightweight champion Benson Henderson one of the toughest fighters in lightweight history.
Click to expand...
No offense to Chandler, but beating the old version of Bendo just doesn't cut it. Even if Conor is "bullshit ranked" at least he is ranked highly and has massive name recognition.

I get that the UFC sees some sort of charm to Chandler, but he simply doesn't have the chops with casuals to be worth the spot. He honestly shouldn't have the chops with hardcores either, considering his best win is what you mentioned and it wasn't vs a ranked fighter.
 
I would be less annoyed with this timeline. However, they are just going make a LW Title fight of Conor vs. TBA.
 
Local Plata said:
I would be less annoyed with this timeline. However, they are just going make a LW Title fight of Conor vs. TBA.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the fact that it wouldn't be done overnight would make it a non-bullshit belt. If they cobble something together to try and sell as much PPVs on one night it will cheapen the belt, the sport, and the long-term aspirations they have for future PPVs (since no one is thrilled to watch a bullshit belt be defended)
 
Dionysian said:
Exactly, the fact that it wouldn't be done overnight would make it a non-bullshit belt. If they cobble something together to try and sell as much PPVs on one night it will cheapen the belt, the sport, and the long-term aspirations they have for future PPVs (since no one is thrilled to watch a bullshit belt be defended)
Click to expand...
Yup. Purely a shitty "business decision". Why waste the money producing 3 shows to determine a real champ, when Conor draws the money and won't fight, or win, against top competition. Might as well just give him the belt in one PPV, then hope the toughest competition eliminate each other for a 2nd PPV against someone else. 2 pointless Conor fights will make more money than 3 shows with the best fighters fighting each other ... so yeah ... fuck MMA, just have the clowns dance and rake in the dough.
 
The right and fair thing to do would be Dustin vs Justin for the title since Justin just fought for the title as the interitem champ and Dustin holds a stoppage victory over him and is also coming off a win over Hooker. Then have Tony vs Conor/Chandler or Olivera for the next shot.
I think no matter what the new Champion is going to be seen as a "paper champion" until it's been a few years and a newer batch of contenders arise that weren't a.) already beaten by khabib and b.) not beaten by someone Khabib has beaten.
 
Dionysian said:
Do you agree?

Chandler doesn't belong in the conversation IMO. But IF you did it that way (winner of Justin vs Dustin fights the winner of Tony vs Conor for the undisputed belt) then I think the LW belt would actually mean something again.

If you don't do that, you'll have problems. Like Khabib said, Dustin and Conor both got choked out by Khabib. If you declare the winner of that one fight to be the champ, it definitely gives the "place holder champ that was finished by Khabib" vibe.

BUT if you made it a 4-man tournament (with the 4 top guys in the division) then the guy who wins twice would have enormously high stock. Only that way would they truly be the "undisputed" LW title holder.

What do you think?
Click to expand...
Meh... none of it matters. The crazy and kinda sad thing is that almost none of these guys will be on top for much longer.
 
IneedSometop said:
I think no matter what the new Champion is going to be seen as a "paper champion" until it's been a few years and a newer batch of contenders arise that weren't a.) already beaten by khabib and b.) not beaten by someone Khabib has beaten.
Click to expand...
True but at least with this 4 man tourney it would lend some legitimacy. It may be quite awhile until we get to the period that you're talking about (only guys not connected to Khabib/people he beat)
GoshiShun17 said:
Meh... none of it matters. The crazy and kinda sad thing is that almost none of these guys will be on top for much longer.
Click to expand...
Why do you say that it doesn't matter? Us hardcores may be small in number but I think even casuals/ESPN would raise an eyebrow if they created a straight-up bullshit belt at LW ASAP.
 
Dionysian said:
True but at least with this 4 man tourney it would lend some legitimacy. It may be quite awhile until we get to the period that you're talking about (only guys not connected to Khabib/people he beat)

Why do you say that it doesn't matter? Us hardcores may be small in number but I think even casuals/ESPN would raise an eyebrow if they created a straight-up bullshit belt at LW ASAP.
Click to expand...
When was the last time the UFC used a tournament style bracket to deteriorate a champ?

They didn't do it for 205 and they won't start now unfortunately.

As far as that other stuff I said, maybe I'm just overthinking but everytime it seems there are a out 4 or t established guys on top set to rule a division for a long time, things get shaken up pretty quickly.

Looking at history, remember it seemed like the 205 belt would rotate between Shogun, Machida, Rashad, and Rampage. Next thing you know Jon comes and fucks everyone up and at least two of those fighters fell off majorly due to injury.

At 185 it seemed like Weidman and Rockhold would be a long time elite level rivalry. Then you had Souza and Romero fucking everyone else up. Next thing you know, two of those fighters fall off HARD and Robert Whittaker(a nobody at the time. Relatively speaking) rises up to take the crown there.

I have more examples, but again I'm overthinking.
 
Last edited:
“Rightful title holder”

lol. The rightful owner just retired. These guys are fighting for scraps.

But gotta stop with the Conor leapfrogging everyone. He has just that one win gift title shot vs Alvarez. One win at LW, and ALREADY had a title shot vs Khabib. Enough already with the fast tracking Conor to undeserved title shots
 
Dionysian said:
Do you agree?

Chandler doesn't belong in the conversation IMO. But IF you did it that way (winner of Justin vs Dustin fights the winner of Tony vs Conor for the undisputed belt) then I think the LW belt would actually mean something again.

If you don't do that, you'll have problems. Like Khabib said, Dustin and Conor both got choked out by Khabib. If you declare the winner of that one fight to be the champ, it definitely gives the "place holder champ that was finished by Khabib" vibe.

BUT if you made it a 4-man tournament (with the 4 top guys in the division) then the guy who wins twice would have enormously high stock. Only that way would they truly be the "undisputed" LW title holder.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

What I agree with most is that no man should follow Khabib as lightweight champion on the strength of a single victory right now.

I can see arguments for a variety of different mini-tournaments.

Poirier vs Tony and Justin vs Conor would probably be what I would lean towards, with Chandler booked against someone like Oliveira, Hooker, or whoever else might jump the queue with a big win.

Tony/Conor and JG/DP II would work for me too.

The problem with the current DP-Conor matchup is that JG crushed Tony very recently. So if they stick with DP-Conor I would make JG vs Chandler on the other side.

Knowing the UFC though I would expect them to use this situation differently. I unfortunately expect them to use the situation as leverage over the fighters, dangling the title fight but threatening to give it to someone else if the negotiations get contentious. That would put someone like Poirier in a tough spot. Would he risk losing the opportunity to the others to hold firm in contract talks? Really difficult.
 
Oliveira vs Tony should be the tittle eliminator. Best winning streaks. It also could be a great fight for the fans.

VS the winner of Conor/Dustin

I'd like to see the WSOF champ Gaethje vs BFC champ Chandler, in another note
 
Local Plata said:
Yup. Purely a shitty "business decision". Why waste the money producing 3 shows to determine a real champ, when Conor draws the money and won't fight, or win, against top competition. Might as well just give him the belt in one PPV, then hope the toughest competition eliminate each other for a 2nd PPV against someone else. 2 pointless Conor fights will make more money than 3 shows with the best fighters fighting each other ... so yeah ... fuck MMA, just have the clowns dance and rake in the dough.
Click to expand...

Agree. If they’re going to have their best lightweights fight they’re going to want to market those fights as title fights. They would also LOVE to have Conor as champion again. Using a title fight as bait and playing DP, JG, TF and MC off against each other seems like their play.

The UFC only loses these negotiations when they run out of viable alternatives (see Masvidal vs Usman), so why put themselves in that position voluntarily by declaring two fights semifinals. If they instead, by way of example, booked Conor vs Chandler for the belt and then booked Tony vs Oliveira and DP vs JG II, now they hold all the cards. Hell, if Conor wins they can threaten to throw Nate right into a title fight at that point.

(That’s actually the dream scenario for the company and it would admittedly be a blast for the fans too — if Nate wakes up and decides he wants in on this action, and now you could legitimately make four separate fights that could serve as eliminators)
 
Since we’re having fun this morning, how about this little doozy....

McGregor vs Masvidal
Ferguson vs Diaz
Chandler vs Gaethje
Poirier vs Oliveira

Who says no to that?
 
JSF said:
“Rightful title holder”

lol. The rightful owner just retired. These guys are fighting for scraps.

But gotta stop with the Conor leapfrogging everyone. He has just that one win gift title shot vs Alvarez. One win at LW, and ALREADY had a title shot vs Khabib. Enough already with the fast tracking Conor to undeserved title shots
Click to expand...

Agree, but rightly or wrongly Conor was the lineal champ and had to be KN’s next fight after The Raging One.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,988
Messages
55,459,622
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top