Should be a defending clause in the champions contracts...

marksmen

marksmen

Brown Belt
@Brown
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
16
That says they are obligated to defend their belt at least twice a year and more if the fighter so chooses. If a fighter gets injured than that would change. If a fighter is injured or can't defend for over a year they will be stripped of the belt.

This would keep the divisions moving along and the UFC would always have an undisputed champ that is either defending or they can gtfo. Thoughts?

Edit: Also they could make it so that if a champ gets stripped because of injury, they get a title shot when they come back if the time away is less than say 2 years.
 
No.


Finishing fights should be a clause in a champions contracts.
 
Sure, for normal fighters. Not for Conor, he deserves everything he gets. He has completely transcended the sport, and will be running the UFC, and maybe all of MMA, before long.
 
Even with injuries there should be a stipulation. The amount of time it took them to strip Cruz was ridiculous. There should be a clause in all contracts for champions. 1 year without defending = stripped of title. Then give an automatic shot upon their return.
 
I agree, but I wouldn't put a timer on it (it get messy, as fighters get injuries, or they have commitments and the dates do not align, etc).
I would simply say that a champion has an obligation to defend their belts.
If they are healthy, they can ONLY fight non-title fights (or outside their weight class) once, after (at least) 2 successful defenses against top ranked opponents that same year.
This would allow super-fights to happen at the tail end of the year.
We all win this way!

If they are injured, same would apply... unless they could not defend at all that year (due to injury). Then the #1 contender becomes the interim and should fight the #2 for the real belt. (or something of the sort).
 
wompuscatwilly said:
Even with injuries there should be a stipulation. The amount of time it took them to strip Cruz was ridiculous. There should be a clause in all contracts for champions. 1 year without defending = stripped of title. Then give an automatic shot upon their return.
Click to expand...

Agree with everything above.

But in the WME era, it's obvious that titles have no meaning.
 
I agree and have always thought this. Fighters will do anything to get a shot at the title. I'm sure they will sign a clause to say if they win they must defend against anyone the UFC chooses.

Pretty simple actually
 
wompuscatwilly said:
Even with injuries there should be a stipulation. The amount of time it took them to strip Cruz was ridiculous. There should be a clause in all contracts for champions. 1 year without defending = stripped of title. Then give an automatic shot upon their return.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but only if absence was justified, e.g. they suffered an injury.

Fighting boxers doesn't qualify.
 
oprah-free-car.jpg

At this point the UFC should just go full Oprah

YOU GET AN INTERIM TITLE!
YOU GET AN INTERIM TITLE!
YOU GET AN INTERIM TITLE!
EVERYBODY GETS AN INTERIM TITLE!
 
UFC would just ignore that clause whenever it suited them anyway.
 
marksmen said:
That says they are obligated to defend their belt at least twice a year and more if the fighter so chooses. If a fighter gets injured than that would change. If a fighter is injured or can't defend for over a year they will be stripped of the belt.

This would keep the divisions moving along and the UFC would always have an undisputed champ that is either defending or they can gtfo. Thoughts?

Edit: Also they could make it so that if a champ gets stripped because of injury, they get a title shot when they come back if the time away is less than say 2 years.
Click to expand...

At least twice a year is a bit much for champions. Many times there is no credible challenger every 6 months. I'd say 8 months, so the target would be 3 title fights at least every 2 years per division. There could be more, but I wouldn't strip a champ because they did not have 2 fights within 6 months and a day of each other.
 
QueenVitor said:
Sure, for normal fighters. Not for Conor, he deserves everything he gets. He has completely transcended the sport, and will be running the UFC, and maybe all of MMA, before long.
Click to expand...

MMA is getting so shitty nowadays because douchebags like Conor call the shots and because pseudo fans like you condone the bullshit...can anybody ban this clown please??
 
Absolutely not. Here is why. For example, let us say Mike Perry was the WW champ and he was scheduled to defend his belt against Ponzi Scheme, and Darren Till vs Donald Cerrone was a fight for the next number one contender.

I think the UFC should have the option to cancel Perry vs Ponzinibio, and make Perry vs Till, and then give Ponzinibio the next shot vs the winner of Perry vs Till.

The Perry vs Till confrontation was "organic match-making" and the entire MMA community was amped to see that fight. It would have done bigger numbers than Perry vs Ponzinibio.

Having mandatory defenses is not a good idea, because we don't want to be stuck with fights like Woodley vs Wonderboy 2, The Racist Snitch vs Demian Maia. Boring or untechnical "making MMA look unathletic and amateurish" fights.

When an "organic" matchmaking fight presents itself, I will always be in favor of cancelling whatever fight that was previously booked, in favor of the "organic" rivalry fight first.

Just my opinion.
 
marksmen said:
That says they are obligated to defend their belt at least twice a year and more if the fighter so chooses. If a fighter gets injured than that would change. If a fighter is injured or can't defend for over a year they will be stripped of the belt.

This would keep the divisions moving along and the UFC would always have an undisputed champ that is either defending or they can gtfo. Thoughts?

Edit: Also they could make it so that if a champ gets stripped because of injury, they get a title shot when they come back if the time away is less than say 2 years.
Click to expand...
What is the deal with this division moving? The division moves regardless of one fighter. Name one division stalled? Conor hasn't defended and guess what? Tony is champ. Khabib and barboza winner will fight him and I'm sure the champ.afywr that will fight too even if Conor never returns. This site is complaining about an imaginary problem.
 
wompuscatwilly said:
Even with injuries there should be a stipulation. The amount of time it took them to strip Cruz was ridiculous. There should be a clause in all contracts for champions. 1 year without defending = stripped of title. Then give an automatic shot upon their return.
Click to expand...

The number of training injuries is by far the most of any sport there is...you don't see pro football players getting injured all the time in training...if they get injured, it's during the game itself...fighters are doing something wrong, if they are constantly getting injured...I've never even heard of guys getting injured the way they do in mma, in other sports...not even close...
 
bigconan said:
The number of training injuries is by far the most of any sport there is...you don't see pro football players getting injured all the time in training...if they get injured, it's during the game itself...fighters are doing something wrong, if they are constantly getting injured...I've never even heard of guys getting injured the way they do in mma, in other sports...not even close...
Click to expand...

I think some of it is the nature of the sport itself and being an individual sport VS a team sport. If you're a baseball, basketball, football player etc., maybe you have a little nagging injury but you are able to pay through it. Maybe you're only at 85% but because of your teammates they're able to elevate their game to compensate for yours. Whereas in fighting, in a cage alone with your opponent who is looking to do you harm, that little nagging injury could be the difference in winning or losing or even getting hurt badly. I'm not defending the amount of injuries per se but I do think that's one of the differences we see in combat sports.
 
QueenVitor said:
Sure, for normal fighters. Not for Conor, he deserves everything he gets. He has completely transcended the sport, and will be running the UFC, and maybe all of MMA, before long.
Click to expand...


Connor is never going to fight in the UFC again... He is going to take over the music scene.

As far as contracted defenses... It's not the fighters who are the problem... It's the UFC. They can tear up a contract any time they want if there is money in it for them.

n6uYD3J.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,254,510
Messages
56,651,531
Members
175,334
Latest member
dubhlinn

Share this page

Back
Top