Unearned title shots: 2025 edition

[Domitian]

This thread is called unearned title shots. I really don't need to explain this, but if your logic that 'Dana says it, so therefore yes,' then no title shots were unearned because "In Dana's opinion.." they were all "earned"

Dana can do whatever the fuck he wants. He gives title shots to people off losses, but we all know that's stupid too, don't we?

So, the fact that 57% of fan scores gave the fight to Strickland, and Dana scored the fight for Strickland, means nothing? This rematch isn't all that egregious in the context of how the fight played out.

ETA: The fight itself was a split decision, so one judge gave the fight to Strickland as well.

 

[sonhow]

Who gives a shit about Strickland? I mean sure fight was close and maybe Sean wins this time but aa far as making business with this I dont know if I see it. Unless Sean won three straight I wouldnt have booked it.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

So, the fact that 57% of fan scores gave the fight to Strickland, and Dana scored the fight for Strickland, means nothing?

Yes. What aren't you getting? Dana doesn't matter for the argument of what should happen. The argument what should happen applies to what "should have happened" in the fight. THAT'S where your argument is. Not "What should happen after it, given that the guy now officially lost." And the answer isn't "Well, fuck it, let's just pretend he didn't.

This rematch isn't all that egregious in the context of how the fight played out.

ETA: The fight itself was a split decision, so one judge gave the fight to Strickland as well.

It is, in the context of how ALL OF MMA FIGHTS PLAY OUT. How many fucking robberies happen EVERY EVENT, let alone split decisions. Do we check the percentages of fan and media scores and run em all back? No. Does every split decision get a rematch because one judge said a guy could have won? No.

Judging sucks some times. I harp on about robberies all the time. But judging is the problem. The solution isn't having Dana play a pick and choose game of when to try and overrule them and act as if the guy didn't lose. Cuz they did. That's the record. That's the point of having fights.

 

[Domitian]

Yes. What aren't you getting? Dana doesn't matter for the argument of what should happen. The argument what should happen applies to what "should have happened" in the fight. THAT'S where your argument is. Not "What should happen after it, given that the guy now officially lost." And the answer isn't "Well, fuck it, let's just pretend he didn't.


It is, in the context of how ALL OF MMA FIGHTS PLAY OUT. How many fucking robberies happen EVERY EVENT, let alone split decisions. Do we check the percentages of fan and media scores and run em all back? No. Does every split decision get a rematch because one judge said a guy could have won? No.

Judging sucks some times. I harp on about robberies all the time. But judging is the problem. The solution isn't having Dana play a pick and choose game of when to try and overrule them and act as if the guy didn't lose. Cuz they did. That's the record. That's the point of having fights.

Were just going to have to disagree on this. The outcome was inconclusive and sort of controversial which is why they are running it back, earned or unearned.

 

[MisfitsBR]

who deserves more than Strickland?
you could say Chimaev because of his momentum victory against Rob but he fights once a year and probably wouldn't be ready to fight at february

and no one has more wins against current rank guys than Sean

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

I'm not sure what you're missing here.

So what's the most likely scorecard with those averages?

By the way that all of the fans voted, the "best" scorecard is 48-47 DDP.

Were just going to have to disagree on this. The outcome was inconclusive and sort of controversial which is why they are running it back, earned or unearned.

Right, they only deserve to run this fight back and not the other 100 fights I posted. That's really what's fair

 

[Domitian]

So what's the most likely scorecard with those averages?

By the way that all of the fans voted, the "best" scorecard is 48-47 DDP.


Right, they only deserve to run this fight back and not the other 100 fights I posted.

I think DDP won the fight. I'm just pointing out the reasoning for running it back, it's because the result wasn't very decisive. I don't think either you or TS are dumb so I have to wonder if there's some sort of bias against Sean at play.

There's other things at work here as well, such as Sean is probably acting like a diva over the result and he's sort of been a good company man for the UFC.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

who deserves more than Strickland?
you could say Chimaev because of his momentum victory against Rob but he fights once a year and probably wouldn't be ready to fight at february

Yes, Sean is ready sooner, because he sat instead of taking a fight. You're rewarding squatting.

and no one has more wins against current rank guys than Sean

In the past. He's on a 1 fight win streak because he lost very recently to the guy they're rebooking him against.

Saying that a fighter should get big fights despite losing recently because those losses 'weren't that bad' is how rank squatting happens. You generally should want the guy going for the title to be the one who is winning a bunch.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

I think DDP won the fight. I'm just pointing out the reasoning for running it back, it's because the result wasn't very decisive. I don't think either you or TS are dumb so I have to wonder if there's some sort of bias against Sean at play.

I've explained 100 times what the deal is. It's not a bias against Sean. Saying that you think this fight deserves a re-go is a double standard FOR him, so if there's a bias, I know which direction I'd start pointing fingers. To that point, you've not said a single word about that every time I've brought it up that robberies and split decisions are a CONSTANT in this sport, so why are you putting in the double standard here? I'm just trying to remain consistent. For instance, I love Aldo. He got one of the most egregious shots of all time, fighting for a title off a loss that he very deserved to lose. Dana straight up leapfrogged a rematch and went straight to treating Aldo like he won. "Dana says" is not a good enough reason to just undo all that. I'm not turning a corner for Sean that I didn't for Aldo.

There's other things at work here as well, such as Sean is probably acting like a diva over the result and he's sort of been a good company man for the UFC.

Yeah, but those are the things people say is part of it being undeserving. Again, that's the point of the thread. No one who is saying Sean shouldn't get the fight is confused about the potential favors he's getting for being a company man or good for business is any way. People are just pointing out that those are not meritorious reasons for a title shot. If these were all nameless blank bodies with no social media presence, I don't think anyone would be scratching their heads over why Khamzat should get the shot over Strickland, given their current positions and momentums based on rankings and wins.

 

[Domitian]

I've explained 100 times what the deal is. It's not a bias against Sean. Saying that you think this fight deserves a re-go is a double standard FOR him, so if there's a bias, I know which direction I'd start pointing fingers. To that point, you've not said a single word about that every time I've brought it up that robberies and split decisions are a CONSTANT in this sport, so why are you putting in the double standard here? I'm just trying to remain consistent. For instance, I love Aldo. He got one of the most egregious shots of all time, fighting for a title off a loss that he very deserved to lose. Dana straight up leapfrogged a rematch and went straight to treating Aldo like he won. "Dana says" is not a good enough reason to just undo all that. I'm not turning a corner for Sean that I didn't for Aldo.


Yeah, but those are the things people say is part of it being undeserving. Again, that's the point of the thread. No one who is saying Sean shouldn't get the fight is confused about the potential favors he's getting for being a company man or good for business is any way. People are just pointing out that those are not meritorious reasons for a title shot. If these were all nameless blank bodies with no social media presence, I don't think anyone would be scratching their heads over why Khamzat should get the shot over Strickland, given their current positions and momentums based on rankings and wins.

It's because it was a title fight. These fights have meaning, the most meaning any fight could have in this sport. Rematches on title fights throughout all combat sports where a result is deemed indecisive is something that happens very regularly, especially when it's the champion who loses. We are beyond the point of earned and unearned when you venture into this area.

 

[RockyLockridge]

You definitely have a bias against Strickland if you can’t see how he’s earned it.

I disagree entirely I have nothing against sean but My argument for him not earning it is he never even earned the first one and just because he beat izzy in a Gifted title shot, doesn't mean he retroactively earned it.

He was given a gift title shot and made the most of it. He lost before his title he had 0 defenses. He got a rebound against a guy coming off a loss. Someone who whittaker already beat recently. so for that reason, No I don't think sean "earned" this title shot he's being given this title shot because he's a controversial talker and his fight with dricus was close (losing close fights shouldn't earn you things).

Sean should have had to win atleast 2. A top 10 then a top 5 would be sufficient.

 

[RockyLockridge]

So, the fact that 57% of fan scores gave the fight to Strickland, and Dana scored the fight for Strickland, means nothing? This rematch isn't all that egregious in the context of how the fight played out.

ETA: The fight itself was a split decision, so one judge gave the fight to Strickland as well.

TJ Lost his title in a split decision to cruz, TJ actually had title defenses 2 of them. TJ had to fight 2 fights, Assuncao, then lineker before he got another title shot.

Sean lost a split decision with ZERO title defenses and gets one fight against a fighter who was 1-3 of his last 4.

Assuncao was on a 7 fight win streak, Lineker was on 6. The fight being a split decision shouldn't be a factor IMO. sean lost the fight and wasn't a defending champion. They should have given the next shot to whittaker after he beat aliskerov or Khamzat after Whittaker. if it's a Ramadan thing and khamzat wont fight, then Sean I guess. But that still above all things doesn't mean he earned it. He's just circumstantially being given a title fight AGAIN.

We need closure

Honestly, I don't. Sean is a split decision guy. Splits with Costa, Splits with Hermanson, Splits with Cannonier, Splits with dricus. He runs away while he fights and creates the same situation every time. He's not going to change at this point.

 

[markys00]

I don't particularly care about this thread, but TS should really reconsidered his biases. Strickland isnt unwarranted at all. Hes like number 2 behind khamzat, and he only has the Whitaker win (and that happened before this got announced or around the same time)

 

[snugglecakes]

It's not a real argument. "I thought he should have won." Well, that didn't happen. If that's true, then shame he didn't. But ultimately he didn't, so it doesn't change the future. Grow up

put words in my mouth much? When did i ever say it changed the future? What does that even fuckin mean? THat's just word salad u just puked outta yur own mouth not mine

This thread was about undeserved title shots, not time machines built outta unreliable cars that stall when it's just a couple years old, even with flux capacitor upgrades. It's unfair to include people like sean who lost their belt in a very controversial decision many thought he won. He is being lumped in with ppl who got shadow realmed the Hell out then sat out for 3 n a half years like Stipe. That is a very very fair point to make. You dont have to agree with it but to say its not even an argument at all is just sounding like you have some biased agenda

 

[Tweak896]

If we have to watch Strickland/DDP 2 and 3 if Strickland wins, I'm going to want to KMS. I will be rooting for DDP to win hard just to not fuck up the division. UFC has been wasting time with these fights. It'd be fine if champs fought 3x a year, but we're likely to see the MW belt on the line 2x a year if no injuries. Watch Khamzat dominates another high ranked fighter like cutting butter and gets sick and we delay his title shot again.

 

[TheMoa]

I like the thread concept and have a similar feeling towards "unearned" title shots. They seem to be more common nowadays, but maybe it's just recent bias and it was always like that.
Now, I dont get this discussion about Sean/DDP. I actually thought that Sean won the fight at the time, but it's irrelevant to the topic based on OP's criteria. I just think the discussion developed in a stupid way.

We can have the same concept with a different criteria, but it would be better on a different thread cuz from my perspective the topic went like:
OP: Thats my list of the fastest cars with combustion engine.
Some people: seems right
Other people: Tesla Model S goes faster than that
OP: Im talking about combustion engine cars, electric cars doesnt apply for this list
Other People: BUT MODEL S IS FASTER!!

I wasn't aware of all these ghosts in the UFC roster. Consider starting a 2025 Active Ghost Fighters on the UFC roster who have unearned rankings.

I actually think it would be a good thread, since we have a lot guys being inactive and holding their position in the rankings.

 

[Eric Silva 2.0]

Alright folks, 2023 and 2024 were amazing years for guys getting title shots coming off losses, long layoffs or wins over random bums, so time to start a new thread to keep track of this nonsense for 2025.

(Note that WMMA is not included because who knows what is and isn't earned in that context)

UFC 311 starts us off above board, but there is some silliness on the horizon with Volk, O'Malley etc. in line to get garbage title shots. Check back in when the shit starts to pile up.

Tsarukyan vs Makhachev: Earned

Merab vs Umar: Earned (Umar may not have really earned his title eliminator bout in the first place, but once he won that, you can't argue against his title shot).

DDP vs Strickland: Unearned - cue incel tears. Zero defence champion. A one-fight split decision win streak over a non-serious contender coming off a loss and 1-3 in his last 4 fights.

"DDP vs Strickland: Unearned"

If your argument is that Khamzat should be in front of Strickland I'd agree. If Khamzat wasn't available for this fight then I think Strickland deserves a shot at it. The first fight was very close (split decision). I think it's the body of work at MW for Strickland. I agree that Costa win is not a big deal. I would say this one is earned with an asterisk.

The others are easily earned. O'Malley is the guy who probably gets the next unearned shot. I think Yan deserves a rematch with O'Malley to see who fights for the title next.

 

[skylolow]

Who really cares.......fighters earn title shots in the eye of some fans and other fans call foul. Dana gifts a title shot and some fans are fine and some aren't. In the end we all watch anyways.

 

[Streeter]

I rather see Dricus v Khamzat . But Brah Dricus won a decision in a close split dec.. Sean should get the rematch. Khamzat fought 1 fight in like 2 years . How is Khamzat more deserving n earned?

 

[wwkirk]

Alright folks, 2023 and 2024 were amazing years for guys getting title shots coming off losses, long layoffs or wins over random bums, so time to start a new thread to keep track of this nonsense for 2025.

(Note that WMMA is not included because who knows what is and isn't earned in that context)

UFC 311 starts us off above board, but there is some silliness on the horizon with Volk, O'Malley etc. in line to get garbage title shots. Check back in when the shit starts to pile up.

Tsarukyan vs Makhachev: Earned

Merab vs Umar: Earned (Umar may not have really earned his title eliminator bout in the first place, but once he won that, you can't argue against his title shot).

DDP vs Strickland: Unearned - cue incel tears. Zero defence champion. A one-fight split decision win streak over a non-serious contender coming off a loss and 1-3 in his last 4 fights.

I wasn't going to weigh in, but I'd like your opinion. Do you consider Renato Moicano's current LW undeserved?