Unpopular opinion : Sometimes title defenses don't mean much

[OmegaRugal]

I agree that you should take into account all the wins leading up to your title win.

JDS only had 1 successful tile defense (Mir) but he destroyed nearly everyone before he got the shot.

WITH that said ... its usually only when you are the champion though that you have a bullseye on your back and everyone is studying your tapes to see and potentially expose holes in your game.

 

[Ryeboi]

@frandie2b - I agree. The key word in your opinion is "Sometimes". The same thing goes for Khabib, since he was on a 9 or 10 fight win streak before he became champion. The only fight left for Khabib in this division is Tony Ferguson.

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

Evaluating historical perspective during a career is a rookie fan mistake.

A few years ago half of sherdog had Woodley above Hughes in the WW Goat FFS. Comical. And if it works the way I understand it to work, once he's up there, a loss shouldn't lower him in GOAT standings - otherwise there's virtually no difference between GOAT and current title holder.

Today Woodley is a 2nd thought at best by most fans.

Judge Tony, Khabib and DJ later. In a few years. After retirement. In their entirety. That's my suggestion.

In my opinion that’s where DJs at. He could lose 9 in a row and I would just say he’s lost his edge. But I agree l, it’s a easier discussion to have after a career. But that won’t stop me from having a little fun and speculating

 

[Andreh]

Change "unpopular" to "stupid" and the title is going to be ok.

 

[Verace]

My point is : Is Demetrious Johnson more legit than Tony Ferg because he has more title defenses ? I don't believe so.

There is one difference.

The champion always fights the best guy in line AT THEIR PEAK.

Conors win over Holloway meant less when he did so then what it would be worth today

 

[aerius]

Cleaning out a division on the way to a title is a lot easier than cleaning out a division as the champion. As a prospect or contender on the way up, you're only fighting 3 rounds and you don't have everyone in the division studying your tape and training specifically to beat you. You're also not fighting the best version of your opponents like the champ usually does, they're often young in the careers and still learning or former top fighters who are past their prime and on their way out. As a champion, the opponents you're facing will usually be at or close to their best.

 

[blaseblah]

Well, of course they have a value in a champion's legacy, but we have to put things in perspective.

I often read that a champion is not 'legit' because he doesn't have a lot of title defenses. Well, if the fighter in question went on a 10 fights win streak and cleaned out the division before winning the belt, then in my opinion he doesn't need 10 title defenses to be considered 'legit'.

Let's take 2 opposite examples : Demetrious Johnson and Tony Ferguson

- Demetrious Johnson, once considered one of the most dominant UFC champion, got the FLW belt after only 2 victories. He then went on a 11 fights win streak before losing to Cejudo, which means he had 11 title defenses.

- Tony Ferguson will fight Khabib for the LW title. If he beats Khabib and becomes the champ, he'll be on a 13 fights win streak, and completely have cleaned out the division while having ZERO title defenses.

My point is : Is Demetrious Johnson more legit than Tony Ferg because he has more title defenses ? I don't believe so.

He's more legit because he dominated his natural division and was clearly the best fighter in the world for years. He started his run by beating the best flyweight in the world (Uncle Creepy) and then the second best bantamweight in the world (Joe B).

For most of Tony's run he was not the best fighter in the world and still isn't until he beats Khabib.

 

[El Fernas]

Tony didnt had a 12 win streak of #1 contenders, thats the thing with defenses, its always a highly ranked opponent, or most of the times thats the case, sure most Tony wins were good, but not all 12 are top 5 wins, or were top 5 at the time.

 

[Doctor Lenovo]

Well, of course they have a value in a champion's legacy, but we have to put things in perspective.

I often read that a champion is not 'legit' because he doesn't have a lot of title defenses. Well, if the fighter in question went on a 10 fights win streak and cleaned out the division before winning the belt, then in my opinion he doesn't need 10 title defenses to be considered 'legit'.

Let's take 2 opposite examples : Demetrious Johnson and Tony Ferguson

- Demetrious Johnson, once considered one of the most dominant UFC champion, got the FLW belt after only 2 victories. He then went on a 11 fights win streak before losing to Cejudo, which means he had 11 title defenses.

- Tony Ferguson will fight Khabib for the LW title. If he beats Khabib and becomes the champ, he'll be on a 13 fights win streak, and completely have cleaned out the division while having ZERO title defenses.

My point is : Is Demetrious Johnson more legit than Tony Ferg because he has more title defenses ? I don't believe so.

I have made this argument.

This is why I no longer consider "title defenses" in my assessment of GOAT contenders. I look at longest winning streak in the UFC, because the UFC doesn't have a fair algorithm guiding how any given fighter can get to a title shot.

Plus, the UFC can create a title anytime they want, and even inaugurate a fighter as champion. Consequently, longest winning streak in the UFC is a better criterion than title defenses.

 

[Ryeboi]

historical perspective during a career is a rookie fan mistake.

A few years ago half of sherdog had Woodley above Hughes in the WW Goat FFS. Comical. And if it works the way I understand it to work, once he's up there, a loss shouldn't lower him in GOAT standings - otherwise there's virtually no difference between GOAT and current title holder.

Matt Hughes is the perfect example of someone that is overrated. He was fighting at a time when the roster was empty. So empty Matt fought for the belt at his first UFC fight. He had 12 title defenses b/c he didn't have to clear out the division before he got the belt. Some of his earliest wins are against people who fought at 155. Like BJ Penn, Hayato Sakurai and Sean Sherk. Where as when Woodley was fighting he was taking on the craziest opponents even before he got into the UFC.

Look at the last 18 opponents Woodley has fought. Not a single one of them was a can.

 

[Pascal Bergeron]

Winning as a champion is way harder as all the division looks at you for weakness to exploit they train to beat you above all else when a contender is being analized only by is scheduled opponent.
Also champions have way more media obligation and his way harder on the mental side of fighting.
Just look at some champion like rose recently or gsp before.

 

[Benoitthegr8]

I’m a huge El Cucuy nutthugger, but he’s far from cleaned out LW, GayChee, Conrad, Poirier, Hooker, Iaquinta, Felder... plenty of work if he gets past Khabby.

 

[blaseblah]

The problem with DJ is that even tho he had a lot of title defenses, it was in a non very competitive division, and he only needed 1 win to get a title shot.

Wins / title defenses aside, DJ's skills were absolutely incredible, he was the most complete champ no doubt.

You're missing the fact that DJ only needed one win because he went into his flyweight debut as one of the top bantamweights in the world and that one win was over the top flyweight in the world.

The flyweight tournament to determine the UFC champ was comprised of two of the best flyweights in the world (Ian McCall and Urushitana) and the two smaller bantamweights in the top 5 who could make flyweight (DJ and Joe B)

 

[chinarice]

Well, of course they have a value in a champion's legacy, but we have to put things in perspective.

I often read that a champion is not 'legit' because he doesn't have a lot of title defenses. Well, if the fighter in question went on a 10 fights win streak and cleaned out the division before winning the belt, then in my opinion he doesn't need 10 title defenses to be considered 'legit'.

Let's take 2 opposite examples : Demetrious Johnson and Tony Ferguson

- Demetrious Johnson, once considered one of the most dominant UFC champion, got the FLW belt after only 2 victories. He then went on a 11 fights win streak before losing to Cejudo, which means he had 11 title defenses.

- Tony Ferguson will fight Khabib for the LW title. If he beats Khabib and becomes the champ, he'll be on a 13 fights win streak, and completely have cleaned out the division while having ZERO title defenses.

My point is : Is Demetrious Johnson more legit than Tony Ferg because he has more title defenses ? I don't believe so.

While I agree with your point about title defenses and Tony being one of my favourite fighters, I don't think Tony will have cleaned out the division with a win over Khabib. Still plenty of fights to have.

Gaethje, Conor, Poirier for sure and possibly some other guys will emerge as top contenders in the next year or so.

 

[Khabib Fan]

It is not an unpopular opinion, it is a horrible opinion.

Anyone who faces the champion is the best in the division at that moment. That person is at a peak in their career. Defending against a series of people who are all at their peak is a bigger accomplishment than beating them when they are at various stages in their career.

 

[Ken Fresno]

It used to be fans understood only champs can clean out a division. Champs have (or used to) very little leeway when it comes to who they fight. And they generally are fighting the best, scheduled for 5 rounds every time out.

Contenders can string together wins with carefully chosen opponents in 3 round fights.

Successful title defenses are what set champions apart from contenders.

There is one difference.

The champion always fights the best guy in line AT THEIR PEAK.

Conors win over Holloway meant less when he did so then what it would be worth today

Michael Bisping is a more legit middleweight champion than Conor McGregor is a featherweight champion. He defended against Dan Henderson while Conor moved up and beat the lightweight champion.



This isn’t the PFL, gentlemen.

It’s all subjective.

 

[djacobox372]

I agree that titles and title defenses in the UFC dont' mean much, but that's because of the rigged ranking and title-shot system.

 

[frandie2b]

It is not an unpopular opinion, it is a horrible opinion.

Anyone who faces the champion is the best in the division at that moment. That person is at a peak in their career. Defending against a series of people who are all at their peak is a bigger accomplishment than beating them when they are at various stages in their career.

This is not always the case. Especially in the UFC.

 

[WHITE ANDERSON]

unpopular opinion? this is common opinion. just ask demetrious johnson

 

[frandie2b]

@frandie2b - I agree. The key word in your opinion is "Sometimes". The same thing goes for Khabib, since he was on a 9 or 10 fight win streak before he became champion. The only fight left for Khabib in this division is Tony Ferguson.

Yup that is my point exaclty. And yes the "sometimes" is very important because I don't want to make generalizations.