Can we please stop pretending there is such a thing as a "UFC title"?

Get_that_yayo

Brown Belt
@Brown
Joined
Apr 17, 2004
Messages
3,921
Reaction score
16
Full Contact Fighter article from 2004.

"Today, White reiterated what Penn’s lead counsel Steven Strauss had stated yesterday, that Zuffa had presented to the Court its belief that the belt was purely ceremonial. "There’s a UFC champion and the belt– this is basically a trophy," White commented. "It says you’re the best fighter we have in that weight class at this time." Penn’s representation had contended that the belt was their client’s property once it was awarded to him, holding value with both MMA fans and the competitors that fought for it and that the UFC did not have the right to simply take it away from a fighter. But, White says the UFC does have that power, unlike in boxing, where separate regulatory organizations monitor and rule over such situations. "It’s not like there’s a sanctioning body out there like the WBO, WBC, ABC, to rank the fighters and hold the belts," White said."

BJ Penn sued to get his "title" back from the UFC in 2004, and lost the lawsuit because the "title" is just a marketing gimmick. Its a trophy that the UFC creates and can take away. By White's own words the "title" is "purely ceremonial" There are no sanctioning bodies forcing you to defend the belt, no set rules on what keeps you champion or can get you stripped...nothing. Under any circumstance the UFC could award or strip the "title" in question to anyone they feel like. Why are we even discussing this "purely ceremonial" trophy if multiple guys won't even defend it?
 
How about no. Ceremonial or not it raises the stakes and gives fighters more to fight for.
 
Can we please stop pretending that 'How I Met Your Mother' isn't the greatest show of all time?
 
If fighters get paid more for having one it matters to them. If it matters to them and they all want one, it means that in theory the best of them should have one. If the best of them have titles, then the titles are a pretty good way of determining who the best fighter in each weightclass is.

So if you care about who the best fighter is, it matters.
 
People care about the gimmick, so they won't be shutting up about it any time soon.
 
How about no. Ceremonial or not it raises the stakes and gives fighters more to fight for.
Something can still be bullshit, even though people have been convinced to risk their lives for it. There is no mutual exclusivity.

We should all know the UFC title is bullshit. I mean, Eddie Alvarez was a champion with a 3-1 record. Max and Tony had to fight twice as many times (and win) before they were given the opportunity.

So, not every UFC champion is worth his weight in gold, that is strong evidence of a bullshit commodity.
 
The belt is a construct, a spook, a concept in our minds that's only kept alive by our belief in it.

Like money, private property, the state, the law, hierarchy.

I take UFC belts more seriously than those other things though.
 
Belts depending on the division context have importance but some guys buy too much into thinking it means the holder is the best of the division - sometimes he is, sometimes not.
 
Now a 125 lb championship bout with a hack like Paige Van Zant makes more sense
 
It's just an ugly piece of jewelry that is suppose to represent the current best fighter in the world who consistently fights top contenders in the division. Nowadays, unfortunately, it is just an ugly piece of jewelry.
 
Something can still be bullshit, even though people have been convinced to risk their lives for it. There is no mutual exclusivity.

We should all know the UFC title is bullshit. I mean, Eddie Alvarez was a champion with a 3-1 record. Max and Tony had to fight twice as many times (and win) before they were given the opportunity.

So, not every UFC champion is worth his weight in gold, that is strong evidence of a bullshit commodity.

Alvarez was 28-4 ...UFC recognises fights that take place outside their trademark octagon, and rightfully so.
 
Full Contact Fighter article from 2004.



BJ Penn sued to get his "title" back from the UFC in 2004, and lost the lawsuit because the "title" is just a marketing gimmick. Its a trophy that the UFC creates and can take away. By White's own words the "title" is "purely ceremonial" There are no sanctioning bodies forcing you to defend the belt, no set rules on what keeps you champion or can get you stripped...nothing. Under any circumstance the UFC could award or strip the "title" in question to anyone they feel like. Why are we even discussing this "purely ceremonial" trophy if multiple guys won't even defend it?
It's a "ceremonial" title representing the best fighter in the UFC in that division. The holder of that title (almost) always faces the top contenders the UFC has to offer.

Considering the UFC has the best fighters, I'd say it's working fine.
 
Full Contact Fighter article from 2004.



BJ Penn sued to get his "title" back from the UFC in 2004, and lost the lawsuit because the "title" is just a marketing gimmick. Its a trophy that the UFC creates and can take away. By White's own words the "title" is "purely ceremonial" There are no sanctioning bodies forcing you to defend the belt, no set rules on what keeps you champion or can get you stripped...nothing. Under any circumstance the UFC could award or strip the "title" in question to anyone they feel like. Why are we even discussing this "purely ceremonial" trophy if multiple guys won't even defend it?

Yeah we should have more threads discussing something real like p4p, and goat.
 
I don't understand TS' point, but I've been telling you guys for years, the belt is a gimmick. Ranking are story lines.

It's all about fighter value. The sport is not what most of you pretend it is.
 
e648b71cba651281d125a87d815244d7.jpg


Just a ceremonial trophy....
<2>



















{<jordan}
 
Back
Top