Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: UFC instituting time restrictions on interim belts

Your Message

Click here to log in

What Is The Last Name Of UFC's Iceman?

 
 

You may choose an icon for your message from this list

Additional Options

  • Will turn www.example.com into [URL]http://www.example.com[/URL].

HTML

Topic Review (Newest First)

  • 10-18-2013, 01:05 PM
    Ramma
    At this point, Cruz needs to be stripped. It's been too long. Whether it is Cruz, St. Pierre, etc... it's been too much time. Barao deserves to be the sole champ at this
  • 10-18-2013, 11:06 AM
    SMGRIFFIN
    Quote Originally Posted by SWIFTboy View Post
    I'm not saying Cruz should be stripped NOW, just that his case is a good example of how things can get out of control if you just try to figure these things out on an ad hoc basis.
    I couldn't agree more. A set process for handling this applied to any and all cases is the simplest solution to a champ sitting on the side lines for years; and an interim champ failing to receive real recognition (sponsor dollars) while wearing a belt. It's simply trying to nail down the fairest process for everyone.
  • 10-18-2013, 09:34 AM
    SWIFTboy
    Quote Originally Posted by Masscore View Post
    But here is the issue you will run into right away. "Barao never beat Cruz and is only champion because of a freak injury!!!!!!!" every single time someone says Barao's name. And it will happen. It happened to Matt Hughes for years after BJ Penn left. Every time someone mentioned Hughes being champ, someone else would chime in and say it was only because Penn left. So even if Cruz was stripped, lots of people would be saying Barao isn't the champ till he beats Cruz.
    Some people probably would say that, and they may even be right. If not in this particular case, then at some point when it happens in another division.
    ...but I don't see that as a good reason for not implementing a rule/guideline.

    Like Rivet mentioned, let the new champ reap the benefits of his hard work. In this instance, I don't think anyone would argue that Barao has deserved the benefits that would come with being a true champ.
    Plus, things will always work themselves out if there was a rule. Either the champ comes back and takes his title back, and prove that the dude who had his belt was never the true champ. In which case the original champ never really lost anything.
    On the flip side if the new champ beats the original champ, or if the original champ never comes back, or never becomes as good as his former self, the new champ doesn't lose out on anything while waiting.
    I just don't really see any serious drawback, besides maybe the original champ having his feelings slightly hurt.

    I'm not saying Cruz should be stripped NOW, just that his case is a good example of how things can get out of control if you just try to figure these things out on an ad hoc basis.
  • 10-17-2013, 05:51 PM
    SMGRIFFIN
    Just set a standard procedure in the event a champ is hurt/out and apply it to all interim situations. Interim champ becomes champ after x and the previous title holder gets a shot to regain their belt upon returning. This is a simple problem to solve.
  • 10-17-2013, 01:41 PM
    rivethead
    Quote Originally Posted by Masscore View Post
    But here is the issue you will run into right away. "Barao never beat Cruz and is only champion because of a freak injury!!!!!!!" every single time someone says Barao's name. And it will happen. It happened to Matt Hughes for years after BJ Penn left. Every time someone mentioned Hughes being champ, someone else would chime in and say it was only because Penn left. So even if Cruz was stripped, lots of people would be saying Barao isn't the champ till he beats Cruz.
    ...they're saying that nonsense right now about Weidman, and there wasn't even an injury or a vacated title.
    But at least Barao would be getting paid, in both contract and sponsorships that he's missing out on right now.

    rh
  • 10-17-2013, 01:37 PM
    SickNasty
    While it may not be fair to strip the title from a champ with a legitimate injury, it's even more unfair to hold up an entire weight class. Maybe have an understanding that should the former champ come back in a reasonable amount of time then they get first crack at it or something.
  • 10-17-2013, 01:18 PM
    hass
    Johna Cena defended his title like 50 times this past....oh crap a faux pa

    I support the "a champ must defend the title at least once annually" camp. Cause that's the right philosophy, yeah.
  • 10-17-2013, 01:04 PM
    Masscore
    Quote Originally Posted by SWIFTboy View Post
    Another reason I think Cruz should have been stripped of the title was for the sake of Cruz himself.

    I am by no means an expert on the injury he sustained and the long term effects it could have, nor do I have first hand knowledge of the impacts of ring rust. Still, to me it seems like if you were out of a sport for two years, you should be given the chance to work your way back in. I'm not sure it will be good for Cruz to have to have his first fight be against a guy as skilled as Barao, and with the pressure and intensity of a title fight.
    I don't think Cruz can turn it down, because there is to much pressure on him to take the championship opportunity, and not look like he's ducking Baroa. I think it would be better for him if he had been stripped and could come back at his own leisure and possibly get a fight or two in first.

    All that to say I agree with a predetermined limit, as opposed to deciding on a case by case basis.
    I actually agree with this and Cruz should have been stripped a long time ago (now it is pointless) so he could have the chance to come back, fight Prickett or another decent BW to shake the ring rust and then fight Barao.

    But here is the issue you will run into right away. "Barao never beat Cruz and is only champion because of a freak injury!!!!!!!" every single time someone says Barao's name. And it will happen. It happened to Matt Hughes for years after BJ Penn left. Every time someone mentioned Hughes being champ, someone else would chime in and say it was only because Penn left. So even if Cruz was stripped, lots of people would be saying Barao isn't the champ till he beats Cruz.
  • 10-17-2013, 12:57 PM
    SWIFTboy
    Another reason I think Cruz should have been stripped of the title was for the sake of Cruz himself.

    I am by no means an expert on the injury he sustained and the long term effects it could have, nor do I have first hand knowledge of the impacts of ring rust. Still, to me it seems like if you were out of a sport for two years, you should be given the chance to work your way back in. I'm not sure it will be good for Cruz to have to have his first fight be against a guy as skilled as Barao, and with the pressure and intensity of a title fight.
    I don't think Cruz can turn it down, because there is to much pressure on him to take the championship opportunity, and not look like he's ducking Baroa. I think it would be better for him if he had been stripped and could come back at his own leisure and possibly get a fight or two in first.

    All that to say I agree with a predetermined limit, as opposed to deciding on a case by case basis.
  • 10-09-2013, 12:42 PM
    Sniggles
    Dana is biased towards wrestlers.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •