Dropping in competition following losses must end.

Whenever I hear that someone lost a fight, therefore they must be dropped down in competition to get them some soft wins to build them back, I cringe.

That comes very close to fight-fixing.  Not in the overt sense, but in arranging to have expected results.  Much too political for my tastes.  If we notice that over 80% of our members favor a fighter, then we should question if that fight is a setup to get someone's record padded to build them up.  If a guy loses, he should not be dropped down.  That is bad.  If the UFC is arranging fights with expected results, is that not manipulating the rankings?

The UFC should NOT, NOT, NOT be in the business of building anyone UP.  It should try hard to find someone of as close to comparable toughness as possible.  The best matches pit guys of equal quality against each other.  Of course, that is not always possible, but that is the goal, the aim, the quest.  

If Shogun must be dropped down to rebuild him, he is washed up.  I say he is NOT washed up, doesn't deserve to be insulted with Vera, and is still deserving of Rashad Evans.  Give him someone like Stephan Bonnar maybe.  Someone who will still give him a really tough fight.  NO SOFT FIGHTS!  Padding his resume with easy competition is immoral, unethical and ********.  Same as forcing Fitch to fight mid-tier guys who can't build his case for #2.  TOTAL ********!!!

* Edited at 06.09.2012, 7:11 PM ET *

Hendricks beat a guy on your list Sadollah 2 or 3 years ago so why not include him in those rising stars Bill?

I considered him, but he only had the one fight with another rising guy who was at the bottom of the group.  The others had several fights among themselves.  To jump from Amir to the #2 feels abrupt and jarring to me.

And that win over Sadollah didn't entitle Hendricks to a Top 20 ranking, to me.  

I also considered Charlie Brenneman, Brian Ebersole.

* Edited at 06.09.2012, 10:42 PM ET *

Hendricks has a win over Brenneman as well

sadly.

Brenneman is still very awesome though.

Charlie just got punked.  But I still like him a lot.

Is it so wrong of a member to want some order and fairness?  If someone is jumped too far, he bumps a more deserving fighter.  So what if the system isn't perfect?  We must try, mustn't we?  

Is that whacked?

"Today, Condit, Kampmann, MacDonald and Ellenberger are considered top contenders and the Top Tier never had to drop to mid-tier to accomadate them."


Ellenberger was given Shields who was coming off of a loss to the champ GSP


Condit was given Hardy who was also coming off of a loss to the champ GSP


There's 50% of that particular argument picked apart in 2 lines

Hardy, a top fighter?  Your argument falls apart.

The principle isn't perfect, but if you can't see it, so be it.  I can see it, and I think most others can see the point.

You don't think a fighter coming off of a title shot classes him as a "top tier" fighter?

Ok dude

I look forward to your next 8 ridiculously pointless threads in the coming 2-3 days

Peace

No, and most others don't either.  And his record since proves the point.  

So far, I've not criticized you, yet you troll me.  

Alright.  If you disagree, fine, but why bash instead of disagreeing with respect and civility?

Sorry Bill, I'll have to disagree with you there. How was Hardy not Top 5 after his loss to GSP?

I'm trying my best to be civil I assure you but it's like trying to argue with a guy who thinks Dan Aykroyd is the Prime Minister of Turkmenistan

I've already stated my argument and it's the correct one so I'm done with this pointless escapade

Good talk Bill

Bill Burgess, The Rock asks.. do you like pie?

@bill He WAS a top tier fighter hence why he got a title shot.. sure he fell off the rankings after that.. but if Anderson lost to Chael then went on a big lose streak you would say he was never a top tier fighter? you're crazy man.

I think the thread is losing its way, but I will do my best to answer all civil respectful questions anyway.

Dan Hardy:  Since he arrived in the UFC, his win streak included Dan Weichel, Akihiro Gono, Rory Markham, Marcus Davis & Mike Swick.  Not a single one could be classed inside the WW Top 20.  Not one.

They gave him a title shot only because GSP was on such a hot streak that he was running short of true title contenders.  He had beaten, in order: Koscheck, Hughes, Serra, Fitch, Penn and Alves.  All the Top Tier guys.  They were running out of candidates, so they gave a shot to Hardy.  Who else were they gonna turn to?  Who was left?  The present crop of exciting guys hadn't arrived at that particular moment.

But Dan Hardy wasn't necessarily Top Tier at that moment, and he hasn't been since.  I'm not being argumentitive, as Jaffa is trying to say.  I've read many times that Hardy wasn't deserving of a title shot at that moment.  But when a man like GSP has cleaned out his division, who are they gonna give him?  It's a valid question.  

The thread has lost its way, so I will try to get it back on track.  The premise.

If a Top Contender loses a fight, there is no need to drop his status to mid-tier and force him to fight beneath his status, just to pad his resume and rebuild his case to fight Top Tier.

Give the man his respect and if he truly earned his Top Tier status in the first place, continue to give him Top Tier fights, to allow him to reestablish his credentials.

Stop giving Top Tier contenders fights against the bottom mid-tier guys.  Make the mid-tier guys fight their way up systematically, until they have sorted themselves out and arrive naturally at the top of the mid-tier.  

Either you support the principle of fighting your way up the ladder or you don't support the principle.  We can quibble about who is and who isn't, but the principle is simple, or at least it was in my mind when I created the thread.

If you disagree with me, that's fine but at least do so respectfully.  Just because I do not back down from a principle, that doesn't make me argumentative, but principled.  All those calling me names just because they disagree with me have never learned to interact with others respectfully.  

Hey Jaffa.  Are all those who won't give in to your arguments all jerks and idiots?  Does holding your ground in a discussion with you classify them as stubborn ******s or trolls?  You need to learn how to be disagreed with and not lose your good manners.  Maybe try humor or laughter.  It's so much nicer than throwing rocks at those who don't agree with your 'correct argument'.  

Bill, your idea of tiers is one I support because rankings are subjective & there isn't a uniformity of difference between each specific spot but Johny Hendricks had more than earned his status as a contender by the time he got the Fitch bout.

He entered the UFC 5-0, 2-0 in the WEC and a 2 time NC wrestler, went 4-0 vs. opponents all still with the UFC whose total # of losses going into their fights with Hendricks was 3 & 2 of the 4 were handed their 1st career losses, lost a split decision to fellow veteran Rick Story, got his (unfair in your eyes) rebuild fight against Waldburger who had 1 UFC fight, and then beat fellow solid veteran Pierce, whose only loss was to Fitch, so therefore a bout with Fitch coming off the draw and injury layoff made it a very viable fight if looked at rationally and not from the perspective of %. Remember, the best of us struggle to pick 2/3 right.

Shogun is coming off a loss and none of the LHWs you listed are coming off a loss and available to fight.

Contracts play a huge part in matchmaking.  You'll generally get your stiffest challenge in your last fight on your contract for leverage purposes.  That's why most mid-tier guys "happen" to be in their final fight on their contract when they "get the call" to face a rebounding top tier fighter.  At the same time, rebound fights are never offered to a top tier fighter in his final fight who hasn't already signed an extension.

@mule  You make a very good, solid case for your opinion that Hendricks was an appropriate candidate for Fitch.  I don't happen to agree with it but you do reason well.  Story was the only Top 15 guy he fought, and he dropped the decision.  Sadollah was probably ranked somewhere between 15-20.  Funch, Grant, Brenneman, Waldburger, Pierce, were not Top 20.  Being a seasoned veteran is not the same as Top 20, hence Pierce is not quite there, even now.

Brenneman, when he fought Hendricks was a good wrestler, but Hendricks was only his 2nd fight in the UFC.  He had beaten Jason High, but who is he?

I like you, mule and appreciate your participation in my thread and your respectful tone shows you are a gentleman.

@Kpro  Thanks for that informative, very useful, helpful post!  That kind of political leveraging by the UFC is not appreciated by us true fans.  It's just another layer of BS for the fighters to wade through on the road to their destinies.

We fans should not support the UFC when it tries to leverage its independent contractors.  Quite good posting, Kpro!