MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos - View Single Post - Is two belts per weight class the answer?

View Single Post

Old 08-13-2012, 01:00 AM   #19 (permalink)
RearNaked
Bantamweight
 
RearNaked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Swinging from Roy Nelson's nuts.
Posts: 848
RearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A BallerRearNaked Is A Baller
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeHawk View Post
But then everyone would look at the winner as being the real champion and the second guys belt would become meaningless.
Until he strung a few wins together. Especially if he beat a guy (or two) who've beaten the other champ in the past.

I'm not suggesting this as a solution to the question, 'who is the best fighter ever' I'm suggesting this as a solution to champs fighting twice a year and avoiding the guys who might actually beat them.

It would be harder to duck, because people would just start considering the other guy the 'real champ' if you started avoiding tough fights.

I'm not suggesting this because I think the current champs, or fans with aspergers would like it, I'm suggesting it because, to me, the golden age was when there was PRIDE and the UFC and each division, had, not one supreme champion, but two (three if you count the GP champ).

It made everything more exciting and with both champs being under one organization, it would mean the fights could actually happen.

I'm not saying 8 belts per division, like boxing, just two.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Life B Ez View Post
Good lord the ignorance is strong with this one.

Sent from my Desire HD using VerticalSports.Com App
I don't think you know what the word means.

Ignorant doesn't just mean 'anyone who disagrees with you'

Although that would be fun, I guess. Is it fun?
RearNaked is offline