MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos

MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos (http://www.mmaforum.com/)
-   UFC (http://www.mmaforum.com/ufc/)
-   -   Ranking System? Time to Reform UFC! (http://www.mmaforum.com/ufc/104643-ranking-system-time-reform-ufc.html)

DrFunk 08-24-2012 12:11 PM

Ranking System? Time to Reform UFC!
 
So in light of all the shenanigans surrounding ufc 151, I've been thinking about organizing a set of rules to determine a more linear ranking system which would determine who gets to fight (instead of the UFC). Now I've got a bunch of ideas but would love to hear what others think it should (assuming you support a ranking system), so let's keep the discussion civil and put out a constructive thread (i.e if you're gonna disagree with someone say why and offer a solution instead of the typical "it's retarded").

That said here's some things I'd like to see:

1. Champion is not allowed to decline vs his contender.
2. Belt is NOT on the line if #1 contender gets injured within short notice of event (let's say 30 days).
3. Contender gets his ranking point adjusted to #1 contender if he somehow wins the match vs the champ on short notice. (this way people get the auto re-match to see if it was a fluke, a belt should be earned not won on a gimmick).
4. Point breakdown:

a. Champion has no point value as he's the champ. If a champ loses his belt, their point goes to the middle of the pack (w/e point value that is).
b. Losses suffer no point loss.
c. If a fighter fails to make weight they will not gain any points.
d. Decision victory is worth 1 point.
e. Split decision is worth 0.5 point.
f. A KO/TKO/Sub finish is worth 2 points (so to encourage aggressive fighting).

5. #1 contender fights the champion, if injured #2 steps up and so forth. If a contender gets injured 30 day before the title fight, the UFC should give the opportunity for all the fighters (starting with #2 and downwards) to step up for #1 contendership vs the belt. They won't win the belt but they'll get their points raised to #1 contender should they win the fight (get paid the title money) and get relegated back to their original rank if they lose.

6. Reduce the # of PPV show per year, so there's a greater stock of talent available to supply the freak injuries and make better overall quality cards.

7. The champ must defend the title at a minimum of 2 times per year (preferably 3). If they fail to do so due to a long term injury (GSP), they get an automatic fight with the #1 contender (not the current interim champ). The former champ gets 1 more point above the #1 contender on a win and goes back to the middle of the pack if they lose.


So it's not a perfect system by any means, but I'm getting tired of the whole marketing theme of "oh this fight is boring or exciting". If the UFC's goal is to really become a legit sports league on par with the NFL/MLB/NBA/NHL then it needs to establish some sort of ranking system. Seeing WWE level drama on who gets to fight who and having this circus is quite frankly unprofessional.

Just brainstorming so far... anything else you guys can think of?

LL 08-24-2012 12:16 PM

I've said for a while now they need a rankings system but after seeing some of the rankings on MMAWeekly and Sherdog, I'd be down right terrified to see the UFC try to create one. I remember Ariel had Rampage ranked above Bader after Bader beat Rampage.

The UFC does not operate like a true sport, in any logical ranking Michael Bisping wouldn't even be in the top ten and Tim Boestch would be 3 or 4, however everyone knows the UFC would rather have Bisping fight Silva because it makes more money and that's not how sports operate, it's about earning your way to a title shot, not talking your way into one.

It also doesn't help when the Champion flat out turns down a fight.

El Bresko 08-24-2012 12:19 PM

This is the best ranking system I know of:

http://www.fightmatrix.com/mma-ranks/

DrFunk 08-24-2012 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLyotoLegion (Post 1619844)
I've said for a while now they need a rankings system but after seeing some of the rankings on MMAWeekly and Sherdog, I'd be down right terrified to see the UFC try to create one. I remember Ariel had Rampage ranked above Bader after Bader beat Rampage.

The UFC does not operate like a true sport, in any logical ranking Michael Bisping wouldn't even be in the top ten and Tim Boestch would be 3 or 4, however everyone knows the UFC would rather have Bisping fight Silva because it makes more money and that's not how sports operate, it's about earning your way to a title shot, not talking your way into one.

It also doesn't help when the Champion flat out turns down a fight.

Wouldn't a point system fix that though? Everyone starting at zero and going by my point system?

TheAuger 08-24-2012 12:23 PM

Ranking system are always flawed & subjective to the person compiling the rankings.

Trix 08-24-2012 01:04 PM

You could never force someone to fight.

The only thing you could do is strip them of the belt & their title. That doesn't necessarily fix things. It can add to the controversy & drama.

The system isn't flawed because Hendo got injured too close to the fight to find a replacement, and no one in Jon Jones weight division wanted to take the fight on 8 days notice.

Jones not wanting to fight Chael on 8 days notice doesn't help things. The real problem is that Hendo got injured just before the event leaving no time to find a replacement.

If Hendo had been injured only a day or two earlier - the card would have been saved. There may be no answer for a scenario where shit happens & there isn't enough time to fix things?

Swiss 08-24-2012 01:23 PM

I think they need to do away with any sort of ranking system whatsoever. The reason we have guys like Condit and Rashad sitting out rather than fighting is because of this "no. 1 contender" bullshit. With a ranking system you're going to get no.2 contenders who won't want to fight no. 5 because there's too much risk and not enough reward, etc. Let the fighters fight and whoever impresses the most gets the shot. Injuries happen and people will miss their slot occasionally but these things tend to sort themselves out. If you're good enough to be a contender and can stay in contention, your time will come around again.

The champion shouldn't have to fight anyone he doesn't want to. But if he decides he doesn't want to defend his belt then he loses it. Simple. The next two cabs off the rank can battle it out.

Woodenhead 08-24-2012 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLyotoLegion (Post 1619844)
I've said for a while now they need a rankings system but after seeing some of the rankings on MMAWeekly and Sherdog, I'd be down right terrified to see the UFC try to create one. I remember Ariel had Rampage ranked above Bader after Bader beat Rampage.

The UFC does not operate like a true sport, in any logical ranking Michael Bisping wouldn't even be in the top ten and Tim Boestch would be 3 or 4, however everyone knows the UFC would rather have Bisping fight Silva because it makes more money and that's not how sports operate, it's about earning your way to a title shot, not talking your way into one.

It also doesn't help when the Champion flat out turns down a fight.

Fully agreed. Not sure what the best way to implement a ranking system would be tho - and injuries don't help.

HitOrGetHit 08-24-2012 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheAuger (Post 1619850)
Ranking system are always flawed & subjective to the person compiling the rankings.

Agreed.

Budhisten 08-24-2012 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Bresko (Post 1619846)
This is the best ranking system I know of:

http://www.fightmatrix.com/mma-ranks/

According to FightMatrix Martin Kampmann is the best WW in the world ATM... So I have to like them ;)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.8 , Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2