Weekend Mailbag: Jones vs. Miocic, Tyson vs. Paul main events should have never happened

This past weekend had a lot going on. On Friday, Jake Paul won a tepid decision over Mike Tyson in an eight-round boxing match that never should have taken place. Then on Saturday, Jon Jones stopped Stipe Miocic in the main event of UFC 309 in their heavyweight title fight that also probably didn’t need to happen.

So with so much to talk about, let’s dive right in to this week’s questions.

A weekend of unnecessary fights

“Was this the carniest weekend in combat sports history? Like has there ever been so much money generated off so little main event value in light of Miocic & Tyson fighting as old as most expected?”

I’m sure it wasn’t the “carniest” weekend in history because combat sports has been around for a long time and there’s always something worse. That being said, this weekend may well have been the worst one in my 20+ years of fandom.

Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson was one of the silliest, most meaningless fights in history. I said that repeatedly heading into the event and if anything I was only proven more right afterward when Tyson admitted to nearly dying over the summer. Sure, a bunch of people watched it but nobody enjoyed the thing, Paul gained nothing from it, and we are all just lucky that nothing terrible happened.

Then we moved right into UFC 309 which was only marginally better than Paul vs. Tyson. Those of us who weren’t total marks knew that Miocic was well-removed from his prime and would offer little resistance against Jones, even if Jones is also a diminished version of himself. And that’s exactly what happened. Miocic looked like he was moving through molasses and hung around as long as he did simply because Jones has never been a fighter to force the issue.

Truly this weekend was a reinforcement of the idea that most people don’t care about fighting, they care about spectacle. These events were sold as big, meaningful fights and so huge swaths of people tuned in only to be disappointed by the reality that faced them. But tune in they did, which means we can all expect more of these sorts of carnival sideshow fights in the future, because that’s just how business works. Yippee!

Jon Jones and Tom Aspinall

“Should the UFC strip Tom Aspinall of the interim Heavyweight Championship now that Jon Jones defended the the the title at UFC 309?”

No, the UFC should strip Jon Jones.

I’m not 100 percent certain but I believe this is the first time in promotional history that a division has had two titles running concurrently. There have been plenty of interim champions in the UFC and even a few who defended interim titles, but never one that defended an interim title while the “undisputed” champion defended his belt. It’s an incredibly silly situation and one entirely of the UFC’s making.

Fortunately, there’s a simple resolution: unify the belts. But Jones directly stated he is not going to do that unless paid a king’s ransom. So the path is clear, pay the man or strip him of the title. Given UFC history, one of those seems much more likely than the other.

For all the Jon Jones defenders out there, the truth is this: Jones is absolutely entitled to fight the fights he wants, and if he wants to fight Alex Pereira for less money because it’s an easier fight, that’s up to him. But he is not entitled to do so with the heavyweight title. Belts have obligations to the rest of the division because if champions don’t defend them against rightful contenders, the whole thing is suddenly pro wrestling. Under those terms, Jones might not have ever won a title if Mauricio “Shogun” Rua said “I’d prefer to fight someone easier.” If you’re going to be the champion, you have to do the job.

So Jones should go ahead and chase down the Pereira fight if he wants to, so long as he drops the title. And frankly, it’s a bit of a paper belt anyway as Aspinall is actually the fighter beating relevant heavyweights and doing the work of a champion.

Vacation, all I ever wanted

“If Jon vacates the belt to fight Pereira do you think best case scenario for Tom is Alex winning and then fighting Tom after getting the hype from beating Jon? Or is there any other realistic fight for him that is even half as big as fighting Jon Jones?”

I genuinely think it doesn’t much matter for Aspinall because as things stand right now, Tommy Aspinall is winning.

No fighter gained more last week than Aspinall, despite the interim champion not even competing. Aspinall’s name was everywhere during Fight Week and that was even before Jones started talking. Jones’s absurd litany of excuses for why he doesn’t want to fight Aspinall got Tom over in a big way and by the end of it, Jones was just outright admitting that he simply doesn’t want to take the risk unless he makes life-changing money. When arguably the greatest fighter of all time is saying “I’ll retire rather than fight that guy,” well, you’re doing something right.

That’s one (of many) things I disagree with Jones about: Aspinall doesn’t need him. Of course Aspinall would like Jones because that is certainly the biggest fight available and winning it would catapult Aspinall into mainstream stardom, but Aspinall is doing just fine right now as MMA’s John Wick — the guy even the bogeyman doesn’t want to mess with. The next time Aspinall fights, he’s going to compete for the undisputed title — coincidentally the only thing he’s really ever asked for — and even if it’s not against Jones it will still be big, because Aspinall is now an attraction in his own right.

Charles Oliveira

“Why doesn’t Charles get brought up more when talking about all timers? I know he wasn’t P4P No. 1 while champ, but what he’s done at lightwweight and his finishing ability, he’s top 30 P4P ever, no?”

I think Charles is viewed as an all-time great? (Mike) Heck, just a few years ago people were (incorrectly) arguing he might be the greatest lightweight of all time. I think most people agree Oliveira is a future Hall of Famer and an all-timer, and the man keeps adding to his resume as he became the first fighter with 20 career post-fight bonuses after winning Fight of the Night on Saturday.

But to dig into the question a little more, I think the extent that Oliveira isn’t talked about in the same way that like, Dustin Poirier is comes down to a few factors.

First, there is almost certainly an English bias as it’s harder for American fans to gravitate towards non-English speakers. Oliveira’s fighting does plenty of talking, but the lack of soundbites probably hurts his broader fandom in this country.

Second, while his highs are obviously incredibly high, Oliveira also has some pretty disastrous lows. The man has been finished eight times and had a reputation (deserved or not) for quitting in fights for many years. That sort of thing sticks with you.

Third, Oliveira appears to still be in the prime (or near prime) of his career. Fans only start waxing poetic about all-time greats when retirement is on the horizon and Oliveira doesn’t seem close to that right now.

And lastly, while I do think Oliveira is an all-timer, he’s in that weird spot where he’s not particularly high on the list. When all-time conversations come up, people are usually talking about the 10-15 best guys. Oliveira is pretty clearly not in that crop and so instead he kind of falls into that next tier with guys like Dan Henderson and Frankie Edgar and Joseph Benavidez as guys who were incredible but not the best of the best of the best.

BMF Title fight

“If Oliveira vs. Max Holloway does happen next (I also hope that it does!), how do you see that fight playing out?”

This should not be an “if.” This should be a “when.” The only fight that should happen next for Charles Oliveira is a “BMF” title bout with Max Holloway.

I’ve written before about how this era of MMA has a Four Kings like boxing did. Charles Oliveira, Max Holloway, Justin Gaethje, and Dustin Poirier are among the best, most violent, most compelling fighters in the history of the sport. All four are in the Top-10 Most Exciting Fighters Ever and they have all fought each other. It’s a beautiful thing, with one glaringly obvious exception.

A lifetime ago Oliveira and Holloway fought at featherweight only for the bout to end almost immediately due to a weird injury. It was a fight fans wanted to see at the time and we all felt as if we were robbed. Now, the fight is somehow even more compelling and if we don’t get it next, it’s friggin’ criminal.

And if it happens, I have no idea how the fight goes down. Oliveira is massively improved since their first bout and appears to still be near his prime. Meanwhile, Holloway seems clearly diminished to me, but might be better off up at lightweight. Oliveira has improved defensively and has the grappling, but Holloway is the better boxer and has more power than he used to. Anything could happen in that one and it is among the fights I most need to see happen.

Politics

“Do you think that the UFC being so pro-Trump will have any effect on what streaming platforms they end up on?”

I rarely touch on politics here but I wanted to address this because I’m not going to get into political opinions and I think there is an interesting question in here that, frankly, I don’t know the answer to.

Over the past few years the UFC has made no bones about their association with right wing politics and specifically with Donald Trump. Dana White spoke at the Republican National Convention and Joe Rogan endorsed Trump before the most recent election, not to mention the broader appeal to conservative ideas. But despite all that, the UFC was still mostly apolitical. Yes it was conservative leaning and yes they showed love to Trump when he attended, but that’s not too dissimilar from most sports leagues. But Saturday felt different.

As he has done many times before, Donald Trump attended UFC 309 and this time the whole thing felt much more like a political rally. The President-elect had half of his future cabinet there with him, had an almost fully dedicated Trump cam to cut to during fights, and spoke with most of the main card winners afterward. Jon Jones even did the “Trump dance” after winning. Saturday night felt as much about the future president as it did about the fighters and that feels like a pretty big deal.

To answer the question posed, I don’t believe the continued shift of the UFC towards conservatism is likely to influence its upcoming TV rights deal. The UFC is simply going to go to the highest bidder and there isn’t a broadcaster out there who would disavow the mountains of money the UFC generates because they don’t agree with its politics, at least not right now. But I do wonder about longterm effects on the UFC viewership.

There’s an apocryphal story about Michael Jordan refusing to endorse a Democratic politician because “Republicans buy Nikes, too.” Well, the UFC obviously does not ascribe to that belief. And it’s entirely possible that the promotion is right and that this will only serve to increase its profile among the demographic it covets. Certainly in the short term it will. But long term I’m less sure. After all, there’s a reason most sports leagues try to remain apolitical.

Ultimately, this could all be meaningless, and the only way we’ll know is to wait and see. But I’m certainly fascinated to watch this all unfold as I suspect things will only move more and more in this direction over the next four years.

Thanks for reading, and thank you for everyone who sent in tweets (Xs?)! Do you have any burning questions about things at least somewhat related to combat sports? Then you’re in luck, because you can send your tweets to me, @JedKMeshew, and I will answer my favorite ones! Doesn’t matter if they’re topical or insane, just so long as they are good. Thanks again, and see y’all next week.