The Middleweight Maze: Why Dricus Du Plessis is Right (and Why It’s More Complicated Than You Think)
The UFC’s Middleweight division is a mess. And I don’t mean that in a bad way—it’s the kind of glorious, chaotic mess that makes combat sports so fascinating. But amidst the chaos, Dricus Du Plessis has emerged as the voice of reason, calling out the ‘senseless’ idea of a Sean Strickland vs. Khamzat Chimaev rematch. Personally, I think Du Plessis is onto something, but what makes this particularly fascinating is how his stance reveals deeper issues in the UFC’s matchmaking philosophy.
The Case Against the Rematch
Let’s start with Du Plessis’s argument: Strickland and Chimaev have a combined zero title defenses, yet they’re being considered for a rematch. In my opinion, this is where the UFC’s obsession with star power over merit becomes glaringly obvious. Chimaev’s charisma and Strickland’s polarizing personality make them marketable, but does that justify a rematch? What many people don’t realize is that the UFC often prioritizes storylines over rankings, and this situation is a textbook example.
Du Plessis, on the other hand, has two wins over Strickland and two title defenses. If you take a step back and think about it, his resume screams ‘title contender.’ Yet, he’s not demanding a rematch—he’s demanding logic. This raises a deeper question: Why does the UFC seem more interested in rematches than in rewarding consistent performance?
Performance vs. Victory: Du Plessis’s Philosophy
One thing that immediately stands out is Du Plessis’s insistence that a win over Kamaru Usman this weekend isn’t enough to guarantee a title shot. He believes it’s about the performance. This is where his mindset diverges from the typical fighter’s. Most athletes would argue that a win is a win, but Du Plessis is saying, ‘No, it’s how you win that matters.’
From my perspective, this is a refreshing take. The UFC has a history of rewarding fighters who put on dominant performances, but it’s also guilty of overlooking them when it suits the narrative. Du Plessis is essentially calling out the UFC’s inconsistency, and I think that’s why his comments resonate so strongly.
The Imavov Factor
Du Plessis believes Nassourdine Imavov should be next in line for Strickland, and honestly, he’s not wrong. Imavov has the best case on paper, and Strickland himself has acknowledged this. What this really suggests is that the UFC’s rankings system, while flawed, still holds some value—if the organization chooses to respect it.
But here’s the kicker: the UFC rarely sticks to the rankings when a more lucrative or dramatic matchup is on the table. If you ask me, this is where the sport’s integrity starts to fray. Imavov vs. Strickland makes sense logically, but will the UFC prioritize logic over spectacle? I’m not holding my breath.
The Bigger Picture: What’s at Stake?
The Middleweight division is loaded with contenders, and this weekend’s fight between Du Plessis and Usman could shake things up even further. A detail that I find especially interesting is how Usman, a former Welterweight champion, could throw a wrench into the entire equation. If he wins, does he jump the line? Or does the UFC stick to its current narrative?
What this really boils down to is the tension between meritocracy and entertainment. The UFC is a business, and its decisions often reflect that. But when fighters like Du Plessis call out the inconsistencies, it forces fans and the organization alike to confront uncomfortable truths.
Final Thoughts
Du Plessis is right—a Strickland vs. Chimaev rematch doesn’t make sense. But his critique goes beyond this one fight. It’s a challenge to the UFC’s entire approach to matchmaking. Personally, I think this is a conversation the sport needs to have. Are we here for the best fights, or are we here for the most marketable ones?
As we head into UFC Oklahoma City, I’m less interested in who wins and more intrigued by what their victory will mean for the division. Because, let’s be honest, the Middleweight maze isn’t getting any less complicated anytime soon.
