The Middleweight Maze: Why Dricus Du Plessis is Right (and Wrong) About the UFC’s Title Chaos
The UFC’s Middleweight division is a mess. And I don’t mean that in a bad way—it’s the kind of glorious, unpredictable chaos that makes combat sports so compelling. But when Dricus Du Plessis calls a potential Sean Strickland vs. Khamzat Chimaev rematch ‘senseless,’ he’s not just stirring the pot. He’s pointing out a truth that the UFC seems oddly reluctant to address.
The Case Against the Rematch
Let’s start with Du Plessis’s argument. Strickland and Chimaev have a combined zero title defenses between them. Zero. Yet Chimaev is pushing for an immediate rematch after losing a split decision to Strickland. Personally, I think this is where the UFC’s matchmaking logic starts to unravel. If you take a step back and think about it, why should a fighter who just lost the title get another shot before someone like Du Plessis, who has two wins over the current champion? It’s not just about wins and losses—it’s about the narrative. What this really suggests is that the UFC is prioritizing star power over meritocracy, and that’s a slippery slope.
What many people don’t realize is that the Middleweight division is suddenly overflowing with contenders. Nassourdine Imavov, for instance, has a stronger case for a title shot than Chimaev does right now. Yet, here we are, debating a rematch that feels more like a cash grab than a sporting decision. In my opinion, Du Plessis is right to call this out. The UFC needs to stop rewarding fighters for being loud and start rewarding them for being dominant.
Du Plessis’s Own Paradox
But here’s where it gets interesting. Du Plessis himself is in a tricky position. He’s coming off a loss to Chimaev, and while he has a point about Strickland vs. Chimaev 2, he’s also not exactly in a position to demand anything. His fight against Kamaru Usman this weekend is a must-win, but even that might not be enough. One thing that immediately stands out is his insistence that ‘performance’ matters more than a victory. He’s right, of course—but it’s also a convenient narrative for a fighter who needs to make a statement.
From my perspective, Du Plessis is trying to rewrite the rules in his favor. He wants the UFC to prioritize his resume over Chimaev’s, but he’s also downplaying the fact that he just lost his title in a lopsided fight. It’s a smart strategy, but it’s not without its flaws. If you ask me, he’s both right and wrong at the same time—right about the rematch, wrong about his own path back to the title.
The Bigger Picture: What’s Really at Stake?
What makes this particularly fascinating is how it reflects the UFC’s broader struggles with matchmaking. The Middleweight division is a microcosm of a larger issue: the tension between sporting integrity and entertainment value. Chimaev vs. Strickland 2 would undoubtedly sell, but at what cost? The UFC risks undermining its own rankings system if it keeps rewarding fighters for being controversial rather than dominant.
A detail that I find especially interesting is how this ties into the UFC’s history. Remember when Conor McGregor got an immediate rematch against Nate Diaz after losing? That fight made sense because it was a cultural phenomenon. But Strickland vs. Chimaev? Not so much. This raises a deeper question: is the UFC losing its ability to distinguish between what fans want and what fighters deserve?
The Future of the Division
Looking ahead, the Middleweight division could go in any direction. If Usman wins this weekend, he could throw a wrench into everything. If Du Plessis wins, he’ll have a legitimate claim—but only if he dominates. And then there’s Imavov, who feels like the overlooked contender in all of this. Personally, I think Imavov vs. Strickland is the fight to make, but the UFC has never been one to take the obvious route.
What this really suggests is that the Middleweight division is in for a wild ride. By Monday morning, the landscape could look completely different. But one thing is certain: Dricus Du Plessis has started a conversation that the UFC can’t ignore. Whether he’s right or wrong, he’s forcing us to ask the hard questions about what it means to be a champion in 2023.
Final Thoughts
In the end, Du Plessis’s comments are less about Strickland vs. Chimaev and more about the UFC’s identity. Is it a sport or a spectacle? A meritocracy or a popularity contest? These are the questions that keep me up at night, and they’re the same questions that Du Plessis is inadvertently raising.
So, is he right? Kinda. But it’s not that simple. The UFC is walking a tightrope, and fighters like Du Plessis are the ones shaking the rope. Whether they fall or find their balance remains to be seen. But one thing is for sure: the Middleweight division has never been more interesting.
