Alistair Overeem defeated Paul Buentello for the Strikeforce heavyweight championship on November 16th, 2007. Next month marks two years since Overeem stepped foot in the Strikeforce cage, precipitating calls from fans for Overeem to be stripped of the title.
I must ask: Why do we care?
Titles are an arbitrary entity fabricated by the men who run the sport. They provide no inherent or intrinsic value. They exist to increase promotional stature and provide a narrative framework for spectators.
I won’t argue that title belts should go away, but their importance is highly overstated. Ultimately, we want to know who the king of the hill is. For the most part, the UFC title belts are the de facto designation of this accomplishment. If you want to prove your worth in the five major weight classes in the sport, the UFC provides the proper stage.
That being said, what importance does the Strikeforce title hold? Does anyone see a Strikeforce champion as a legitimate contender for the Best in World moniker? Even in a hypothetical future situation where Fedor Emelianenko holds the San Jose crown, it is Fedor and his accomplishments that maintain his status as the number one heavyweight in the world, not the strap of gold around his waist.
So when we get up in arms about Overeem’s champion status, what injustice are we trying to right? Does Overeem gain or prevent others from gaining status in the MMA world as a dormant champion? Are people clamoring to see a Strikeforce Heavyweight Title Fight?
This isn’t even a unique situation in MMA. Shinya Aoki last defended his Shooto middleweight title in February of 2007. Yet, I don’t hear the cries of injustice for rank-and-file Shooto middleweights.
If Scott Coker strips Overeem of the title, I certainly won’t blink an eye; it’s been a long time coming. Yet, I feel like Allen Iverson waxing about practice. Strikeforce title? We talking about the Strikeforce title? We got the UFC, and you wanna talk about the Strikeforce title?
About the author
