Who deserves to be the 2025 Fighter of the Year? How will Merab Dvalishvili’s valiant attempt but eventual failure to win four UFC title fights in one calendar year impact his chances? And if it doesn’t matter that Arman Tsarukyan has the number “1” next to his name in the rankings, why are we bothering to call anyone the No. 1 contender?
All that and more in this week’s mailbag. To ask a question of your own, hit up @BenFowlkesMMA on X or @Ben_Fowlkes on Threads.
@NeedXtoseePosts: Now that Merab lost to Yan, am I loco for still thinking he is Fighter of the Year?
For me 3 defense and shooting for greatness is better than
Islam Makhachev: Double champ, but won one of his two wins (though no fault of his own) was a gimmie
Merab Dvalishvili still has a strong case, but I fear MMA fans will always put more weight on the last thing they saw than on the big picture. He went 3-1. He wasn’t afraid to push it and try to break records. And, let’s not forget, that fight with Petr Yan was a great one. That’s an immediate Fight of the Year contender in my book.
Advertisement
But the takeaway for a lot of people is still going to be that he lost the title. And when that’s what they saw in your last fight of the year, I see how some are going to be reluctant to call him the Fighter of the Year. I agree that Islam Makhachev’s claim to it is a little bit thin, but going up in weight to capture a second UFC title is always a big deal. I also don’t know how much we can fault him for quality of competition since, like you pointed out, all he did was fight who the UFC had to give him.
@KeiffEllison: Between the back injury prior to fighting Islam, the punching (of a fan) during a walkout and the head butting of Hooker, can Tsarukyan really be surprised he getting passed over? I’m a fan of the guy, but it seems he makes hard decisions easy from a promotor’s view.
He does actually get to be surprised, and for one clear reason: He has that little No. 1 next to his name in the official UFC rankings. And, prior to his fight with Dan Hooker last month, UFC CEO Dana White came right out and said that the winner would be the No. 1 contender at lightweight. Then, after Arman Tsarukyan submitted Hooker and looked great doing it, White turned right around and said he didn’t “give a s*** what the number says.” So basically he lied to all of us to hype up a fight that didn’t actually mean what he claimed it meant. Yeah, I’d say Tsarukyan gets to be at least a little bit surprised and disappointed.
I kind of understand the argument that he messed up and needs to, I don’t know, perform some act of penance or just hang around a while in title shot purgatory before he gets another crack at it. But if that’s the case, why put him in these fights and tell us it’s to determine the next contender? Why not just be honest and say these are Tsarukyan’s community service fights and if he does well and behaves himself maybe he’ll get off the naughty list soon? That’s the part I don’t get. Just tell us the truth, damnit.
@EyeofMihawk: 125 (and 135) seem wide open right about now. Horiguchi seemingly got jumped in line by Taira. But Royval has a recent win over Taira and had the FotY with Van. Could he jump past Taira with a win this weekend? Does the UFC care more about getting Mexican or Japanese P+ subs?
So much depends on: A) how long Alexandre Pantoja is going to be out, and B) how long the UFC is willing to wait before putting another flyweight title fight on the calendar.
Advertisement
If Pantoja is out six months or more, I think we absolutely see Joshua Van defend the belt against someone else. Even if Brandon Royval beats Manel Kape on Saturday, I think Tatsuro Taira still has the inside track. But I also wouldn’t be surprised if the UFC picked the date first and the challenger second, meaning that whoever picks up the phone and says yes will get it.
And while we’re on the subject of the flyweight title picture? I’m a little tired of seeing people take shots at Van for celebrating the way he did at UFC 323. Obviously that wasn’t how he wanted to win, but you have to remember all the pressure and stress and fear and doubt that these guys push past just to get in there. When it’s over and you’ve won and you realize you’re the champ now, you’re probably going to have a flood of very strong feelings in that moment. Even if it was a quick TKO via freak injury, you can see how all Van’s brain might have been registering was: You did it.
It’s only later that you get to respond in a more logical way, and he has. So cut him some slack, is all I’m saying.
@LCombatsports: Can you articulate to your audience how if the Ali revival act is passed and UBO models are allowed, how that will negatively impact boxing fandom? I think this needs to be said. Despite the UFC Paramount deal, it doesn’t help the sport of MMA.
I think we won’t know for sure how it will impact boxing fandom until we see it in action. Seems like we’ll get the chance very soon, as TKO is very aggressively pushing for these changes to the Ali Act and says it wants to start putting on boxing events early in 2026.
Advertisement
You can get a better picture of what this will entail from the big homie John Nash, but the main thing I think people should ask themselves is this: When has a multi-billion dollar corporation ever wanted to change the law to make things better for anyone other than itself? TKO isn’t doing this because it’s so worried about the state of boxing. It’s doing it to stuff more money in its already bloated pockets.
@wolfelandia: With the advent of the Paramount+ era and the end of PPV’s, do you think that the UFC will stop stacking cards for the numbered events and spread out the fights that we want to see? In other words, will we actually get some good fights on the Fight Nights?
What we’ve seen of the 2026 schedule so far suggests that even on Paramount there will still be three very distinctive tiers of UFC programming. There’s the numbered events, where titles go up for grabs. Then there are the UFC Fight Night events in actual arenas in front of actual crowds, which feature meaningful fights between relevant fighters. Then there are the UFC APEX events, which are very much just weekly content to roll out in between the stuff that matters.
I know we want to gaze into the crystal ball and imagine a whole new world for the UFC in this new year with a new broadcast partner, but let’s not forget the UFC is pretty resistant to change. The company is raking in so much money, I doubt there are many people there who see any reason to do it differently.
@br1gsy: Seeing as Jason Herzog is back in the cage, where are we at with the fight fixing investigations in general? Any word on the street?
Nothing. Kind of like what happened with the last fight fixing scandal, right? A lot of tough talk about federal prison, and then total silence.
Advertisement
I’ve said it before, but this is not the way to go. For the sake of the sport’s legitimacy, the UFC should be a lot more visibly proactive about stuff like this, treating it with a real sense of urgency.
But as for Jason Herzog? Near as I can tell that was a rumor that started on one social media account. I’ve heard nothing substantive on that. State athletic commission officials I’ve spoken to say they’ve heard nothing real with Herzog’s name anywhere in it. It seems to be pure rumor, and a potentially harmful one.
Also? If you’re going to try to fix an MMA fight, please don’t think you can do it by paying off the ref. There are tons of ways for that to backfire, and so few ways for him to tilt it in one direction without immediately raising alarms.
