Questionable Tactics? Gegard Mousasi Won't Defend Belt On Nov. 7th
As a supporter of all things MMA, including the steadily-rising Strikeforce promotion, it's really tough to comprehend what is going through Scott Coker's mind.
Days ago, Coker announced that Strikeforce will attack the UFC with their own brand of counter-programming medicine. I'm guessing the phrase, "go big or go home" is wandering around inside the Strikeforce president's mind.
Nevertheless, everyone's life has moved on.
Now, hours after the Strikeforce light heavyweight champion, Gegard Mousasi, announced that he would be defending his newly acquired belt on Nov. 7th, a representative for Strikeforce proclaimed that Mousasi's fight will not be for the title.
What's the point of Mousasi fighting, then?
Now, it isn't breaking news that Strikeforce is in dire need of contenders for their light heavyweight division, but there are still a few guys available to fight for the belt. Two of them have even been asking for Mousasi (Paulo Filho and Rameau Thierry Sokoudjou).
Still, why isn't the belt on the line come Nov. 7th?
Could it be that Coker is doubting Mousasi's ability to win coming off of an injury?
This is unlikely, but still a possibility. Despite having a firm grip on some elite fighters in the states, Strikeforce has a ways to go before building itself as a premier organization.
If Mousasi were to lose the belt to someone such as Filho or Sokoudjou, Coker would lose a considerable amount of promotional firepower.
Nonetheless, Coker should stick with his "go big or go home" attitude if he wishes to compete with the UFC.
If Mousasi loses, so be it. It is a tough setback, but a new champion always presents a new set of promotional tools for future events. Just ask UFC president Dana White, who rolled his eyes at Lyoto Machida before reluctantly giving him a crack at the belt.
So here's some idle advice for Mr. Scott Coker: Let Gegard Mousasi prove that he is a true champion and make him defend his Strikeforce light heavyweight championship when Nov. 7th hits the calender.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?