If you're an MMA fan, the idea of a killer superfight has been the elephant in the room ever since Tito Ortiz was actually winning fights. Some of them even came to fruition, but many argue the ones that have didn't come at the ideal time. For example, many argue that Chuck Liddell vs. Wanderlei Silva happened too late for Silva and Chuck as they were both on the tail end of their prime and slipping toward retirement.
Now many are clamoring for Anderson Silva vs. Georges St. Pierre or Anderson Silva vs. Jon Jones, and there are even still rumblings of a Brock Lesnar vs. Fedor Emelianenko fight as a one-off.
Do you think there is a point to these fights? What does it prove? They never seem to happen at a point in each fighter's career where it is definitive and actually establishes some type of "GOAT" status.
My opinion stands - Silva/Jones or Silva/GSP offers little incentive to the fighter. The outcomes are far more likely to be detrimental to each's career than helpful. In the case of Silva/GSP - there will be the argument of which weight class they should fight in. It will be too tough for Silva to cut further toward WW, which may hinder his striking power, and GSP will be at a size disadvantage at MW, which will work against his primary skillset in top wrestling game. In the case of Jones/Silva, it is lose-lose for Jones. If he wins, it will be only because he beat a man 12 years older than himself. If he loses, he loses his belt and his streak. People will say he was never as good as people thought, or that Silva was always on some kind of interplanetary level of fighting.
While the freakshow superfight would bring tons of money in, I don't see how the fighters would ever want to make it happen. There is too much to lose and not enough to gain. What do you think?