- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 392,035
- Reaction score
- 43
You must be registered for see images attach
Kamaru Usman's opinion on who Ilia Topuria should fight next may not be a popular one.
Topuria (16-0 MMA, 8-0 UFC) vacated his featherweight title for a move up to 155 pounds. "El Matador" is eyeing UFC lightweight champion Islam Makhachev right off the bat, but Usman would like to see him tested against an elite grappler first.
He initially suggested lightweight contender Dan Hooker, but quickly changed his tune and picked Mateusz Gamrot (24-3 MMA, 7-3 UFC).
"Ilia Topuria, Mateusz Gamrot," Usman said on "Pound 4 Pound with Kamaru & Henry." "Hey, hey, hey, hey. The one thing we really don't see often is Ilia Topuria on his back, now give him a relentless wrestler who is very successful in that lightweight division. I know a lot of people don't talk about him because the style is not so fan friendly, but this guy can make a run at that title. You saw his fight vs. Arman, that was back-and-forth."
Gamrot jumped on that idea.
As for the rest of the lightweight division, Usman played matchmaker.
"If I had to put my bracket together, I would have to say Islam is fighting Justin (Gaethje)," Usman said. "And after that, if you want to give a fantastic fight for Dustin Poirier, the retirement fight, why don't we do the third one with Max Holloway? And then, I would do Arman Tsarukyan vs. Charles Oliveira, and then I would probably do the winner of Chandler vs. Pimblett against Dan Hooker. I would do that."
Related
Alexander Volkanovski: 'It's fair' for Ilia Topuria to get immediate UFC lightweight title shot
Why Chael Sonnen considers it 'a real insult' to ask Islam Makhachev to fight Ilia Topuria
Michael Bisping: It would be a 'massive market opportunity lost' if Islam Makhachev doesn't fight Ilia Topuria
Beneil Dariush wouldn't be against Ilia Topuria getting a title shot vs. UFC champion Islam Makhachev
This article originally appeared on MMA Junkie: Kamaru Usman makes curious Ilia Topuria fight suggestion, gets response
Continue reading...
