Support for Joaquin Buckley sharpens debate over knockouts, stars, and spectacle
Daniel Cormier has stepped into the Buckley-Stevenson exchange and made his position clear. The UFC Hall of Famer says the UFC product is stronger than modern championship boxing, pointing to finishing instinct and event consistency at the top level.
Cormier backed Joaquin Buckley after the welterweight criticized Shakur Stevenson’s comments about MMA. Buckley accused boxers of dismissing UFC fighters and questioned a defensive style built around protecting a record rather than pressing for stoppages.
Cormier agreed.
“Shakur Stevenson said the UFC could never be boxing – Joaquin Buckley was right,” Cormier said on his YouTube channel. “It doesn’t have to be boxing, because the reality is there’s no big fights like there were in the past.”
“There aren’t enough big events to make us go back to the days when (Muhammad) Ali was fighting or when (Mike) Tyson was fighting, or when you had the ‘Four Kings’ and they were all fighting each other,” Cormier said. “It was different back then. Those fights brought more attention, and they felt bigger.”
The immediate reference was Canelo Alvarez against Terence Crawford in Las Vegas. The event was large. The fight was technical. Crawford relied on sharp counters, and ring positioning to manage a naturally bigger man over the distance.
Cormier saw it differently.
“Whereas when you get to the UFC, it’s more fun, it’s more exciting, and it’s just better and Joaquin Buckley was right,” he said. “We aren’t boxing. The UFC is better. It’s just the God-honest truth. It is what it is.”
That take leans into an old split in fight culture. At championship level, boxing rewards a man who starts with the jab, sets his feet, and picks his spots. You can bank rounds with range control, sharp counters, and clean exits without standing in the pocket for no reason. Effective aggression does not mean reckless exchanges. It means landing the telling shots and keeping command of the geography inside the ropes.
The UFC builds its product on constant engagement, short bursts, and thinner scoring margins. Space closes quicker. Exchanges come in flurries. The optics are different.
This argument is not about who understands technique. It is about what kind of action people want to see. Stevenson wins with a solid jab, balance, and punch selection. Cormier talks impact and visible damage.
Inside a boxing gym, ring IQ, conditioning, and shot selection still pay the bills. Whether that approach holds the same appeal for a crossover crowd is where the friction now lives.
