Picture this: the UFC women’s bantamweight throne is occupied by a fierce champion named Kayla Harrison, and she's gearing up for a showdown that could redefine women's MMA forever. But here's where it gets controversial – what if the superstar fight everyone’s buzzing about gets sidelined for an even bolder idea? Stick around, because her manager is stirring the pot with a pitch that might just flip the script on what we thought was the ultimate matchup.
Kayla Harrison stands at the brink of the most pivotal battle in her professional journey so far. Ever since their intense eyeball-to-eyeball standoff during UFC 316, fight aficionados have been eagerly anticipating the announcement of her clash with the returning legend Amanda Nunes. For newcomers to the sport, UFC stands for Ultimate Fighting Championship, a global mixed martial arts organization where athletes compete in a cage called the Octagon, blending techniques from boxing, wrestling, and more.
This potential bout pits the reigning women's bantamweight queen against what many consider the greatest female fighter in MMA history. The energy surrounding this fight feels monumental, promising excitement for both warriors. And this is the part most people miss – Harrison and Nunes share a rich backstory from their time training together at American Top Team, a renowned gym. This connection adds an extra layer of intrigue and personal stakes to what could be a dream confrontation for fans.
While spectators have been thrilled by the prospect of seeing these two face off inside the Octagon after their memorable encounter, one of the fighters' representatives has a different vision in mind. Intriguingly, Kayla Harrison’s manager is pushing for something else entirely.
In the past few weeks, whispers have circulated about another ex-UFC women's bantamweight titleholder – not Amanda Nunes – possibly staging a comeback. That fighter is Ronda Rousey, the iconic 'Rowdy' who drew inspiration from boxing legend Mike Tyson's triumphant return to the ring after a long hiatus. Despite this motivation, Rousey hasn't fully committed to re-entering the Octagon yet. She’s shared that she’s reignited her passion for martial arts, having resumed training to regain her peak form. For those unfamiliar, Rousey was a dominant force in early women's UFC, known for her judo expertise and rapid knockouts.
Kayla Harrison’s manager, Ali Abdelaziz, appears eager to seize this opportunity if 'Rowdy' decides to return after nearly a decade out of the competitive scene. He recently took to social media with a surprising post that completely dismisses the Nunes fight, opting instead to advocate for a rematch with Rousey – the very fighter Harrison defeated in a single round during Rousey's last UFC appearance. Abdelaziz called it 'the biggest fight in UFC history,' boldly prioritizing this over the highly anticipated Nunes showdown.
As a quick detour, here's some related buzz: Alexander Volkanovski might be lined up for a contentious title rematch, showcasing how matchmaking in MMA can spark heated debates.
Abdelaziz's exact tweet read: 'Forget about Amanda. Let's make Kayla Harrison vs. Ronda Rousey biggest fight in UFC history @KaylaH team Pedro🇺🇸' – posted on October 17, 2025.
Adding fuel to the fire, Harrison herself dropped hints in an ESPN interview about a special adversary she might face at the UFC's upcoming event in the White House next June – and it's not Amanda Nunes. While Rousey seems a long shot at present, another possibility could be the long-standing feud between Harrison and Cris Cyborg, another all-time great who's expressed openness to a UFC return amidst rumors of bigger matchups.
No matter who steps into the cage opposite her, it's clear Harrison is poised to headline that card, given her unique status as the UFC's sole American champion.
But here's the controversy hook: Is pushing Rousey over Nunes a savvy business move, or does it disrespect the fans' desires for a historic rivalry? What do you think – should we prioritize past rivalries over potential legends? Share your thoughts in the comments; I'd love to hear if you agree, disagree, or have a wild counterpoint of your own!
