Sean Strickland is known for his unfiltered, no-holds-barred approach to speaking his mind, which has earned him both fans and critics in the world. Former UFC champion Daniel Cormier, while not known for holding back either, has admitted he wishes he could be more like Strickland in this regard.
Cormier, who has built a successful career in commentary and analysis, said that most people can’t live as freely and unapologetically as Strickland does. That is not entirely surprising since most of Strickland’s controversial opinions are just bigoted in nature. He’s made a career out of saying out-of-pocket things in the lead-up to his fights, be it homophobic or misogynist.
However, while speaking to Chael Sonnen, DC claimed Strickland was smarter than he let on as he would never cross lines like Bryce Mitchell, where even Dana White would have to intervene.
“In the build up, Sean Strickland is Sean Strickland. Honestly bro, I like Sean Strickland I think he is hilarious. I think he is so unfiltered that at times, I wish that I could live like that. Most can’t live and just say anything that they want, it will backfire on you.”
View this post on Instagram
Unfortunately for Cormier, while he can speak his mind, there is a limit to what he can say. Cormier is a commentator for the UFC and has multiple sponsorships which means that he has to present himself in a certain way in public.
Strickland is not tied down by those same rules and often finds himself in hot water due to the things he says. However, his statements have progressively gotten worse. If Strickland were a part of UFC’s sister company WWE, he might have already been in hot water. But the UFC brass doesn’t believe free speech comes with consequences.
Is free speech in UFC absolute?
Allowing fighters to speak their minds freely offers fans an authentic glimpse into an athlete’s personality and beliefs, fostering a deeper connection. However, this unfiltered expression can sometimes lead to deeply uneducated remarks.
On the very first episode of his podcast, featherweight fighter and UFC’s resident flat earther, Mitchell praised Adolf Hitler and claimed he was a good guy who fought for his country. The backlash was so bad that Dana White, who has usually allowed to let condemnable remarks slide, had to step in and assert that the promotion, in no way reflected the mindset of the fighter.
Condemning Mitchell’s remarks as “beyond disgusting”, White called him a ‘moron’ but emphasized that the featherweight prospect would not face disciplinary action.
UFC CEO Dana White on Bryce Mitchell’s comments praising Hitler:
“Hitler is one of the most disgusting and evil human beings to ever walk the face of the Earth. And anyone that tries to take an opposing position is a moron… Out of all the dumbest, ignorant sh*t I’ve heard in… pic.twitter.com/xesgeOmQkt
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) January 30, 2025
This scenario raises the question: should there be limits to a fighter’s freedom of expression, especially when their words can incite harm or spread misinformation? And if Mitchell and Strickland can say these outrageous things without a hint of consequence, why would it stop someone else from doing something worse? Free speech is often a line drawn on sand, but there must be a line. What do you think?
