Mike Fagan from bloodyelbow.com had an interesting take on the news last week that there will be two new editions to the UFC’s Hall of Fame at UFC 100. He has a problem with the Hall of Fame because there’s no transparency in who gets selected, unlike baseball, which admits members through a vote.

I guess it begs the question -- how many MMA fighters deserve the “Hall of Fame” classification? And, is this even something sports fans today still care about? Hall of Fame ceremonies are great to honor past stars and to give them one final sendoff. But Hall of Fames don’t generate nearly the number of heated debates used to among sports fans.

Would anyone be truly heartbroken if someone like a Matt Hughes wasn’t included in the UFC Hall of Fame? While Hughes may be a likely choice someday, what about someone who ended up on the wrong side from the UFC brass, like Tito Ortiz? You can debate whether or not there would be merit for Ortiz but there’s no question he’d never be considered.

And, if it’s something fans wanted to take seriously, what criteria would fighters be judged on? The sport is still in its infancy so would you hold that against fighters who have been retired for several years? They didn’t have to deal with fighters as athletic and versatile as Georges St. Pierre. Then again, Babe Ruth didn’t have to play against African-American pitchers.

And what about performance enhancers? Does that automatically make someone ineligible for the Hall of Fame?

There are some interesting dilemmas that would present themselves if the UFC wanted to legitimize its Hall of Fame but at the end of the day, does anyone really care? Currently, it’s a way for the UFC to give a nod to the fighters that helped get the promotion to where its at today and I think it’s just fine that way.