The announcement that Diego Lopes would challenge Alexander Volkanovski for the featherweight title at UFC 325 has ignited serious debate inside the locker room — none louder than from veteran featherweight contender Aljamain Sterling. In a candid interview with MMAFighting.com, Sterling voiced confusion and anger at what he sees as a questionable booking decision. The fighter’s remarks didn’t pull punches: he demanded clarity on the organization’s criteria for title opportunities.

Sterling acknowledged that Lopes recently re-entered the win column with a stoppage. But to him, one fight does not justify what appears to be a fast-track rematch — especially after a clear defeat by Volkanovski earlier this year. Sterling argued that more consistent contenders, those with sustained runs and recent activity, were passed over. Fighters such as himself, Lerone Murphy and Movsar Evloev, who many expected to be next in line, had legitimate claims. Instead, a man who lost his last title challenge and only recently secured one win is being rewarded with another shot. For Sterling, that undermines the long-held principle that UFC title shots are earned through merit, not timing or marketing appeal.

He didn’t mince words. “They just don’t want to tell us what the criteria is anymore,” Sterling said. From his perspective, the sport has drifted from its roots. Once, ranking and performance dictated opportunity. Now, he fears decisions are influenced by popularity and business calculations. In his view, the promotion seems to prioritize spectacle over fairness — placing marketability ahead of the competitive ladder.

That sentiment has struck a chord with fans and fighters alike. Many in the division agreed: some of the top contenders had been waiting, fighting, and winning — yet they were overlooked. Sterling’s remarks echo broader concerns that the sport may be shifting toward a “popularity-first” model rather than one grounded in merit and performance.

For Diego Lopes, the rematch against Volkanovski represents redemption — an opportunity to right past wrongs, prove growth, and reclaim the title. But for fighters like Sterling, it triggers uncomfortable questions: what does it take now to earn a shot? A single finish? A fan-friendly style? Or simply being in the right place at the right time?

Sterling’s frustration goes beyond a single fight or opponent. It reflects the uncertainty many top contenders face in the current landscape. There is concern that if decisions continue to be unpredictable, fighters may feel undervalued, unable to trust that wins — not hype — will carry them where they belong. In his interview, Sterling warned that this kind of booking leads to disillusionment among athletes and damages the integrity of the division.

As the division gears up for the rematch, all eyes will be on how Lopes versus Volkanovski plays out — not just for the belt, but for what it signals about the state of matchmaking moving forward. If Lopes wins again, critics like Sterling may argue it was confirmation that merit doesn’t matter. If he loses, the backlash could escalate, with calls for a restructuring of how contenders are judged.

For now, Sterling’s comments provide a sobering voice in the post-fight political noise. They remind fans and officials that behind the glitz, fighters build careers through sweat, risk, and consistency — and that opportunity shouldn’t come down to who has the best timing, but who has earned it.