MMA Junkie's Knockout of the Month for May: Barriault puts Silva on a stretcher
With another action-packed month of MMA in the books, MMA Junkie looks at the best knockouts from May 2025: Here are the five nominees, listed in chronological order, and winner of MMA Junkie's Knockout of the Month award for May.
At the bottom of the post, let us know if we got it right by voting for your choice.
Nominee: Aleksandr Maslov def. Yuriy Fedorov at ACA 186
After facing some early adversity in their heavyweight bout, Alexandr Maslov got the last laugh against Yuriy Fedorov.
In a heated exchange early in the second round, Maslov (12-1) threw a multi-punch combination at Fedorov (10-7), one of which was a right hook that landed clean to the chin and immediately send him folded to the canvas unconscious.
Nominee: Connor Hughes def. Sebastien Di Franco at 2025 PFL Europe 1
The devastating knockout power of Connor Hughes was felt by Sebastien Di Franco when the pair met in a lightweight showdown.
At roughly the midway point of the fight, Hughes (11-2) took advantage of poor movement from Di Franco (10-4) with a clean punch that instantly knocked him out. No follow-up shots were needed with Di Franco's lifeless body falling and smacking his head off the canvas.
Nominee: Mike Malott def. Charles Radtke at UFC 315
Mike Malott gave the Canadian crowd plenty to cheer about – especially after Charles Radtke talked trash on the country prior to their welterweight bout.
A "Proper" left hook from Malott (12-2-1 MMA, 5-1 UFC) spelled the beginning of the end for Radtke (10-5 MMA, 3-2 UFC). Malott found the chin early in Round 2 with the cracking shot, leading to the finish seconds later after hard, accurate follow-up punches.
Nominee: Jared Gordon def. Thiago Moises at UFC Fight Night 256
Jared Gordon scored the biggest highlight reel win of his octagon tenure so far when he knocked Thiago Moises out cold.
After getting a takedown early in the lightweight bout, the action returned to its feet where Gordon (21-7 MMA, 9-6 UFC) landed a brutal right hand that floored Moises (19-9 MMA, 8-7 UFC). He followed up with a few shots on the ground to seal the deal.
Nominee: Dustin Jacoby def. Bruno Lopes at UFC on ESPN 68
Dustin Jacoby prioritized violence over technique, and it paid off against Bruno Lopes.
Jacoby (21-9-1 MMA, 9-6-1 UFC) knocked out Bruno Lopes (14-2 MMA, 1-1 UFC) with a swarming attack for a stoppage just minutes into the opening round of the light heavyweight bout.
The winner: Marc-Andre Barriault def. Bruno Silva at UFC 315
Marc-Andre Barriault finished Bruno Silva in scary fashion at UFC 315.
Barriault (17-9 MMA, 6-8 UFC) unleashed an array of elbows in the clinch to knock out Silva (23-13 MMA, 4-7 UFC) at the 1:27 mark of Round 1 in their middleweight bout.
Silva was rendered unconscious after being finished by an emotional Barriault and had to be stretchered out.
With the win, Canada's Barriault snapped a three-fight losing skid. Meanwhile, Silva has now lost five in a row, and seven of his past eight fights.
Cast Your Vote!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
4 minutes ago
- USA Today
Dan Hooker not keen on Paddy Pimblett next: 'I think someone's sh*t, then I fight sh*t'
Dan Hooker is seeking the toughest fight possible for his UFC return. Hooker (24-12 MMA, 14-8 UFC) called out Arman Tsarukyan (22-3 MMA, 9-2 UFC) and Charles Oliveira for the November pay-per-view card in a series of tweets. He broke down the landscape at lightweight, and why he's zoning in on Tsarukyan, who withdrew from his title fight against Islam Makhachev at UFC 311 in January. "I think they're going to do (Max) Holloway-Oliveira (and) they're going to do (Justin) Gaethje for the title," Hooker told Submission Radio. "That leaves Arman in the lurch. He's stuck fighting me, brother. He's got to fight me to get back in the mix and to get a title shot. And that's always the fight I want, and not because he's a prick and I hate him, but because I genuinely think that he's the harder fight." Hooker was asked about Paddy Pimblett (22-4 MMA, 7-0 UFC), but "The Hangman" took a dig at him when explaining why he'd rather fight Tsarukyan. "I don't think the guy's that good," Hooker said of Pimblett. "And it brings out the best of me when I fight an actual good fighter. Like, when they give me someone that I think I can beat, or I think someone's sh*t, then I fight sh*t. Like, my mind subconsciously relaxes because I think they're sh*t, and then I do sh*t, then they beat me. "But when I fight a guy that I think could kick my ass, then my subconscious goes, 'Oh,sh*t, we might get our ass kicked.' Then I wake up so, I actually end up fighting really well. So, I'd rather just fight the best guy so I actually perform well."
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Video: UFC on ESPN 71 media day live stream from Las Vegas (1:30 p.m. ET)
LAS VEGAS – UFC on ESPN 71 takes place Saturday at UFC Apex with a card that airs on ESPN and ESPN+. Before fight night arrives, though, notable athletes from the main card and preliminary are scheduled to speak to reporters Wednesday at media day, and MMA Junkie will have a live stream beginning at 1:30 p.m. ET/10:30 a.m. PT. That includes headliners Tatsuro Taira (16-1 MMA, 6-1 UFC) and HyunSung Park (10-0 MMA, 3-0 UFC), who meet in a flyweight bout. If you happen to miss any of the individual sessions on the live stream, check below for the archived videos of each media day. Elizeu Zaleski dos Santos Neil Magny Nora Cornolle Karol Rosa Estaban Ribovics Elves Brener Chris Duncan Mateusz Rebecki HyunSung Park Tatsuro Taira This article originally appeared on MMA Junkie: Live stream: UFC Vegas 108 media day interviews (1:30 p.m. ET)
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NCAA Trying to Block 24-Year-Old Rutgers Transfer From Playing
The NCAA contends the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit should avoid becoming 'the first appellate court in the nation to invalidate sensible limits on how long student-athletes can play college sports' and thus should reverse a trial court's preliminary injunction allowing 24-year-old Rutgers transfer Jett Elad to play for the Scarlet Knights this fall. The argument was featured in a brief filed by the NCAA last Friday. The brief disputed testimony by Rutgers head football coach Greg Schiano, whose remarks about Elad's NIL opportunities and potential NFL career were dismissed as reliant on 'self-interested, non-expert [and] subjective beliefs.' More from UNLV Lineman Denied Bid for Fifth Season in Antitrust Decision Baseball Antitrust Exemption Covers More Than MLB, Court Rules Trump Executive Order on College Sports Unlikely to Move the Needle In April, U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi blocked the NCAA from disqualifying the 24-year-old Canadian safety from playing this fall. As Sportico detailed, Rutgers is Elad's fourth college as he previously attended Ohio University, Garden City Community College (JUCO) and UNLV. Elad has already played four seasons (2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024) in five years (2019, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024). He is thus ineligible under the NCAA's five-year eligibility rule, which limits athletes to four seasons of intercollegiate competition—including JUCO competition—in any one sport within a five-year window. If deemed eligible, Elad figures to play a prominent role for the Scarlet Knights' defense. He's (clearly) a seasoned player at the collegiate level. Elad is an accomplished player, too, having been a finalist for the 2024 Jon Cornish Trophy, which recognizes the top Canadian in NCAA football, and was honorable mention for the All-Mountain West Team. In his order, Quraishi wrote critically about the five-year rule. He described it as unreasonably restraining the labor market for college football players who can sign lucrative NIL deals, nowadays receive a revenue share via the House settlement and, as the judge noted, 'transition into the NFL.' Quraishi indicated Schiano's testimony on behalf of Elad was especially persuasive. As a former NFL coach and experienced power conference coach, Schiano's opinion that Elad is an 'NFL-caliber safety' who would benefit greatly by having the chance to showcase his talents at the NFL combine was viewed as an authoritative and reliable statement about Elad's future. Although Elad could have declared for the 2025 NFL Draft, Schiano explained that Elad was 'under the impression that he was going to be able to play another season of college football.' Elad relied, mistakenly, on the NCAA issuing a JUCO waiver policy in the wake of Vanderbilt quarterback and former JUCO transfer Diego Pavia receiving a court ruling last December to play another season this fall. The gist of Quraishi's injunction for Elad was that college football, at least at a power conference school, shares some features of a professional football experience and the players, while still full-time students, ought to be viewed as selling services to teams. In a brief authored by Kenneth L. Racowski and other attorneys from Holland & Knight, the NCAA contends Quraishi fumbled key aspects of the case. One alleged defect is Quraishi placing importance in Schiano's 'subjective belief that playing for Rutgers will lead to Elad being drafted by an NFL team.' The NCAA argues this testimony was 'inherently speculative,' since it frames 'whether scouts see him in another college season' as a determinative factor without empirical support. The NCAA adds that Schiano's acknowledgment that an injury 'would prevent Elad from being drafted' only serves to confirm 'that Elad's NFL prospects depend on numerous factors that are out of Coach Schiano's hands.' Another alleged weakness in the injunction is how Elad relies on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in NCAA v. Alston (2021). The NCAA stresses that Alston 'had nothing to do with eligibility rules' and didn't 'call into question every rule that might impact commercial opportunities' for college athletes. Alston was about NCAA rules restricting education-related benefits for student athletes—not whether college athletes can sign NIL deals or eligibility rules. The NCAA also argues that Elad's exclusion from playing college football doesn't show the rule causes economic harm from a market standpoint. The rule doesn't 'reduce the number of roster spots' but instead 'defines and limits' which athletes can 'compete for opportunities and for how long.' The rule reflects the 'zero-sum game' of team rosters, since Elad's inclusion would mean another player isn't on the Scarlet Knights' roster and thus wouldn't be able to sign NIL deals as a Rutgers player. 'Even Coach Schiano's testimony,' the NCAA asserts, 'concedes that Elad would be taking away a roster spot from another player, who will not make the Rutgers roster, and playing time from another player who would otherwise get snaps that Elad plays.' The NCAA also insists there are important justifications for the five-year rule, including that it is designed for college athletes in a period that 'roughly corresponds to the time required to complete most college studies.' Elad's 'framework' for college sports, the NCAA charges, would permit athletes to train at JUCO, D-II and D-III 'indefinitely before transferring to Division I with four full seasons remaining.' This approach would allegedly 'fundamentally alter the structure of college sports' and constitute a 'complete redefinition' akin to a minor league. Along those lines, the NCAA invites the Third Circuit to think about the ramifications of permitting athletes 'to participate in college sports well past the time necessary for them to complete a college degree.' Elad's case is one of many taking place in courtrooms featuring seasoned college athletes who want to keep playing after exhausting their NCAA eligibility. As the NCAA notes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently sided with the NCAA in a case brought by Wisconsin cornerback Nyzier Fourqurean to play a fifth season of college football in five years. The possibility of the Third Circuit or another federal circuit siding with an athlete invites a potential 'circuit split,' meaning federal courts of appeals holding conflicting views about the same legal question, with the Seventh Circuit. Circuit splits provide a compelling reason for the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, since otherwise the rights and obligations of Americans can vary based on which circuit their cases happen to be litigated. Best of College Athletes as Employees: Answering 25 Key Questions
