Generally, I think the UFC is doing a great job getting the top fighters onto its roster - and thereby creating fricking great cards for us fans. But recently, I think UFC's been cutting a too hard, and not in the most logical manner.
Each cut decision must of course be decided on its own merits, of course. But there are definitely some instances where I think the UFC cuts a little too hard. Cuts so hard, in fact, it goes against their professed intention to have the top fighters in the world in every division on their roster.
Take Brandon Vera. Sure, he lost 3 in a row - to Couture (ex multi-time champ in two divisions); Jones (rising killer and probably at a skill level higher than his current ranking); Thiago Silva (top 5 LHW).
Take Gerald Harris. THREE KO/TKO wins followed by a decision loss (attempted to finish via stare but failed) against a pretty devastating opponent. Gets cut. Note that there was a timekeeping error in this fight that caused it to extend past a probable submission in R1. If the officials can't even get their shit right, it's a bit harsh to cut the fighter who did nothing worse than fight a little boring. In fact, I watched the fight again and in R3 Harris does most of the attempted striking while Falcao stays away. I don't even feel Harris should be blamed that heavily for the lack of action in R3.
Take Todd Duffee. Seemingly a very good fighter, up and coming. Cut for "poor attitude" (we believe).
Vera should not have been cut. If you want the best fighters in LHW (or HW which people think Vera should be in), you shouldn't be cutting Vera unless you give him one of the bottom 3-4 LHW or HW fighters as an opponent, and he LOSES to them. Vera as a personality I consider a better draw than many of the lower ranked LHW/HW, and he would probably beat them in a fight. It should be a ladder system. Your ranking goes up if you win, and you get a stronger opponent next. Your ranking goes down if you lose, and you get a weaker opponent next. If you lose to the bottom guy or someone close to bottom, then you should get cut. I don't agree with cutting a guy after he loses to a top 5 LHW. (I just checked and Thiago is now at 8, Jones at 7, but you get the drift).
Gerald Harris should not have been cut. The guy is generally entertaining, is very talented, and out of UFC's 42 (! didn't realise there were so many) middleweights on the roster, is far from being the worst fighter.
Todd Duffee should not have been cut. He was dominating his fight and got KO'd. He performed well for most of the fight, and this was his only UFC loss. He may have had a little attitude and I consider it immature or not-well considered of him if he indeed displayed lack of interest in staying with the UFC, to Dana White of all people. But again, if you want the best fighters in the world, don't just cut a guy like Duffee who has serious potential, and who I think would probably beat the bottom 2-3 heavyweights on the roster. This one's a little marginal because his ranking isn't high and my view on his potential is debatable.
As a fan, I want to see the UFC's primary criterion for hiring and firing as being "who are the best fighters in the world?". At the moment it seems that personal issues (e.g. attitude being one), strings of losses to very strong opponents, and "being boring" can get you cut rather quickly, if you aren't one of the marquee names. Would we see Fitch hypothetically get cut if he lost in boring manner to Kos, Shields, and GSP all in a row? To me, that would make no sense.