The aggressive spillover hypothesis posits that precopulatory sexual cannibalism could evolve as a byproduct of directional selection on aggressiveness in a foraging context. In this debates piece we consider the critique of Kralj-Fišer and collaborators on the existing evidence in favor of the aggressive spillover hypothesis. Like Kralj-Fišer et al., we are of the opinion that the evidence in favor of the aggressive spillover hypothesis is still fairly weak. Despite this fact, the hypothesis remains one of the most widely celebrated examples of how behavioral syndromes can generate adaptive trade-offs. We describe herein several opportunities to build upon the existing data in favor of the aggressive spillover hypothesis and more critically evaluate its assumptions and predictions.