The new MMA general news, events and thoughts thread

[Egg Shen]

i think it's a different situation, Silva was jacked off his tits when he fought Vera.

 

Dana said in a recent scrum that the UFC are within their rights to cut people off a win or something similar so i don't think there's anything in there that says they need to bring Mills back.

[deathrey]

They cut Fitch on the back of a win.

If your under a UFC contract, I guess now is the time to stay clean as far as banned substances go, UFC need to cut fighters and surely they would be the first to go.

[David]

The problem is, the fighters are just so eager to sign with the company that they don't see that the contract is pretty much one-sided in favour of the UFC. If the fighter decides he wants out of his contract and the UFC deem them a money-maker they'll get taken to court, but the UFC can offer a guy a four fight deal and simply fuck you out after two fights if they so choose.

 

I guess it comes with the territory of one company having a complete monopoly over the sport.

[Egg Shen]

They cut Fitch on the back of a win.

no they didn't.

[lambyUK]

The problem is, the fighters are just so eager to sign with the company that they don't see that the contract is pretty much one-sided in favour of the UFC. If the fighter decides he wants out of his contract and the UFC deem them a money-maker they'll get taken to court, but the UFC can offer a guy a four fight deal and simply fuck you out after two fights if they so choose.

 

I guess it comes with the territory of one company having a complete monopoly over the sport.

 

I'm guessing that these fighters would receive a pay off if they are let out of their contracts early. Why should the fighters keep their contracts if they are doing a diabolical job?

[Egg Shen]

The problem is, the fighters are just so eager to sign with the company that they don't see that the contract is pretty much one-sided in favour of the UFC. If the fighter decides he wants out of his contract and the UFC deem them a money-maker they'll get taken to court, but the UFC can offer a guy a four fight deal and simply fuck you out after two fights if they so choose.

 

I guess it comes with the territory of one company having a complete monopoly over the sport.

yep, that's just how it goes. The door isn't closed on these guys though when they leave, they can win and come back. You can't blame any fighter for taking a deal the UFC throws at them, it's well highlighted how hard it is in MMA to make significant money, you have to take to the oppurtunitues you're given and try making the most of it.

 

Matt Riddle however was cut for being a fucking idiot, if they don't bring him back it's his own doing.

[Egg Shen]

The problem is, the fighters are just so eager to sign with the company that they don't see that the contract is pretty much one-sided in favour of the UFC. If the fighter decides he wants out of his contract and the UFC deem them a money-maker they'll get taken to court, but the UFC can offer a guy a four fight deal and simply fuck you out after two fights if they so choose.

 

I guess it comes with the territory of one company having a complete monopoly over the sport.

 

I'm guessing that these fighters would receive a pay off if they are let out of their contracts early.

that's something im unsure of. If a guy is under contract for 3 fights yet gets cut after 2, does he get the payment for the 3rd bout?

[lambyUK]

The problem is, the fighters are just so eager to sign with the company that they don't see that the contract is pretty much one-sided in favour of the UFC. If the fighter decides he wants out of his contract and the UFC deem them a money-maker they'll get taken to court, but the UFC can offer a guy a four fight deal and simply fuck you out after two fights if they so choose.

 

I guess it comes with the territory of one company having a complete monopoly over the sport.

 

I'm guessing that these fighters would receive a pay off if they are let out of their contracts early.

that's something im unsure of. If a guy is under contract for 3 fights yet gets cut after 2, does he get the payment for the 3rd bout?

 

I'd hazard a guess that it will be a % of it.

[David]

Why should the fighters keep their contracts if they are doing a diabolical job?

Because they signed a contract?

 

You do know what a contract is, right? An agreement between two or more parties which is written and enforceable by law. It's supposed to be a safeguard for both sides, not just the UFC.

 

It should guarantee the UFC the services of the fighter for a pre-determined number of fights at a pre-determined payscale (which it does. Try to walk away from the UFC and go elsewhere when you still have fights on a contract with them and see what happens), and it should also provide some sense of security for the fighter that he's guaranteed a pre-determined number of fights at a pre-determined rate of pay.

 

Jon Fitch, for example, should have been cut at the end of his contract with the company. That's why I was asking how many fights he had left under his current agreement. The proper way to go about business would have been to honour his current deal and pay and once that was up either offer him the financial terms you deem him worthy of, or not rehire him.

 

As I said though, the UFC have a monopoly on the sport, and most fighters will do anything to get into the company (including signing these contracts), so they have no one to blame but themselves.

[lambyUK]

Why should the fighters keep their contracts if they are doing a diabolical job?

Because they signed a contract?

 

You do know what a contract is, right? An agreement between two or more parties which is written and enforceable by law. It's supposed to be a safeguard for both sides, not just the UFC.

 

It should guarantee the UFC the services of the fighter for a pre-determined number of fights at a pre-determined payscale (which it does. Try to walk away from the UFC and go elsewhere when you still have fights on a contract with them and see what happens), and it should also provide some sense of security for the fighter that he's guaranteed a pre-determined number of fights at a pre-determined rate of pay.

 

Jon Fitch, for example, should have been cut at the end of his contract with the company. That's why I was asking how many fights he had left under his current agreement. The proper way to go about business would have been to honour his current deal and pay and once that was up either offer him the financial terms you deem him worthy of, or not rehire him.

 

As I said though, the UFC have a monopoly on the sport, and most fighters will do anything to get into the company (including signing these contracts), so they have no one to blame but themselves.

 

Sorry David, a contract is there to be broken and happens in every part of life if said employee is not performing. A manager in football who is sacked is released if they are not doing the job accordingly. It's also becoming common practice to have release clauses in contracts too. Say Alan Pardew at Newcastle. Do you really think he will get a 10 year pay off if he is sacked?

 

The simple fact is if the employer is not happy with your performance, you're gone. They pay you to do a job. What happens if you sign someone to a 5 fight deal, and they come in to their fights like they can't be arsed? That employer should have the right to release someone from their contract if he/she is not fulfilling the job of what the company expected.

 

You don't half like changing your stance on these things David? Just the other week you were almost applauding Randy Couture for walking out on his contact and "sticking it to the man" (not your exact quote, but a phrase anyway).

[wandshogun09]

Fucking hell. Riddle must be painfully thick. I'm gutted about this because he's someone who's really grown on me the last few years. He's dopey as fuck but I really like him. I'll miss Riddle. Hopefully he'll be picked up by Bellator or something. But fuck, how stupid to get caught again so soon after last time.

 

Faber vs Jorgensen is awesome. I was stumped on who Faber's next opponent would be, didn't even think of Jorgensen. Can't wait for that one, and best of all it will be 5 rounds.

 

EDIT - deathrey, Fitch got Fitch'd by Demian Maia in his last fight. You must be thinking of Fitch's win over Erick Silva before that.

[deathrey]

They cut Fitch on the back of a win.

no they didn't.

 

Right you are, I had forgotten about the Maia fight

[Carbomb]

You don't half like changing your stance on these things David? Just the other week you were almost applauding Randy Couture for walking out on his contact and "sticking it to the man" (not your exact quote, but a phrase anyway).

 

To be fair, lamby, he's not changing his stance on that point. Couture didn't breach his contract in any legal sense.

[lambyUK]

You don't half like changing your stance on these things David? Just the other week you were almost applauding Randy Couture for walking out on his contact and "sticking it to the man" (not your exact quote, but a phrase anyway).

 

To be fair, lamby, he's not changing his stance on that point. Couture didn't breach his contract in any legal sense.

 

I know he didn't breach his contract, it was within his right. Same with the UFC here, it's within their right to get rid.

[David]

Sorry David, a contract is there to be broken and happens in every part of life if said employee is not performing. A manager in football who is sacked is released if they are not doing the job accordingly. It's also becoming common practice to have release clauses in contracts too. Say Alan Pardew at Newcastle. Do you really think he will get a 10 year pay off if he is sacked?

Unless Alan Pardew signed a contract that said he would settle for less than the full ten years pay that's due then he would be due every penny owed to him if he was sacked. If he chose not to sign a contract that stipulated that, and instead chose to take a percentage of that then he's at fault, much like the UFC fighters are at fault for signing deals that say they can get cut at any point that Dana decides he doesn't want them around.

 

There's been reports of fighters finding out they've been cut via Ariel Helwani's Twitter, so we can guess that there is no sit-down with these guys to work out a severance package.

 

The simple fact is if the employer is not happy with your performance, you're gone. They pay you to do a job. What happens if you sign someone to a 5 fight deal, and they come in to their fights like they can't be arsed? That employer should have the right to release someone from their contract if he/she is not fulfilling the job of what the company expected.

I'm assuming that the fine print of the contract that fighters sign will say something to the effect of them having to perform to the best of their ability otherwise they would be in breach of contract. I'm not sure that not "letting it all fucking hang out" or refusing to "stand and bang" would quite qualify as a breach of contract though, would it?

 

You don't half like changing your stance on these things David? Just the other week you were almost applauding Randy Couture for walking out on his contact and "sticking it to the man" (not your exact quote, but a phrase anyway).

I don't recall "almost applauding" Couture for walking out on his contract. I didn't even think he had a contract with the UFC to walk out from! In every article I read about the situation Couture was described as a "former employee" of the UFC.

 

I believe he had a deal with FOX to do announcing, but that was due to expire, leaving him legally able to sign with SpikeTV.

 

I know he didn't breach his contract, it was within his right. Same with the UFC here, it's within their right to get rid.

And I didn't say it wasn't, did I? I simply said that the contracts are very one-sided in my opinion, but that the fighters have only themselves to blame for signing them in the first place.