Will Jon Fitch Open the Flood-gates?

by Mike Fagan on Nov 20, 2008 8:47 AM EST in News Comment 61 comments

Thumbnail_crop_php_medium

In October of 1969, the St. Louis Cardinals traded a dependable, veteran centerfielder by the name of Curt Flood to the Philadelphia Phillies. Flood, upset at being traded to a cellar dwelling team playing in a run down stadium in front of a borderline racist crowd, refused to report to his new team. Instead, on Christmas Eve of 1969, Flood challenged Major League Baseball's reserve clause and demanded baseball declare him a free agent. Flood ultimately lost the case, but set in motion the change necessary to bring about free agency for players.

Strictly speaking economically, one understands why events unfolded as they have between ZuffA LLC., Dana White, and Jon Fitch. The UFC does not lose much from dropping a fighter like Fitch. Joe Six Pack and John Pepperoni will still buy their UFC pay-per-view each month for $49.95. Fitch, meanwhile, feels that UFC pay and exposure don't make up what he loses in giving away his likeness and name rights to Zuffa and feels he can make a comfortable living fighting elsewhere. Hence, Jon Fitch no longer is employed by Zuffa LLC.

What upsets me about this deal is that Jon Fitch was released for reasons entirely unrelated to his performance as a fighter. Dana White harps daily about how far MMA has come to be seen as a legitimate sports enterprise. Yet, how does dropping Jon Fitch, a consensus top 5 welterweight, and threatening his campmates (including another top 5 welterweight in Josh Koscheck and one of the most highly touted heavyweight prospects in Cain Velasquez) further that claim? White and Zuffa love to boast about putting on the best fights between the world's greatest fighters, but in the past year we have seen Tim Sylvia, Mirko Cro Cop, Fabricio Werdum, Randy Couture, Andrei Arlovski, and now Jon Fitch all leave the company. That's just a list of fighters Zuffa voluntarily let go, without taking into consideration the vast amount of fighters the company has refused to bring in.

In addition, if releasing Fitch strictly revolves around his refusal to sign away his name and likeness rights, why not simply remove him from the UFC video game? I have a hard time imagining Fitch's disappearance from the game causing any dropoff in sales, let alone significant ones. At the same time, you still punish Fitch - who loses out on a prime exposure opportunity - while still having the ability to utilize him in his main role as an athlete.

Jon Fitch will likely fare better than Curt Flood. Flood, after being traded from the Phillies to the Washington Senators in 1971, played in only 13 more games before retiring for good. Fitch will find work in other organization, whether at home or abroad, and will probably make good money doing it. The parallels of two veteran athletes at rougly similar ages being essentially blackballed from the primary organizations of their sport remain for one to ponder. Will we look back in ten years at this story as the moment labor relations became a serious issue in MMA?

0 recs | Comment 61 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: dana white, ufc, jon fitch, ufc video game

Comments

In addition, if releasing Fitch strictly revolves around his refusal to sign away his name and likeness rights, why not simply remove him from the UFC video game? I have a hard time imagining Fitch’s disappearance from the game causing any dropoff in sales, let alone significant ones. At the same time, you still punish Fitch – who loses out on a prime exposure opportunity – while still having the ability to utilize him in his main role as an athlete.

It appears to be because of the competing MMA game.

The American Kickboxing Academy welterweight standout explained that the situation for the urgency of the contract from the UFC might have stemmed from another company, EA Sports, putting out an MMA video game of its own. Apparently the UFC had promised all of its fighters exclusively to THQ, the makers of the upcoming UFC Undisputed 2009 game scheduled for release in spring of 2009.
“We were already promised to THQ by the UFC, even though none of us were under contract (for that), in order to save face, they had to force us to sign this thing,” he explained.
-MMAWeekly

by Eugene Schelfaut on Nov 20, 2008 5:38 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

That makes sense. If he refuses to sign they could drop him from the game. However, the competing game will use him, and possibly pay him for his likeness. If that happened then every Zuffa fighter that hadn’t quickly agreed would be free to refuse just so they could get paid to be in the EA Sports game. Their game would eventually fail and it would be because of their own fighters.
I don’t understand why the UFC won’t pay their stars for their likeness though. Money must be tight.

by EazyEismydad on Nov 20, 2008 5:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Stupid fucking reason not to sign a contract.

by subo on Nov 20, 2008 7:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seems like the middle ground would be a term in which Fitch could not appear in any other video games during the life of his UFC deal plus one year. If Fitch gets more popular the UFC can decide they want to give him a little better deal in order to get him into the game thats fine. The other side of the coin is that they won’t get burned by fighters under contract (or recently leaving the promotion) jumping into a competitor’s product.

by Day Man on Nov 20, 2008 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And if Fitch signed a deal with the EA game under Zuffa contract, I think releasing him is much more appropriate.

by Mike Fagan on Nov 20, 2008 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And, as a minor point, I don’t think Randy Couture should be in the list of fighters Zuffa voluntarily let go.

by Eugene Schelfaut on Nov 20, 2008 5:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

“Joe Six Pack and John Pepperoni will still buy their UFC pay-per-view each month for $49.95.”

I will still watch the PPVs even though I am a big Jon Fitch fan. I am however pissed off that the UFC thinks a video game is more important than the fighters, who are the REASON for the video game in the first place.

I’d rather see Jon Fitch fight in real life in the UFC than play some retarded video game that will probably have terrible fighter ratings and unrealistic ground game.

I don’t think his stance will change anything, especially not now. He has no hope of changing Zuffas stance and there is no real contractual obligation for the UFC to keep him around if he is not happy with things.

I hope Fitch fights in Japan, Diaz, Alvarez, Hansen, Aoki. Lots of good fights for him there.

I do not really agree or disagree with the UFCs stance on owning fighters trademarks and images, but I know if my top priority in life was being the best fighter I would just make the sacrifice, because there are more important things than money and if you are on the sidelines because of some ideological dispute then you are being a martyr for a lost cause, in this situation.

by DirtyML on Nov 20, 2008 5:54 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

fitch should find a new manager and talk to dana then sign the papers. I dont want him to fight meaningless fights in japan. The top welterweights are in the UFC let him keep fighting top competition.

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 6:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

at the same time

hes not going to win the belt in WW, and i think he knows that.

heading elsewhere might let him become a champion, but i think we all know he’s a long way from beating GSP, as is everyone else in ufc’s ww division.

Naming my son Brodie Damon

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 6:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i got bj to be the one to do that. :)

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 6:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ha well see

i think itll play out something like the last time… but i guess i’ll cheer for BJ

i dont really like either of them.

Naming my son Brodie Damon

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 6:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i think bj’s the underdog there but i hope he pulls it off. :)

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 7:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think hes gonna be a big underdog, in the 160-200 range.

by Day Man on Nov 20, 2008 12:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I love Fitch and to see him blackballed like this is a travesty. The guy did everything right and is being hammered into the ground by “the man”.

Fitch should go to DREAM in order to fight Akiyama at the year end show. That’d be a great fight. Fitch has fought at 185 before so he could make it without any problem. Or, he can simply choose to fight Jake Shields at Affliction in January if both guys are up to the fight. There are great fights out there for Jon Fitch. Not all of them are in the UFC. Should he win, and win handily, maybe the UFC will finally budge that he can stay without having to be in the game. There are a host of guys he could fight. Akiyama, Shields, Mousasi, Santiago, Filho, Trigg, Belfort, Misaki, Hieron, Sakurai, and Thompson are just a few of the guys he could step in and fight anywhere else in the world. And to be honest, it’d be smart for him to do so. He wasn’t going to beat St. Pierre in a rematch so maybe this is the way he can make a name for himself elsewhere. Think about it. What if Fitch defeats the likes of Akiyama and/or Shields? The UFC will take notice but probably still won’t budge. However, what if he beats another guy on the list. Say someone like Belfort. A name that the common MMA fan would know. It’d certainly raise eyebrows and people would start to realize how wrong the UFC is.

The sad part is that the entire AKA camp is being singled out here. And it’s a damn shame. One has to wonder if it was the reason Velasquez hasn’t had a fight since mid-July.

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." - Sir Winston Churchill

by FlyByKnight on Nov 20, 2008 6:02 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

This is a message to all the fight camps

AKA, ATT, Jackson and Couture..

I’m sure Zuffa is getting tired of the amount of fighters not willing to fight each other because they train in the same camp.

by steveoc24 on Nov 20, 2008 6:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Dana is sending a message, clear and loud. If your not a draw, we can replace you.

by steveoc24 on Nov 20, 2008 6:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

even if you ARE a draw

Fitch could bring in numbers, he did it for me. Guys exciting, even if he doesnt have super duper name recognition among the masses

Naming my son Brodie Damon

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 6:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, but you don’t really count, as you are a hardcore fan of MMA.

Koscheck, on the other hand, while not a true star, can still draw off of the heat he got from TUF. Now, he’s really becoming a great fighter as well, which will only help his drawing power.

I’ll be stunned if they cut him and Velasquez (for different reasons). It’s a damn shame that Fitch was cut, but if that was the only cut, I could at least understand the UFC’s rationale outside of the ancillary rights issue. He did just get clobbered by the champion, which may indicate to the wider audience that he is not a true threat to the title (which is not a belief those of us here would necessarily hold, but again, this has little to do with the hardcore audience) and Fitch was not pulling in bug numbers either on free TV or PPV. I’d still feel awful about it, but at least I could understand that rationale to a certain extent.

The upsetting thing is that, per Dave Meltzer’s latest show on www.f4wonline.com, both Koscheck and Velasquez offered to give the UFC their ancillary rights through the terms of their contracts and they apparently also offered to give the UFC their rights for up to five years beyond the term of their contract. How is this not acceptable? In five years, if the UFC feels like they still want to market these names/faces, could they not then re-negotiate the terms of the marketing agreement? Five years is a rather long time in the fight game, and who is to say that, in five years, either fighter is even relevant any longer?

It’s a very disappointing situation. Additional speculation on the show was that this lifetime agreement would perhaps not hold up in court. I’m no legal mind, so I won’t even speculate on that, but I can hope that is the case. What is intriguing to me is that, and I’m getting way ahead of myself with this, but if enough guys from enough different camps are not agreeable to signing away their ancillary rights, it could (could, not will) spur the development of a fighter’s union. I wouldn’t hold my breath on that, but this could certainly spark those flames.

Or it could turn out that the firing of Fitch scares the other contracted fighters into signing the marketing agreements, and then only Jon Fitch is left out in the cold.

by Brett Jones on Nov 20, 2008 8:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Five years is a very very long time in the MMA world. I’m thinking that this deal is about owning the rights so fighters can be used as legends and to make sure that the UFC’s video game always has the biggest names.

by Day Man on Nov 20, 2008 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Fitch isn’t a draw. I know a lot of people who watch (virtually) every UFC PPV and I’m willing to bet at least half of them couldn’t pick Fitch out of a lineup.

Intentional Blog on Balls

by Richard Wade on Nov 20, 2008 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i dont think that has anything to do about it dude.

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 6:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No he won’t, if Couture couldn’t do anything against the UFC Jon Doe Fitch sure as hell isn’t gonna open any flood gates. This reminds me of the Brandon Vera situation, the guy let stupid management decisions ruin his career and he’s never been the same. Fitch needs to smarten up and realise that in reality he’s destroying his mma career because of listening to bad advice, hopefully he’ll wake up tommorro and realise this and joing Swick in saying goodbye to AKA

by Raker on Nov 20, 2008 6:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

i actually agree with you.

So what if UFC gets your video game rights for life? if youre fighting with other promotions you wont even need those rights cause you’ll never be in a game. weigh the pros and cons. Fight in the best promotion available, get sponsors, get paid good, but no video game rights, or fight on fringe promotions that arent even sure to survive, and lose youre good sponsors. You have your video game rights.. but for what game?

He should stop listening to his manager and just sign the damn contract. the pro’s of signing significantly outweighs the cons.

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 6:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

pretty tough to say that

Affliction couldnt possibly have a video game ten years from now. Say they get a network deal, pick up a few more lower weight fighters, put out a crap THC game like UFC did… its totally possible.

And does Fitch really care if he gets to be in a video game in the first place?

Naming my son Brodie Damon

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 6:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i know. there’s a chance affliction could get a video game. But cmon man, look at the odds of that happening. and even if they did get a game years from now it still wouldn’t out weight the pro’s of signing.

and that wasnt even my point. His career could and would go further if he stays with the UFC.
he already said that 70-80% of his sponsors would leave.

Dana is an asshole, but whats a video game compared to all the pluses he gets with the UFC?

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 7:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i guess its a game of

principal vs payment

or perhaps he believes its an issue of

instant gratification vs compounded payment down the road

i dont think that the UFC is invincible, more importantly i think it could slide to being the number two promotion in north america within fitch’s career. if that happens and the promotion that fills the void is the one fitch signed with, than he’ll be the guy that got off the titanic early enough to snag the luxury lifeboats.

Naming my son Brodie Damon

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 7:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cmon man, lets be realistic here, by the time the UFC becomes the number 2 promotion, i think fitch will be retired by then. Lots of people dont even know what MMA is, but they know the UFC and ultimate fighting. Who will come up anytime soon? Affliction? They just hope to be as big as elite was before. And elite was faaaaar from the UFC.

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 7:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Affliction

is one CBS contract away from posing a serious threat to UFC. Theyll get consistency and have much better consistency than elite did.

im not impressed with your performance

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nope

They are not.

http://mma4real.net/

by Tha Realness on Nov 20, 2008 2:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

plus the license deals were non exclusive so i dont even know how big that compounded payment thing your saying since he can still get merchandise from other people. its just that the UFC can put little jon fitchs all over without his consent even forever.

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 7:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

question....

whats a “baseball?”

Naming my son Brodie Damon

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 6:19 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

This whole thing has to do with Zinkin… it started a while ago surrounding chuck.

The Dana will accept posturing to a certain point… but when the economy is in the shits don’t fuckin test.

I will bet that zinkin is feeding alot of his guys hot air.

For example:

He wants standard language changed for Cain’s contract… language that’s in Couture’s chucks, lesnars, Bj’s, GSPs contracts.

Does Cain know this? or is he just getting lip service from Zinkin while Zinkin is trying to test Dana and get under his skin using fighters livelihoods.

Now that there aren’t any orgs left… Dana has tasted blood and this is not the time to be his next pet project.

From a business perspective what is Fitchs’ likeness worth without Zuffa?

By the way he can still go out and do whatever deals he wants – the likeness rights are non-exclusive.

The problem are the agents…

In MMA there are no “agents” there are “recruiters”. There is only one game in town so the agents should be focusing on getting fighters endorsements etc…

Even if a “pepsi” emerges there is still no need for an “agent”. “agents” are only needed when there are a plethora of options and career paths like in the movies, or dozens of teams in the NBA, NFL, etc…

In MMA at most there will be 2 and highly likely only 1.

So as an “agent” in MMA if you are blacklisted from the only player in town what does that mean exactly?

Well for starters it means you stop getting paid from the guys who got cut… so now in order to maintain revenue you have to get these guys signed to at least comprable terms.

Now how much leverage do you have when you go to negotiate with another org when the other org knows Zuffa isnt interested? not much…

On top of that pack on this economy and all of this translates into:

YOU ARE FUCKED.

Pretty soon you’re going to have guys like Ken Pavia jerking your fighters off telling them he can get them back into zuffa.

So the end result is either the fighters leaving aka/zinkin to sign with Zuffa or Bob Cook smartening up and fixing this.

Now some might say well you’re giving a pass to Dana and these underhanded negotiating tactics…

Well these “agents” are using certain tactics as well.

This whole thing has nothing to do with just the “likeness” issue. The amount of demands made from these guys were just ludicrous… just as ludicrous as cutting a whole camp of fighters.

Every action causes an equal reaction.

Unfortunately the fighters are the casualties.

by mmalogic on Nov 20, 2008 7:19 AM EST reply actions 1 recs

jk maybe later

Naming my son Brodie Damon

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 7:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

hey dont worry about the fact that

perhaps the best fighter in the world has fought with about 80 gazillion promotions, that one of the biggest names in mma never fought in UFC, that dream is pwning asia, etc.

just dont worry about any of that

and the ecnomy BS is overplayed. “OMGz our economies are so bad btw do you know where i can buy tix to ufc 92??//”

Naming my son Brodie Damon

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 7:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

how many of those orgs that he has worked for still in business?

by mmalogic on Nov 20, 2008 8:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

as the sport matures

other orgs will become more stable

im not impressed with your performance

by troy145 on Nov 20, 2008 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Anyone who was here last night already knows this

But, with all the facts out now, I agree with Dana. He simply can’t allow one fighter to disrupt this precedent, and with the roster the UFC has, this is a loss that, while tough, the company can survive.

The employer sets the terms of your employment – Jon Fitch could still make Jon Fitch shirts and this is a dumb move by Jon (and maybe Cain and Josh, but fingers crossed that they sign.)

I think this is part of MMA’s growing pains. I still don’t think competitors to the UFC will emerge, however.

by subo on Nov 20, 2008 7:44 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

agreed..

while dana is an asshole for releasing him immediately and saying shit about him to the press, but i get why he did it.

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by Anton Tabuena on Nov 20, 2008 7:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dana is quick to point out that the big stars have often signed these clauses, as if that is proof that they are worthwhile or good, and people eat it up. The best part is that those are people who generally write endless posts about how awful boxing and its politics are.

I also think the idea that there will be a union is ridiculous. As long as he can get top fighters to do his bidding by offering large sums of money, giving them cars during negotiations, etc., it will likely never be. Historically, greed has always been a determining factor to prevent them from ever getting off the ground.

by D.Capitated on Nov 20, 2008 8:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Said every MLB and NFL fan before the rich players realized they were hurting the business and unionized.

Seriously, we’ve seen this movie before. We know how it ends – that’s with a union.

by subo on Nov 20, 2008 8:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That was the point I was about to raise.

The only way this sort of thing stops is by fighters joining unions where these issues are sorted out when they sign their fight contracts. For fighters, this would be great though. This would not be happening if they were in a union like MLB.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 9:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

All of this is sad

Just very very sad. The Cain Velazquez dismissal also sucks BIG TYME.

WTF Dana?!!!!

by xFenixKnightx on Nov 20, 2008 9:03 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I thought that Cain & some of those

other fighters were just “threatened” by Dana. Have they actually released Cain as well?

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 9:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh right, misread it.

I see that now, so I guess hes just been threatened. Still, this is complete garbage.

by xFenixKnightx on Nov 20, 2008 9:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree completely,

I was just hoping that was not true!

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 9:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

For everyone chiding the fighters...

and telling them, “just sign the contract”.

How about this for an idea, pay the fighters for rights to their likenesses!! I KNOW, I KNOW….it’s an earth-shattering idea to actually pay someone a percentage or lump sum to own their image for a life time.

Heck Ali only got something like $30million for his likeness 10 years ago after he’d used it throughout his career and into his later years probably making lots of money off it along the way.

by Frank_Castle on Nov 20, 2008 9:34 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

What’s their incentive for doing that?

Intentional Blog on Balls

by Richard Wade on Nov 20, 2008 3:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dana’s my way or the highway has got to stop at some point. Sooner or later there will be an organization that will succeed. He is going to lose a lot of fighters to greener pastures eventually. You can only take so much of his kind of attitude…i mean it’s human nature to resist being strong armed.

They def need some kind of union. This is a perfect example of the fighters needing some sort of defense outlet.

As of right now it’s: You disagree..walk. That aint right.

by lbk on Nov 20, 2008 9:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

This comes back to the fighters representation

during contract negotiations as well. These issues are out there & any rep/fighter that does not address them during contract negotiations is asking for trouble down the line. As far as Dana goes, while it is not the most likable way to go, this is still a business & the bottom line is to make all that you can on every aspect. If the fighters do not word this into their contracts of course the UFC is not going to pay them when they do not have to. Much like every single other company in the world that does not have to deal with unions.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 9:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Despite what DW says, this has nothing to do with the economy

"There are a lot of guys who help us and work with us and are great partners with us, and they’re the ones we’re going to remember and take care of," White said. "Do these guys understand what is going on in this world? I’ll tell you, this economy is [expletive] up. It’s totally [expletive] up. It’s bad, real, real bad. The [television] networks are in trouble and don’t have money. The sponsors are in trouble, and they have no money. If they don’t have money, they go out of business."

"I’m not a douche bag and I do a lot for these guys, a lot more than any of you will ever know. We’re in a horrible time in the economy now, and every guy with two nickels to rub together is making a run at us. We’ve worked too hard, given too much, to let certain guys come in and [expletive] with that."

This has everything to do with the power that DW can wield over the fighters. These guys were willing to sign over their rights for 5-10 years — more than the duration of most careers in the UFC — and DW is saying that they don’t want to work with him?

Don’t insult my intelligence and try to get my pity by whining about the economy. Don’t label fighters as ungrateful because they don’t want to sign whatever you tell them to sign.

by thepenismightier on Nov 20, 2008 9:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I really do not understand

why everyone expects Dana & the UFC not to operate with the best interest of the company in mind. Every single, I repeat every single company does these exact same things. Do we really believe that MLB, NFL, NBA would not be doing these exact same things if there was no union? Eventually being a good person does not compute with running a large company, no matter how much we would like it to. It just is not feasible. If they are not already, these fighters mgmt should be attempting to work these issues out when signing their contracts so there is not additional problems that come up.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I really don’t understand why people think the fighters shouldn’t be operating with their own interests in mind. Calls for “JUST SIGN THE PAPERS” accept the notion that they (the fighters) can’t fight the monolith, so just get in the cage and fight. There’s two sides in a fight.

by Mike Fagan on Nov 20, 2008 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Does every company do what is in their best interest the vast majority of the time? Yes.

Does that include attempting to add in terms beneficial to the business to already established contracts that offer no financial benefit to the employee with the threat of blackballing or losing their job as leverage? No.

Also, all of the sports you listed also have multiple teams bidding against each other which, I would argue, makes the unions even less needed in those sports than here in MMA.

by Day Man on Nov 20, 2008 12:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Market Power

First, I think it’s complete bullshit what Zuffa has done.

However, this ithe way it is: market power. Zuffa is really the only game in town. There are absolutely no other organizations sniffing the MMA video game business. Signing away your name and likeness in perpetuity may sound bad at first, but think about this: There are no competition to the UFC! You can cry all you want about Affliction, Dream, etc. but these guys are not competition. They just simply aren’t. There will not be a competing video game so what do these fighters lose when they sign away their video game likeness? Nothing. The only thing they lose is their dignity for bending over and take it up the ass by the Zuffa lawyers.

Their video game likeness won’t earn them a dime anywhere else in the next 10-15 years. If in those years, they find that they are losing money through this “contract,” then they can band together and throw a class action lawsuit at Zuffa. Until then, just sign it because it doesn’t change anything financially for them, but perhaps even help them in the long run as new fans are brought in through the video game world.

The sport world has this script played out over and over. When a sport is in its infancy, the owners have market power. When a sport blows up and becomes indispensable, the players gain market power. The original players must pay their dues so that later players reap the benefit. John Fitch and others just need to suck it up and take it on the chin for the next generation of fighters who will benefit later when the sport blows up. This is not the time.

by cyph on Nov 20, 2008 10:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Very good points!

This should be address by the fighters mgmt at the time the initial contract is signed & if not they do not have an argument. It is called smart business & smart representation.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You are quite intelligent...

by your logic the UFC should have no argument since it was not addressed at the time of the initial contract. Two way street shill boy.

He has a contract and they want him to sign another one – that gives away rights to his likeness for eternity. And they want to give him nothing for it, but without fighters giving up rights to there likeness the UFC couldn’t make the game or money.

So they want to make all the money and share NONE. Yeah how unsmart of his management.

by Frank_Castle on Nov 20, 2008 1:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

DREAM

That’s fine, Fitch should make his home in DREAM like another commenter suggested. DREAM 1-6 put together some fights that would stomp the colons of White and the Fortida Bros..

Looks like to me there’s a shift in focus from fighting to all of the marketing bunk surrounding fighting. Sad sad. If Zuffa is the only major player then it’s safe to say that they’re driving the industry that way.

by jyoseph on Nov 20, 2008 10:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Awesome write up. Curtis Flood – The Way It Is gives all sorts of insight as to life as pro baseball player. A-la different women in every city… and most of it is taken from before 1970.

by lunedi18 on Nov 20, 2008 11:07 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

It won’t open the floodgatess. The fighters will buckle, like they always do, and the fans venting their anger will be right back in front of their TV for the next pay-per-view, like they always do.

by andherewego on Nov 20, 2008 11:57 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Sad, but true.

by mythbuster on Nov 20, 2008 12:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I walked away from a mid six figure job on principals. My soul was not for sale, niether is Jon Fitch’s. This has more do to with being a man of principals than money/fights. I applaud him for his stand.

WAR FITCH

by Riney on Nov 20, 2008 2:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs