The UFC Was Right To Cut Jon Fitch

by Derek Suboticki on Nov 20, 2008 8:38 AM EST

My comment thread kind of speaks for itself (this topic kept me up past my bedtime last night, pretty brutal when you have to be at work at a quarter till six), but I'll briefly outline my defense of Dana's decision:

1. Your employer sets the terms of your employment.

2. The merchandising deal does not prevent a fighter from making, marketing and selling his own products - it only means that Zuffa will be able to as well, in perpetuity. It's not an especially uncommon deal.

3. If you're Dana White and Jon Fitch is telling you he might want to be in another promo's MMA game in five or ten year's time, what does that tell you about Fitch's ambitions? What is your allegiance to Jon Fitch at this point?

Here's Dana's initial quote on the situation:

"We’re looking for guys who want to work with us and not against us, and frankly I’m just so [expletive] sick of this [expletive] it’s not even funny. Affliction is still out there trying to build its company. Let [Fitch] go work with them. Let him see what he thinks of those [expletives]. [Expletive] him. These guys aren’t partners with us. [Expletive] them. All of them, every last [expletive] one of them…. 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."

Dana, like I, believes the future of the sport is with the UFC holding all the top talent in the world, and that ruin lies down the other road. We both think that multiple organizations, competing for and diluting the talent pool of elite fighters, would spell doom for the sport. In response to Cain Velasquez trying to have standard contract language removed:

"Can you believe that?" White said. "Chuck Liddell has that language in his contract. Randy Couture has it. Anderson Silva has it. And Cain [expletive] Velasquez, with two [expletive] fights, wants us to change it for him? That’s [expletive] nuts. He can get the [expletive] out."

As much as I like Cain, Kos and yes, Fitch, I completely agree. This is over exclusive lifetime video game rights, people - the rest of the merchandising agreement is really quite standard, sane and (most importantly) unavoidable if MMA is ever going to be huge. Here's hoping they all come to their senses instead of going over for Affliction's next (read: last) show.

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.

Tweet Comment 24 comments | 6 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Thanks for taking the time. Flame away.

by Derek Suboticki on Nov 20, 2008 8:39 AM EST reply actions

It is weird that Chuck, Randy, Rampage, Rich, BJ, GSP and Forrest can sign the contract but not Jon Fitch? Maybe there is more to the story like blaming Fitchs’ sports agent?

by Nick Thomas on Nov 20, 2008 9:25 AM EST reply actions

The AKA guys and Chuck, Forrest all have the same agency which makes things interesting.

But I read that Dana went directly to Chuck to circumvent the agents, likely a similar situation with Forrest as well. They may have been able to get a modified deal.

by bigweeze on Nov 20, 2008 9:51 AM EST up reply actions

It’s because certain fighters get privilige to negotiate certain things out of their contract, and others dont.

by MMASuPreMaCy on Nov 20, 2008 12:31 PM EST up reply actions

Well..

The UFC is certainly within their rights to do it — but that doesn’t mean that it was right to do it.

The wrinkle that hasn’t been discussed too much is that Zuffa’s reasons for doing this might be more about covering their asses with regard to the upcoming “UFC Undisputed 2009” game from THQ.

According to some stuff I’ve been reading (over at fiveouncesofpain.com), the UFC gave THQ the impression that they could use any UFC fighter’s likeness, even though they hadn’t specifically contracted with all fighters for those rights. So, now they’re scrambling to get these rights, and Dana’s playing hard ball because he knows he’s in trouble if he doesn’t get those rights now. (i.e., if enough fighters refuse to do it, they could potentially sink the game) So, they’re sending a message.

They’ve got balls, to be sure. But that doesn’t mean they’re “right.”

by josemonkey on Nov 20, 2008 9:39 AM EST reply actions

I guess if they aren’t UFC fighters, the UFC isn’t technically failing to provide THQ anything.

by bigweeze on Nov 20, 2008 9:52 AM EST up reply actions

Dana over-reacted. He allowed personal feelings into a business decision

You’re agreeing with he guy that said this?:

“Can you believe that?” White said. "Chuck Liddell has that language in his contract.
Randy Couture has it. Anderson Silva has it. And Cain [expletive] Velasquez, with two [expletive] fights, wants us to change it for him? That’s [expletive] nuts. He can get the [expletive] out.

“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.”

Fitch also pointed out : “We could die and they could make memorial figurines and stuff and make thousands, millions of dollars, and our families wouldn’t see a penny of it. The way they bring the contracts and stuff to us, I don’t know, it’s just not how business is done.”

How do you side with the UFC on this? Dana also made some offhand comment about being away from his family and the economy sucking. I get the feeling there are things in Dana’s personal life contributing to this, like his 401k is down and his wife might be sleeping around. I don’t know but pretty sure this is not how other CEOs behave. It is a bad business decision, period.

by Headkick on Nov 20, 2008 9:57 AM EST reply actions

First of all...

Dana White does not have the power to cut people by himself. It was probably a group decision and if you want to blame one person in particular then Lorenzo Fertitta would likely be a more accurate target.

Secondly, do you really think the UFC is going to make memorial figurines of a passed fighter to try to turn a profit. I didn’t see that with Evan Tanner. It would be a PR nightmare and blow up in their face.

Fitch seems more like his is wigging out. “He wanted our souls forever” -Fitch’s actual hippie response to the contract.

P.S. – it is rude to speculate on someone’s personal life, especially in a public forum.

by EazyEismydad on Nov 20, 2008 10:11 AM EST up reply actions

if you want to blame one person in particular then Lorenzo Fertitta would likely be a more accurate target.

dingdingding! I think people give Dana too much credit. He’s basically been relegated to public relations and fanboi idol.

it is rude to speculate on someone’s personal life, especially in a public forum.

I bet you’re only saying that because your cat threw up on the rug again.

by mythbuster on Nov 20, 2008 11:15 AM EST up reply actions

I don’t get the cat reference. I’m just tired of people hating on people like that. Its just immature and takes away from your argument.

by EazyEismydad on Nov 20, 2008 11:06 PM EST up reply actions

eh, the cat thing was a joke (‘speculating on someone’s personal life’), trying to lighten the mood. And I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments, tho maybe not in the way you intended.

by mythbuster on Nov 21, 2008 9:12 AM EST up reply actions

Rec’d to hopefully put a well thought out post in a more public viewing place. Hopefully all the ranting angry “I hate the power mongering UFC” might be able to see another side of the story.

In particular:

2. The merchandising deal does not prevent a fighter from making, marketing and selling his own products – it only means that Zuffa will be able to as well, in perpetuity. It’s not an especially uncommon deal.

by iiowyn on Nov 20, 2008 10:34 AM EST reply actions

Not surprised you would say something like this.

by MMASuPreMaCy on Nov 20, 2008 12:33 PM EST up reply actions

I’m glad my ability to research and put out a well thought out opinion has been noted. I despise people who go way out on a limb before researching what they are talking about. Most MMA websites and forums are rife with that type of poster; thank god for BloodyElbow and its readers =)

by iiowyn on Nov 21, 2008 2:02 PM EST up reply actions

I imagine that Cain might go to Affliction, though I bet you that the rest head to Bellator.

by Rundownloser on Nov 20, 2008 10:49 AM EST reply actions

ufc

was not right. This is not how you treat employees who are just looking out for their own best interest.

by tkired on Nov 20, 2008 11:20 AM EST reply actions

Um, yes, it is. When they put it before the company’s, that is.

by Derek Suboticki on Nov 20, 2008 11:49 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs

Under this logic, all the fighters should fight for free.

by Mike Fagan on Nov 22, 2008 5:14 PM EST up reply actions

I Hope You Guys Realise, This ALL Started From The Merchandise Deal

Which DID say that you cannot make money off of your own name likeliness in any way unless ZUFFA would approve or take a cut, even if you are not in the UFC.

ALL AGENTS WERE AGAINST THIS DEAL AND ALL LAWYERS THAT POSTED ON SAID IT WAS A ONE SIDED CONTRACT.

I am sure you know better subo.

Here is the link that points out all the material you need to knwo about this:

by MMASuPreMaCy on Nov 20, 2008 12:36 PM EST reply actions

Well, the link may not show up but it is on Fight Opinion.
Rob Maysey and Josh Gross had some pretty strong words about it.

by MMASuPreMaCy on Nov 20, 2008 12:38 PM EST up reply actions

First time on the rec list

Thanks, mates

by Derek Suboticki on Nov 20, 2008 5:47 PM EST reply actions

re: the clause being in Chuck, Randy, etc. contracts

It’s known that certain guys have different deals than the standard video game likeness release and are probably making money off it.

by Mike Fagan on Nov 22, 2008 5:15 PM EST reply actions

So UFC agreed they werent right....

i’ve written a short play about the matter

dana: me angry, do as I say or me fire you. fuck! fuck! shit fuck!
Fitch: huh, what? can we talk about this?
dana: no, youre fired
fitch: i’m calling your boss
lorenzo: dana did what? over what agreement?not sure why Dana strongarmed you, i think he’s still upset over the economy. sorry. just sign it, you’re not fired.
dana: fuck shit cock n balls!!!!

by Headkick on Nov 23, 2008 2:12 PM EST reply actions

Dana: haha, isnt it awesome how we made that fucking camp bend over?did you see the fucking look on their faces when Fitch got the boot? now the rest know not to fuck with us!
Lorenzo: yes, gooood, goooood! Muwahahaha

by iiowyn on Nov 23, 2008 5:31 PM EST up reply actions