Bloody Elbow: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: The Boxing Bulletin for Boxing Fans!

UFC Cuts Jon Fitch Version 2.0

In an effort to not be reflexively anti-Zuffa, I want to make note right up front that anyone from the organization who is reading this and would like to air their side of the story is more than welcome to email me. I am happy to let the viewpoint be aired.

There is quite a bit to chew on here and the picture isn't as clean as saying either side has a monopoly on prudence, judgment or truth. Michael Rome has indicated that there is more to the story for likeness rights, namely, that the UFC has lifetime likeness rights but not exclusively. I look forward to reading his interpretation of the issue. Fitch has indicated that the agreement the UFC wanted him to sign regarding the video game would prevent his likeness from being used in another game albeit acknowledging the plausibility of another entity creating a MMA game seems remote.

Then Sam Caplan has an interesting scoop, essentially suggesting that THQ was unaware the UFC didn't have exclusive rights to all of the fighters' likeness. To wit:

The fact that THQ had been promised exclusive access to the likeness of the entire UFC roster when the UFC wasn’t in a position to make such an assurance is believed to be a reason why the promotion has acted in haste in regards to demanding its fighters sign over their likenesses for “Undisputed.”

This seems highly plausible to me, although I have no way of knowing for sure. I trust Caplan's reporting, but I also tend to think Zuffa has partially set themselves up for this.

First, this video game agreement is different than the merchandising agreement bandied about a few months ago. That agreement is absurd and should've been roundly rejected. There were a host of problems with it, most notably that the fighter and his management had no auditing rights to verify they were being paid properly or to ensure the agreement was being enforced properly, offered no compensation to fighters for likeness use on DVDs or video games, "enables Zuffa to divert royalty and licensing payments by shifting income that could be classified as a license or royalty fee entitling a fighter to payment, into a payment that is Zuffa’s income alone." Not exactly an agreement that's generous to fighters.

Second, unless there is a copy of the language for the video game contract specifically, we need to see which interpretation is correct. Is it the case that Fitch and his team are misreading and able to use his likeness outside of Zuffa's auspices? Or is it the case that this contract firmly does not allow Fitch to be used in any other video game other than those the UFC offers them to participate in? If it's the latter, then not signing the agreement is perfectly justified if very consequential. And if its similar to the merchandising agreement, that means Zuffa would have to allow another company to use Fitch's likeness, which means they can outright deny it or take a monster cut.

There's much to dig into here and I will do so piece by piece with this issue. One matter that should be addressed at the outset, however, is Dana White's statements to Iole. You'll notice he never once explains why the legal requirements Zuffa is asking of fighters is reasonable, ethical, fair or necessary for Zuffa's long term vision. He exclaims quite loudly the economy is in turmoil, that he's worked hard, that other fighters "get with the program" (if that isn't ominous language used by bullies, then nothing is) and that people simply don't understand what's going on. White may be adamant, but he isn't forthcoming. Under no reasonable rubric does this qualify as an answer to the issue. Fitch has stated his position quite clearly: he doesn't want to sign away his likeness rights for fear of long term consequences. White has simply acted aggressively and suggested others in more vaunted positions are willing to move forward. That's an appeal to authority, not an argument or an answer. Until White or others within Zuffa are willing to present their case on the merits of the issue - why the agreement is fair, reasonable and necessary for Zuffa's long term plans - then they presently have no answer.

It's also worth pointing out the merchandising agreement did them no favors. There is no question the UFC is trying to promote fighters, make them more money and offer them a better life. But that doesn't mean the contract by which they go about it is a good fit for every fighter, reasonable by industry standards or in all cases fair. There were serious problems with the language. To wave that around only to follow up with this new agreement regarding the video game rights - not to mention trying to blackball virtually an entire world-class team - did them no favors. They created doubt and suspicion with an agreement that needed serious revision then White becomes irate when fighters are incredulous about a new agreement that asks them to offer lifetime likeness rights? Forgive me for being equally skeptical.

So much more to come. Stay tuned.

0 recs  |  Comment 62 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Look at the million different things White is saying in his interviews – Zach Arnold has a nice compilation on his site.

White is (once again) talking sh*t out both sides of his mouth, so I’m pretty certain I know who’s word I’ll believe. Zuffa’s hardball tactics are just getting stauncher as the competition falls by the way side…yayyyyy monopoly and boo to any of you people who thing fighters have a right to earn a fair living relative to the money they make their employer – one who will toss you out like last week’s trash the second you lose, become no good to them, won’t renegotiate a contract you’ve already signed or take less money because they say so.

by Frank_Castle on Nov 20, 2008 10:15 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

White was on "The Carmichael Dave" radio show and had this to say:


    "No, no, no. It has nothing to do with an agreement. It doesn’t have to do with Jon Fitch either. I like Jon Fitch. I’ve never had a bad word with Jon Fitch. The problem is with the idiots that run AKA. I won’t use any names; the idiots know who they are."

Clearly, according to him, the issue goes much deeper than the video game deal.

by Discman2 on Nov 20, 2008 10:16 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, like I said: lots to chew on.

by Luke Thomas on Nov 20, 2008 10:17 AM EST up 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 10:17 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

It may be the case the UFC is acting in its best interest, I understand that. But Fitch has a right to work in his interest as well even when the two do not coincide.

by Luke Thomas on Nov 20, 2008 10:18 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with that statement completely,

but if you do not address this with your initial contract negotiations then that is you & your mgmt’s fault. It is their job to find out about these things & work them into the fighters contracts. This is so standard for any business that I cannot believe we are this upset about it. We as fans love the fighters & I understand that, but it is still a business & the UFC has to act in its best interest as well. We have seen this with every single major sport in this country (MLB,NFL,NBA) & I expect we will continue to see it. It will always fall upon the athlete/mgmt to address these things BEFORE YOU SIGN YOUR CONTRACT. If you are unhappy with said contract, THEN DO NOT SIGN IT.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:21 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

They didn’t sign it? Are you saying they shouldn’t sign bout agreements if they aren’t going to sign merchandising agreements, etc?

by Luke Thomas on Nov 20, 2008 10:24 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I am saying

their mgmt teams should know what is coming down the pike with the particular organization they are signing a contract with & ensure that is covered when they sign a contract. Every other industry has realized this and has installed these languages in their contracts. If this is something that you are concerned about prior to it happening you & your mgmt team need to address it before it happens. You cannot wait until after something happens to make your decisions.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:26 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

If you want to side with Dana, ok fine. But this line of thinking is not fair. They had no idea the merchandising agreement or video game agreement were coming down the pike and realistically, there’s no way to prepare for it.

by Luke Thomas on Nov 20, 2008 10:41 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It really does not have so much to do with Dana

as it does business in general. There are languages that every single smart athlete/mgmt team puts in their contracts for these exact type of scenarios. They are not addressed specifically, but their is language in them that covers the fighter for this. I really could not care less one way or the other, but what I cannot stand is for someone to sign a contract that is not completely in their best interest & then try to change it.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:47 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Have you even read what this dispute is about?

Fitch didn’t sign the contract because it wasn’t in his best interest to turn over his lifetime likeness rights. He was trying to get the language into the contract, but as soon as he tried to get it he was cut loose.

by thepenismightier on Nov 20, 2008 10:59 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Then Fitch should get better mgmt

or wait until he has more leverage.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 11:02 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Zuffa is negotiating from a position of power and Fitch is not. Fitch and his management needs to learn when to bend and when to fight back. Signing your video game likeness away (which is really only as long as he’s in the UFC anyway. Video games wouldn’t use his likeness if he’s not with the UFC) is not all that bad when you consider the alternative.

by cyph on Nov 20, 2008 10:25 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

My jaw, and fingers, are getting tired. But for all the reasons I’ve enumerated since last night, I am on the UFC’s side on this particular squabble.

by subo on Nov 20, 2008 10:17 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Hahaha. I laugh everytime you say that.

by MMASuPreMaCy on Nov 20, 2008 12:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Did anyone other than Apple & other software companies bitch about Microsoft making their products not functional with other programs? This is a get all that you can while you can world. Sorry, but that is the way that it is.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:24 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Exactly my point,

someone got together and made a change. But you cannot fault a company for trying their best to ensure their product makes all that it can in every aspect of its function.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:48 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I can fault a company for trying to bully their employees into signing any they want to put in front of them.

by thepenismightier on Nov 20, 2008 12:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Doesn't really seem like bullying

when 95 percent of the fighters signed without issue does it? Including virtually every single high profile fighter who would have pull if they chose to use it.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 12:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Dana White speaks out about Jon Fitch’s release during emotional radio interview:

"No, no, no. It has nothing to do with an agreement," White corrected Carmichael when the host began to suggest Fitch was cut amidst reports he wouldn’t sign an agreement that would grant the UFC lifetime rights to his likeness for the purpose of making video games.

"It doesn’t have to do with Jon Fitch either," continued White. "I like Jon Fitch. I’ve never had a bad word with Jon Fitch. The problem is with the idiots that run AKA. I won’t use any names; the idiots know who they are."

"The economy is changing by the second. Every day when you wake up tomorrow, bad things are happening," he said. "Not just in the United States but all over the world. Television networks are in trouble. The sponsors who used to sponsor them are in trouble. Some of them are going out of business and the rest of them are cutting their sponsorships big time.

"Companies that have been around for hundred years are going out of business. It’s crazy. Banks are going under. And I’m in a situation now where I’ve got these guys — I’m trying to run a business — bro, I live on a plane 24 hours a day, seven days a week. That’s all I do is fly everywhere to try to build this company. And these guys think this thing is so big and these guys start negotiating all this stupid stuff like they’re Mel Gibson. No disrespect to Jon Fitch — I like Jon Fitch — (but) like we’re going to be doing the Jon Fitch swim line sometime soon? And then the clothing line.

"It’s insane. What I try to do — is we put together all of these things and we try to make everyone money. That’s the way that it works. But I’ve got these guys from AKA, these idiots, that don’t want to play. Listen, at the end of the day it’s not a big deal. The problem is because when something goes wrong in the UFC all the idiots from the media like to jump out and go, ‘Yeah, there’s something negative with the UFC. Let’s get out there and talk about it!’

"Listen, this is just like any other job. You don’t want to work for me? They’re plenty of other opportunities out there. The t-shirt guys are trying to start their own business. Get in business with them. Do it with somebody else. If you don’t want to be in business with me? Then you don’t have to be in business with me. It’s simple as that."

"’I’m more than willing to work with them, but I don’t see why we have to give up our whole lives. Why not a time limit?,’" the host read before being cut off by White.

"What’s with this whole lives?," White interjected. "Do you know how much Jon Fitch made for the Georges St. Pierre fight? Where the hell else could Jon Fitch go right now and make the money he made? He made $169,000 for that night for that fight. Where’s he going to make that kind of money in one night?"

"It’s like all the media wants to jump up and go ‘Oh the UFC! The UFC!" Shut up! Shut up. Every one of you shut your mouth. Mind your business. Here’s the deal: the reality is we’re working our asses off to make this thing bigger and better for everybody. The world is a very dangerous place right now with this economy."

White also confirmed during the course of the interview that he had been contacted by Mike Swick and indicated that Swick had expressed a desire to handle business on his own and work something out with the UFC. In regards to other fighters affiliated with AKA such as Josh Koscheck and Cain Velasquez, White didn’t mention them by name but stated he had no desire to work with any fighters that are represented by the San Jose-based fight gym.

by Nick Thomas on Nov 20, 2008 10:29 AM EST reply actions   1 recs

I agree, damnit.

by subo on Nov 20, 2008 11:58 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

“It’s like all the media wants to jump up and go ‘Oh the UFC! The UFC!” Shut up! Shut up. Every one of you shut your mouth. Mind your business".

Isn’t reporting the media’s business?

by Day Man on Nov 20, 2008 12:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Last time I checked.

by Luke Thomas on Nov 20, 2008 12:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I am sure it was fine to Jump at all the faults from other orgs like EliteXC and Affliction, but, please, don’t talk about the UFC….LOL…Oh Dana!

by MMASuPreMaCy on Nov 20, 2008 12:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Jon Fitch would have a part time job without Zuffa

Sherk, one of the best fighters in the world at the time, retired once because he couldn’t support his family on a UFC salary. That is just one of many many great names that before Zuffa couldn’t train full time and make enough money. The sport isn’t the MLB or NBA yet. This celebrity attitude by fighters needs to chill.

by EazyEismydad on Nov 20, 2008 10:30 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

This relates to fighters getting a

percentage of the PPV’s in some cases. Would anyone expect the UFC to share PPV shares/profits with every fighter that does not have it in their contract? Of course not. Smart fighters like Randy Couture w/good mgmt have implemented this language into their contracts. If you want more from your company, you should ask for it prior to agreeing to work for them.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:33 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I work for a medical group

who beginning in 2009 will be acquiring 20 new physicians making our company much larger & subsequently making much more money. Should I be able to go ask for more money when because of this alone? My work makes this possible, but my company pays me for my work like I asked them to. Of course I would love for them to just offer me more money because of this, but that is not really how the real world works.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:37 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

What....

Does that have to do with anything?…

by jafotinatos on Nov 20, 2008 11:48 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

What it means is

you do not ask for more jus because your company is doing well while you are under contract.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 11:52 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

As far as I can see, Fitch wasn’t asking for more. He had a contract, they tried to get him to sign an additional contract he didn’t agree with and terminated his existing contract when he didn’t.

by thepenismightier on Nov 20, 2008 12:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Translation:

WIthout Zuffa your “likeness” that you’re so worried about is worth:

 “would you like fries with that”

by mmalogic on Nov 20, 2008 10:49 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Great points,

if you intend to cover yourself so you can make money if your likeness is used in video games or dvd, etc then put that language into your contract.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:50 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

All fair points

But there’s this issue too:

From UFC’s point of view, perhaps they’re saying, “If you want to spend your whole career with us, why not sign this contract if you’re not going anywhere?”

Yeah, but that’s not the approach they take. That’s not how they bring it to you. (Things would be different) uf they would come in and sit down with you and say, “Hey, we have this deal (with a video game company), we’re in a spot, promised them all the guys, but there’s other video games out there now, so can you help us out and do this for us?”

That’s not what they say. They come in and they threaten you and try to bully you. It’s really disrespectful. I can’t even believe they’d treat someone like this in daily life, let alone business.

by Luke Thomas on Nov 20, 2008 10:55 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I understant the respect part of it

& we would all love to be respected in business at all times. However, that is not the way the majority of the business world functions. Some people are extremely nice in business & some are not. I just think that these fighters should look into getting with major mgmt teams like other professional athletes so these issues are addressed prior to the contract being signed or at least you should wait until your next contract & ensure it is addressed then.

These video games/dvd’s are ultimately better for the fighters in the long run. If these ventures all go well it brings in more revenue for the company which in turn makes more lucrative future contracts available.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 11:00 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

One more portion of this that I do not

understand is if this is such a major issue then why are more fighters not fighting this? It seems that the majority of the prominent fighters realize they are making a very good & comparable living for what they do & the others realize they are not in a position to demand it as they do not have the notoriety.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 11:10 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ummmm, I’m guessing it might have something to do with that fact that Dana is capable of blackballing an entire team if he doesn’t like the management negotiating. I guarantee you its not the fighters reading the contracts, its the agents and managers. Those agents are at least partially motivated by self preservation. It’s the same reason that the media people with the best access don’t ask the hard questions: fear of retribution.

by Day Man on Nov 20, 2008 12:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, I am sure

that the superstars in the UFC had no idea about this. They knew & they apparently did not have an issue with it. Probably because they are being pd 6 figures per fight

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 12:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Thats not how the pro-athletes that I’ve been around are. They know as much about their contract as their agent tells them. They don’t read their own deals and can’t interpret the legal terms anyway (hell many lawyers have a hard time with that).

Athletes don’t go clause by clause in their contract and decide…“hmmmmm, video game rights. I really want those”, they focus on whatever their agent tells them to focus on.

So yes, its possible that their agent gave them a blow-by-blow of every term of their deal. Its MUCH more likely that the agent said “Go ahead and sign, its a good deal”, which is why my point about self-preservation and fear of retribution above stand.

by Day Man on Nov 20, 2008 12:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

There is whole other story to this…

There is a personal beef between Zinkin and Dana.

Unfortunately the fighters will be the casualties.

At the end of the day Zinkin can make all the demands he wants… you don’t hear about those but when the pit bull bites back that’s what you hear.

If someone demands something absurd you will either walk away or throw something back equally absurd.

The real story here is this:

If you were his agent and were looking out for his best interests what you advise him to do???

Answer honestly and then you will see how Zinkin is doing a disservice to his client.

FItch, etc… need to understand the reality of this landscape… like I said above they are talking to him like it’s hollywood when it’s not. And like it or not they are knowingly or unknowingly advising him against his best interest.

And because of the beef I believe they are knowingly steering these guys on the wrong path.

by mmalogic on Nov 20, 2008 11:10 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

QFT

http://mma4real.net/

by Tha Realness on Nov 20, 2008 11:27 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Fitch mentions that he will lose 80% of his sponsorship money by leaving the UFC. This means that the UFC provides him the opportunity to earn an additional 400% of sponsorship money. People always say that the fighters are the product, but that proves the UFC generates more money for fighters than they can with other promotions.

As long as fighter purses remain decent and sponsorship money huge, I feel the fighters should be able to live with alot of things, including this video game deal though it is hard to stomach the way they went about it.

by bigweeze on Nov 20, 2008 11:46 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I forget who it was, specifically,

but an interview with a fighter awhile back revealed that he made somewhere around 200% his total fight purses in sponsorships/endorsements.

Fitch made $169k for his highest paid fight, and $60k before that. If those numbers are even close, then the UFC affords him something like $300k/year opportunities for endorsements. That’s just stupid to walk away from.

There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

by misterjonez on Nov 20, 2008 12:50 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Perhaps were they speaking directly to the fighter rather than to his agent the tone would be different. Given that they’re not addressing the fighter directly, I don’t think this is really an issue.

by Richard Wade on Nov 20, 2008 3:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I have to agree...

Knowing that Fitch made 170k with purse and bonuses for the GSP fight, does he really think that the video game likeness would amount to anything close to that if he has his lifetime rights to a video game deal? I’d say with proper financial planning, investments and consistently being a co-main event on the card would present a much larger dollar figure on the back end. These profits are all something that would benefit Fitch and all his family, as these are all personal investments. I’d have to chalk this up to bad agents, they’re only seeing what their cash cow can pay them, not what’s going to be best for Fitch in the long term. Like, seriously, he’s probably looking at a similar payday for January Ghono fight, something quite close and provided he doesn’t get hurt, he’d be close to getting that every couple months for a fight, until he can up his purse in his next contract.

Now, he has no place to fight. He can go to Japan or Affliction, I doubt he makes the same amount of dough at either of those places. He probably won’t be able to fight with the same frequency and they won’t have the long term stability, he has with the UFC.

BAD CALL. Thinking too much now and not enough of when he plans on stopping fighting. :P

"Men like me are like comets, destined to be consumed by lighting up their century"

- Napolean

by Kris McKillop on Nov 20, 2008 10:59 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Fighters have every right

to ask for this money, but the UFC has every right to refuse if it is not in their contracts.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 10:52 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

That’s exactly the point – it’s not in anyone’s contract, i.e. no one claimed the “rights” to it in the first place.

Now you’re saying, screw Jon Fitch et al because they never asked for it in writing but on the other side of the coin – UFC is fully entitled to it (even if its not in their contract). Glad we’ve got their company lawyer commenting here to clear it up for us!

by Frank_Castle on Nov 20, 2008 10:55 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Never in all my days

Would I have believed that all these people would come out and tote the zuffa company line. Some of you people are the sort of assholes that would stand behind a guy playing Blackjack and root for the house. Next were going to be hearning how the oil company’s need to raise prices to protect their profits going forward. un f%7NG believeable.

" Tell me something Steve, How does a guy from Puerto Rico loose a ball in the Sun? "

by aaronb on Nov 20, 2008 11:58 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I’m rooting for the fighters, the fans and the sport when I root for the UFC.

by subo on Nov 20, 2008 11:59 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hahaha…ridiculous.

by MMASuPreMaCy on Nov 20, 2008 1:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Sorry, I don’t fight the establishment, I try and work with them to my own best benefit. Sometimes the world sucks, deal with it.

by iiowyn on Nov 20, 2008 12:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with both you & Subo on this.

by dnevil001 on Nov 20, 2008 12:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No need to call people names. If you read most of the comments, they are very well thought out and debated. It’s just an opinion. Everyone’s got ’em. Just like assholes :)

by pud333 on Nov 20, 2008 12:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

And why wouldn’t I rather see a legitimate business succeed over a degenerate gambler?

by Richard Wade on Nov 20, 2008 3:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It's unfortunate for everyone involved.

First off, I’d have to say that I don’t blame the UFC for acting this way. They’re a business, and any business that has enough foresight will look out for its own long term interests. In the end, I really do believe that Dana and a lot of the UFC management do care about the future of MMA, it’s just that they want to make sure they’re on top and stay on top. So demanding likeness rights seems reasonable to me as far as how I’d expect the UFC to go about things, especially when the opportunities they are offering for the fighters, in terms of pay, name exposure, fame, etc. seems to be quite favorable to the fighters.

That being said, I’d have to agree with the fact that the tactics used, are less than subtle, and are very bullyish in nature. It’s clear that they are willing to share the pie, so long as they get control of it first. Perfectly understandable, but it doesn’t mean it’s exactly fair.

I think in the end, it comes down to what each fighter wants. The reality is, the economy sucks, there is no viable competition to the UFC, and probably won’t be for a long time, and fighting overseas, while money could be made, is dubious when it comes to various promotions. (eg: The Japanese MMA scene is dying a slow death). So it comes down to signing off and giving something up in exchange for continued employment and access to arguably the best and most vibrant platform for MMA today, and the near future.

I’ve had a few different jobs in my life, and at every job there was something I had to sign away in order to stay employed. I may not have liked it, or wanted to, but because of my career, I had to. I weighed the pros and cons, and in the end, I would sign because the pros outweighed the cons. Clearly, these fighters will have to take a step back (away from what their agents say, away from what Dana is saying) and make a decision for what’s best for themselves. Goodluck to them.

by pud333 on Nov 20, 2008 12:38 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Anyone else feel dirty?

As pissed as I am, it’s not going to stop me from watching UFC events. I get the “it’s just business” angle, but that is not a carte blanche for unethical behaviour. Some of the most evil acts in human history were justified with, “I was doing my job” or similar bland rationalisms. Dana White is being a bully here. Despite my moral compass spinning wildly through all of this, I still can’t wait for UFC 92. At least I don’t order the PPV, I just go to sports bars.

Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by themachiavellian on Nov 20, 2008 2:47 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I don’t feel dirty at all, Dana has made it possible for Fitch to get paid a nice sum of money and help feed his family. Now he’s made an idiotic decision that will harm his career and his ability to take care of his family because he’s listening to the wrong people. While it sucks, no one is to blame but FItch himself and just like Couture and others have found out he will either learn his lesson or end up like Lindland it’s up to him.

by Raker on Nov 20, 2008 3:00 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

Money isn’t the end-all argument for many people. So many people were outraged with the UFC that they’re talking with Fitch again. I don’t see it as any different than when Dave Chappelle walked away from Comedy Central – there are more important things than money.

Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by themachiavellian on Nov 20, 2008 3:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

"All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it." -- H.L. Mencken
Start posting on Bloody Elbow »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Weoweoweodotdeviantartdotcom_by_weoweoweo_small
TUF 10 Contestant, Darrill Schoonover to Return to Active Army Duty
Tracy_lee_martin_mcneil_small
UPDATE: It's (99%) on: Machida / Rua II on May 1st
Headkick-lg_small
Judging Change: Reward Flashy Fighters?
Small
The REAL Controversy at UFC 106
Mirkneebaraim640_small
Georges St Pierre vs. Dan Hardy to Headline UFC 109 in February?

Recent FanPosts

Picture_010_small
What if: Dan Gable would have been a fighter?
Neil_lomax_small
UFC vs. Boxing PPV dilemma (May 1, 2010 edition)
Weoweoweodotdeviantartdotcom_by_weoweoweo_small
Dan Hardy: "Josh Koscheck Is Like A Piece of S*** That Just Won't Flush."
Picture_010_small
What if Kimbo beats Houston Alexander?
Weoweoweodotdeviantartdotcom_by_weoweoweo_small
Ben Saunders Still Wants a Rematch Against Mike Swick
Just_tiger_small
Kim Couture (10K) top earner at Strikeforce Challengers V
Just_tiger_small
Josh Burkman KO's Brandon Melendez at Throwdown Showdown V

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

MMA Rankings

USA Today / SB Nation Consensus MMA Rankings