Sorry Strikeforce, No Fedor Emelianenko, No Gegard Mousasi
by Kid Nate on Dec 8, 2009 11:17 AM EST
in MMA News
Email
Print
Ariel Helwani gets the story:
From the moment news broke on Monday that Dan Henderson had signed with Strikeforce, all eyes pointed to a potential title match against light heavyweight champion Gegard Mousasi. But when reached via e-mail by FanHouse, the 24-year-old Dutch fighter said that the organization had yet to approach him about a fight against Henderson.
"That would be an exciting fight for the fans," he wrote. "For me, it's just another fight. But I understand that a win over a caliber fighter like Dan Henderson is very interesting."
Mousasi informed FanHouse that his next fight will be contested under K-1 rules at the Dynamite!! show on New Year's Eve in Japan, although his opponent has yet to be made official. The former DREAM middleweight champion is 1-0 in his kickboxing career, defeating Musashi via first-round TKO at last year's Dynamite!! show.
When asked when he expects to fight in MMA again, Mousasi noted that his contract states he can only compete on the same Strikeforce shows that feature his fellow M-1 Global fighter, Fedor Emelianenko.
"So when he fights, I will fight too. But sooner would be also be fine by me," he wrote.
Ok, so Strikeforce is now having to compete for their Light Heavyweight champ with K-1 as well as having to wait on their heavyweight champ Alistair Overeem to get kickboxing out of his system.
But the bit about Mousasi only fighting on Strikeforce shows that feature Fedor is the big news here. Holy moly! what a restrictive and baffling contract clause. I don't see how that helps anyone, unless its purpose is to tie Mousasi to M-1 Global longer by dragging out the time it takes him to complete his contract.
66 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
strange indeed. i guess this is the price strikeforce pays to do a deal with some of these guys, and why the UFC couldn’t come to terms.
www.tapology.com | twitter @tapology
or...
“having to wait on their heavyweight champ Alistair Overeem to get kickboxing out of his system.” or something else…
Was his first fight in SF not a part of this contract then? Because Fedor wasn’t on the Cyborg/Gina card.
"My diet is like Atkins, but with the carbs." - BJ Penn
M-1 can probably waive that clause if it sees fit.
I would imagine they want to co-promote shows with Fedor and Mousasi together on CBS, so as to build M-1 up.
that's my reaction to it as well
cagar é uma filosofia profunda...
a merda bate na água e a água bate na bunda.
Wow, so one potential headliner always has to be on the same card as another headliner? Weak.
Bloody hell.
by 3PA on Dec 8, 2009 11:19 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Do they share a car?
Keep firing Assholes!
Fedor has accomplished nothing until he fights Kimbo.
by Ubernoober on Dec 8, 2009 11:21 AM EST reply actions 4 recs
lol
Maybe they figure that more eyes will see Gegard with Fedor on the card.
by HappyLittleTreez on Dec 8, 2009 11:24 AM EST up reply actions
Perhaps they (M1) think that Gegard is their new cash cow...
and that Fedor is nearing retirement. So they need to use Fedor to gain exposure for Mousassi.
Dana White is Laughing
That’s really odd. Well I guess that’s what Strikeforce signed, that’s what they will get.
Strikeforce Fail.
Check out my recent MMA drawings on my blog, drop a comment, or subscribe via RSS for updates http://www.scritchandscratch.com/blog/?tag=mma
Is M-1 managing and promoting fighters at the same time? Isn’t that a clear conflict of interest?
If Dana White or Scott Coker were managing fighters while also running their MMA organizations people would be killing them for it. I don’t understand why M-1 is getting a pass. Especially considering that kind of clause in Mousasi’s contract has to be a conflict of his best interest. That clause to me appears to be in M-1’s best interest.
Just BE.
by mattman73 on Dec 8, 2009 11:35 AM EST reply actions 8 recs
Wouldn’t the conflict of interest with White or Coker arise because of their influence over matchmaking, title shots, etc.? M-1 has no control over that, except at the negotiating table.
by JRN on Dec 8, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Which ultimately boils down to exactly the same thing.
mattman73’s got it right, this is pretty much exactly the type of thing we don’t want in modern, high-profile MMA, forgetting the names involved.
Notice we didn’t hear Dana say anything bad about Coker & Co. until they agreed to M-1’s ludicrous position. I doubt it had anything to do with undermining Dana’s bargaining position and everything to do with how royally Strikeforce is porking themselves with the inclusion of all of these clauses.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Which ultimately boils down to exactly the same thing.
But doesn’t every manager of a high-profile fighter have considerable power at the negotiating table? Surely Brock Lesnar’s manager could influence which fights he takes, given Brock’s status as the UFC’s biggest draw.
I’m not doubting that there’s a conflict of interest in there somewhere, but I’m not a business-minded guy and I don’t see it right now.
by JRN on Dec 8, 2009 9:33 PM EST up reply actions
It sort of makes sense since Mousasi is allegedly getting 2k/2k per fight. So he has to be getting money from M1’s “consulting.”
I find it odd that they’d come out and say this flat out, and it’s not ideal for SF, but I’m not surprised
I doubt this was a planned
statement by M-1, and Gegard will likely get a good scolding about it very soon.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Makes sense to me. The biggest shows that Strikeforce will do will feature Emelianenko implicitly. Mousasi obviously has his wagon attached to Fedor. Also, if they air say 5 fights each show and Emelianenko and Mousasi keep winning… that looks really good for M-1 regardless of how Strikeforce fairs in the long term.
I'd watch that in a heartbeat
Even with the Strikeforce announce team.
by asa on Dec 8, 2009 9:24 PM EST up reply actions
I’m gonna call bullshit on that
clause, gegard fought on the carano/cyborg card which did not feature fedor.
And hey m1 it doesn’t matter if you get your name out every week on abc/cbs/nbc/fox you still aren’t gonna be jack shit in the world of mma.
2 fighters do not make a promotion.
by kanodogg on Dec 8, 2009 11:52 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Wasn’t that under a different contract? I thought Strikeforce just absorbed the terms of the contract he had with Affliction for that fight.
Even if it was the same contract,
in the end this whole ludicrous setup is about branding the M-1 name, and the way you do that is to succeed (preferably in spectacular fashion) in front of as many viewers as possible.
Carano/Cyborg provided that.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
What would M-1 gain from this?
My guess is should Strikeforce go to PPV, M-1 will take a cut, and it behooves them to get the largest audience by putting their best fighters on the same card. Even if it’s on Showtime or CBS, the gate is still important and maximizing that by having their biggest fighters on the same card guarantees that. It may seem slimey to some, but it’s good business sense I think.
Good business for who?
M-1 or Mousasi? It might be good for M-1 but as Mousasi’s manager M-1 should be negotiating Mousasi’s contracts in his best interest only not theirs. Now it may turn out it is a good deal for Mousasi but to me this has conflict of interest written all over it.
Just BE.
by mattman73 on Dec 8, 2009 12:21 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Good point.
In the end, M-1 is trying to behave exactly like Dana, without having to put anything on the table except their fighters (which is a given in any scenario), yet they get all these passes from The Hardcores.
Shenanigans.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Abosolutelly hillarious, the more I hear about SF the more they are falling into the same traps that other’s did before them why don’t people ever seem to learn from other’s mistakes?.
Because Strikeforce doesn’t have any choice. They want to compete with the UFC, but they don’t have the leverage that the UFC does from being the dominant brand. To compensate they have to agree to co-promoting with the M-1 leaches and other stuff that the UFC would never do.
by BilboMcFonzie on Dec 8, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
They don’t really want to compete with the UFC, they just want to carve out a larger portion of the higher end of the market. Zuffa is the one who is looking at this as competition – but not for consumer dollars but against their labor market.
It doesn’t matter if Strikeforce looks at it as a competition or not. They are trying to sign fighters that the UFC wants without having the same leverage and that’s why you see them agreeing to things like this.
by BilboMcFonzie on Dec 8, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions
A couple of questions points, which some others have raised as well:
1) Isn’t Gegard actually signed to M-1 who has 3 fight deal with Strikeforce for his services (he’s not fought twice) and two fights left on his deal with Dream?
2) If he is an m-1 fighter wouldn’t he naturally appear on their co-promoted events? In addition it seems it would makes sense to use the leverage of both to get them on CBS?
3) Does anyone know if there was a championship clause in his Strikeforce contract and what does that means for him in regards to number of fights he owes Strikeforce?
4) Does anyone know how long his contract with m-1 is for? I know he supposedly signed a 3-fight deal with Strikeforce this summer, and had 2 fights remaining on his Dream deal (maybe they’ll wave them), but is that all the fights he owes or does he have a longer contract with M-1?
5) if Mousasi is not available do to k-1 also explains why Shields is being talked about as Hendo’s first opponent.
The real important thing is that hat that Mousasi is wearing. I think if Fedor wore that hat, along with his sweater, and Mousasi wore Fedor’s sweater, along with his hat, it’d probably be the more badass pre-fight get-up in human history. If that’s what the ridiculous M-1 clause can accomplish by bringing them together, I say its worth it.
by TLow on Dec 8, 2009 12:20 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Just wow
This is another reason why i stick with the UFC on not co promotiing or even giving M1 any control over any thing. This clause basically leaves SF out to dry with two of its major stars having to be on one show. Its things like this that will destroy SF from the inside out. Also i see Gegerd leaving SF after his conract is up to seek greener pastures, either Japan or UFC probably.
The greatest trick M1...
ever pulled was convincing the world that it doesn’t exist.
by PM23 on Dec 8, 2009 1:15 PM EST up reply actions 7 recs
LOL
At people making fun of this. Is it that hard to believe that M-1 wants M-1 fighters to fight on M-1 co-promoted events on CBS? It makes the most sense for them, doesn’t it? Now, if Strikeforce wants Mousasi to defend the belt and Fedor is out for 4-6 months, he will fight without Fedor on the card, simple as that.
Except that the point is that it’s probably at M-1’s discretion to waive that clause, not Strikeforce. That’s what people have an issue with.
Common man. That was weak, even for you.
Except that the point is that it’s probably at M-1’s discretion to waive that clause, not Strikeforce.
=)
SI_JoshGross
Just talked with Scott Coker. He denied that Fedor Emelianenko and Gegard Mousasi are contractually obligated to fight on the same cards.
/facepalm
by MMASuPreMaCy on Dec 9, 2009 12:59 AM EST up reply actions
People crap on the UFC contracts a lot
and call them “restrictive,” but at least they don’t have to deal with crap like this.
That’s one of the most bizarre contract clauses I’ve ever seen.
LOL
Lets see here…he can only fight when Fedor fights…lemme do the math….ok, 2….carry the 5…..add a zero….times 3……ok got it, we wont see Mous fight for another 4 years.
The UFC has the best contracts whether or not people think their too binding or not. They are one of the reasons why the UFC has proved to be MMA’s only elite promotion over the years
by AintNoSunshine on Dec 8, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions
You mean taking fighters lifetime image rights
and preventing them from ever making money on video games, action figures, standups, or Fathead type things? Yeah, great contract.
Let’s not get out of hand saying that Strikeforce sucks and UFC rules because of this one clause in one contract. The general UFC contract is still all sorts of shitty.
by pdl on Dec 8, 2009 4:31 PM EST up reply actions
Come on K-1 put Mousasi against Hari or Semmy
So he can get KTFO for allowing himself to get caught up in all this M-1 BS.
I don’t see how Mousasi being on the Dynamite card means Strikeforce is in competition with K-1. He just won in SF a month ago, it isn’t like they were looking to bring him back a month later.
The Mousasi/Fedor package deal is unusual, but it makes sense in the context of M-1’s partnership with SF, and from a promotional perspective it behooves them to link the two; that is, to make a concerted effort to put Mousasi over as “The Next Fedor”.
Nobody is arguing whether or not this makes sense for M-1.
Quite the opposite. It quite obviously makes sense for them, so much that we look closer and see it does nothing but harm their supposed partners, Strikeforce. Also, it doesn’t pass the sniff test as far as who M-1 is looking out for first, their brand or their fighters individually.
I think what makes people mad is that they’re trying to behave exactly like Dana, without the downside (which is shouldered entirely by Strikeforce), and so many people support their actions while decrying Dana’s.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Dec 8, 2009 7:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
In the case of Fedor, helping the brand is definitely helping their fighter. But in the case of Mousasi? I don’t know. I guess it depends what the real terms are between him and M-1. Are they just hitching up their wagons to him or does he have a stake in it’s success as well? The answer to that will tell me if he’s getting screwed or not.
Scott Coker says this is UNTRUE
From Josh Gross’s Twitter:
SI_JoshGross Just talked with Scott Coker. He denied that Fedor Emelianenko and Gegard Mousasi are contractually obligated to fight on the same cards.
The only thing Jon Jones does better than Matt Hamill is hear.
(And smash faces)
So… either the article made up the Mousasi quotes, or Mousasi has been mislead about what is in his contract?
When asked when he expects to fight in MMA again, Mousasi noted that his contract states he can only compete on the same Strikeforce shows that feature his fellow M-1 Global fighter, Fedor Emelianenko.
“So when he fights, I will fight too. But sooner would be also be fine by me,” he wrote.
If this has any truth to it, then it could have been misquoted…
They only have the Mousasi quote, they did not cite the actual quote in which it supposibly says he can ONLY compete on the same Strikeforce shows as Fedor.
What actually is going is probably when Fedor fights, Mousasi fights, but the events aren’t mutually exclusive, meaning Mousasi can fight without Fedor being on the card, but when Fedor is present on the card, Mousasi fights as well due to M1 obligation.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
