UFC Star Roy Nelson Stuck in Contractual Limbo
Roy Nelson has been the subject of lawsuits and counter-law suits for most of this year, but it hadn't stopped him from fighting for the UFC, until now. When Nelson signed with the UFC to participate in the tenth season of The Ultimate Fighter, he apparently believed he was free and clear from other contractual obligations.
It's looking like Nelson was incorrect.
MMA Junkie reported yesterday:
UFC president Dana White today told MMAjunkie.com that Nelson (15-5 MMA, 2-1 UFC) is currently contractually bound to another fight promotion.
As such, he won't be seen inside the octagon until he is in the clear from his previous employer.
The story was originally broken by Robert Joyner:
Nelson, as well his overseers at Zuffa, are facing off in court with another combat sport participant that goes by Junior - Roy Jones Jr, that is. RJJ and his Square Ring, Inc. (SRI) filed suit in late Spring in Nevada court against both Nelson and Zuffa, alleging that the two parties acted together to deprive SRI of its' contractual rights.
Nelson initially entered into a relationship with RJJ and SRI when participating against Jeff Monson on the Boxing/MMA March Badness PPV, which was headlined by Roy Jones Jr. vs Omar Sheika. In his contract for the fight, SRI alleges that Nelson granted "exclusive first negotiation rights" on subsequent fights and under certain conditions the right to match any offers that Nelson received in the future.
Nelson would continue to work with Square Ring after his fight vs Monson. Nelson served as an advisor to Square Ring matchmaker for a mixed boxing and mma event on May 24th, 2009 in Primm, Nevada. The suit claims that UFC VP Marc Ratner was at said event and met with Square Ring CEO John Wirt. In the process of their conversation Wirt alerted Ratner to the fact that Nelson was assisting at the event in a matching making role and also stated that Nelson was an under contract Square Ring, Inc. fighter. The case states that Ratner later met separately with Nelson while at the Primm event. After the event, in late May/early June, SRI alleges that Nelson would negotiate first with Zuffa, did not provide SRI with the opportunity to match the Zuffa offer, and would sign an exclusive promotional agreement with Zuffa. SRI alleges that all these actions violated their agreement with Nelson. SRI also alleges that bouts that Nelson participated in while competing in the TUF 10 season were also in violation of the agreement.
The Fight Lawyer looked at the case, and the flurry of counter suits filed by Zuffa and Roy Nelson in August:
I checked the docket and it appears that Zuffa asserted a cross-claim against Nelson on May 3, 2010 and that Nelson asserted a counterclaim against SRI on June 17, 2010.
I have not seen either of these documents, but my guess is that Zuffa's counterclaim against Nelson is for contractual indemnification -- especially given the amount of time and money Zuffa asserts is involved in drafting its contracts.
That is, my guess is that under Zuffa's agreements with Nelson, Nelson has agreed to indemnify Zuffa for any losses Zuffa incurs (including attorney's fees, costs, judgments, etc.) arising from or relating to Nelson's breach of any agreements with any other promoter, which would include all of these claims that undoubtedly arise from Nelson's alleged breach of his agreement with SRI.
So, although people may assume that this litigation is causing Zuffa some pain (and litigation is always a hassle), I predict that Zuffa is likely to be covered for any of its expenses relating to this lawsuit and those expenses are likely to come from Nelson's pocket...
Dana White commented to MMA Junkie:
"These guys go out and sign with these rinky-dink little promotion companies and sign these bad contracts, and let's just say Roy Nelson is involved in a bad contract right now that he had before," White said. "There's a couple of different organizations out there that do it."
...
"There's organizations that are locking these guys up to the old-school boxing contracts," White said. "The contracts that King and those guys were doing back in the 60s, 70s and 80s where they have options on top of their options - so your contract never ends with these guys.
"These are the kinds of contracts that some of these guys are signing in these other organizations out there that some of these MMA websites go, 'Oh, stick up for these guys, they're the small guys.' The small guys are the guys that are really [expletive] the fighters."
In sum, it appears that Nelson took $30,000 to fight Jeff Monson for Roy Jones, Jr.'s Square Ring promotion and apparently didn't realize that contract gave Square Ring the option to match any future contracts Nelson was offered.
I'm surprised that Nelson fought for the UFC twice since the suit was originally filed and I'm curious as to what has changed to make Zuffa unwilling to book Nelson for further fights.
I do have to agree with Dana White that this appears to be one time where questionable boxing business practices have come over into MMA.
I'm not quite clear on what Square Ring thinks they are gaining by suing Nelson beyond a possible cash settlement. If they had an option to match other offers to Nelson, it's unclear to me that they could have matched the UFC's offer since they haven't put on an MMA event since 2009 to my knowledge.
52 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
as a lawyer
who admittedly doesn’t know much about this
these contracts should be strictly interpreted as a restraint against trade and declared void as against public policy.
It is odd that Nelson didn’t know about what was in the contract and we don’t know what the length of the matching term was but having a matching clause in there is fairly common. The odd thing here is why did it take well over a year for this to come out and become an issue? The fight with Monson was in March of 2009, there seems to be a lot more under the surface that we aren’t seeing here and I have to wonder just what the length of the matching clause period was.
The kicker to this whole fiasco is that Nelson takes great pride in the fact that he does not employ an agent and handles his own negotiations. Looks like that bit him in his ample posterior in this instance.
I also think his lack of an agent is partially responsible for his notoriously chilly relationship with the Zuffa brass. Dana & company tend to take negotiations personally and get their noses bent out of shape when the guy across the table plays hardball. Most of the time, the guy on the other side of the table is an agent rather than a fighter, but in Roy’s case, he doesn’t have an intermediary to take the heat for him.
Yep, the days of an athlete being able to manage themselves and work without professional legal advice are long over, MMA is no different than other sports in that regard. Roy signed a contract and didn’t keep up with what was in it and now he is caught, Square Ring may be assholes but in the end this all falls on Roy Nelson for not taking care of his business.
I have had some experience in some similar situations
And I think that when this gets before a judge the old contract will get nullified due to the circumstances.
So Lesnar/Mir 3 then?
"So, while you're taking a break from the UFC, hanging out at some lame party that your girlfriend dragged you to, I'll man up and watch some goddamn fights like a goddamn adult."
- Mike Fagan
Support independent artists
http://worldisart365.blogspot.com/
No.
Reppin' the NYMMAI.
Black Lesnar aka Slap ya Favorite MMA Writer
Follow me on Twitter
Read me at WatchKalibRun . Imma write til the wheels fall off.
by S.C. Michaelson on Nov 14, 2010 11:04 AM EST up reply actions
boy, you are adament about this
and i 100% agree.
by F'n Clownshoes on Nov 14, 2010 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
even a can or a young up and comer would be better
to have 1/3rd of you fights against one dude just seems wrong.
by F'n Clownshoes on Nov 14, 2010 11:11 AM EST up reply actions
No thanks, there are still other options
Schaub v Mir
Lesnar v Nog
WELL
nog said he was coming off a staph infection when he fough mir. they should rematch that match. let lesnar fight kongo so we can get his ass out of the ufc.
by BIGNAT on Nov 14, 2010 11:26 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
so we can get his ass out of the ufc
which guy? lol
by Kevin Jennison J. Zametov-St Pierre on Nov 14, 2010 11:56 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Logging in must be a bitch for you
"I'm gonna go after number one, whoever it is. If it's Anderson, or I gotta go up after the guys at 205, or go on a diet and go after Jose Aldo-- it doesn't matter." -Chael Sonnen
by Charles Awad on Nov 14, 2010 5:21 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
This sucks for Nelson. If Nelson had beat Dos Santos, I’m sure Zuffa would just be paying what ever it had to in order to make this go away, but Nelson is coming off a loss, and he has never been Dana White’s favorite guy.
It is a word of warning to all up and coming fighters who are looking at the big time.
If Nelson had beat Dos Santos, I’m sure Zuffa would just be paying what ever it had to in order to make this go away
This all came up before the Dos Santos fight, something has changed since then. Otherwise Zuffa wouldn’t of taken the risk that Nelson could of won the Dos Santos fight and been stuck.
Square Ring was hoping to get money. They will if Nelson ever wants to fight in the UFC anytime soon.
In the fantasyland some people exist in, second rate promoters would be willing to just give up their talent whenever asked to the big boy promotions and no harm would be done. Ultimately club fight promotions have the same issues the big boys do on a smaller scale – spending money on promoting a guy and having them sell tickets only to have them walk giving you nothing in return isn’t a good business plan. Most of the promoters now that have to sell tickets to make money are now signing guys to contracts rather than operating on an event to event basis for that reason, and since they aren’t tied to the Ali Act, they (like the UFC and Strikeforce and Bellator) will gladly put in a variety of contract extending options because they legally can.
Another thing to be frank about: Nelson is notorious for acting in a very independent fashion. He trains when he wants to effectively with who he wants to. I have little doubt whatsoever that he takes his professional management in much the same way.
And before some mouthbreather says I’m an apologist for this sort of promotional behavior, I’m not endorsing or saying I like it. It simply is. Until you give promoters financial or legal incentive not to act in this manner, they will continue to do so. Calls for idiotic “boycotts” against such promoters that will do nothing are a waste of time and bandwidth.
by VirtualBalboa on Nov 14, 2010 11:12 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
There’s nothing wrong with Square Ring having a matching clause in their contracts. It is odd that Roy apparently didn’t know about it and it’s odd that this took so long to come up as a court case and even longer to actually become a problem but just having a matching period clause in a contract shouldn’t be a issue. There is obviously more going on here than we are privy too, it’s the situation that smells funny not the the fact that the clause was in the contract.
Frankly, a promoter who doesn’t plan on running any more mixed cards or MMA shows trying to hold a guy to a contract is foul. Jones’ company was looking to recoup money by getting him to pay money for a release from the contract. By waiting until Nelson had won TUF and shown some level of success in the sport, it made the value of Nelson’s release much greater. Nelson probably doesn’t have the money himself and the UFC obviously doesn’t think enough of the guy to warrant them paying it, so….
Morally is it right? Of course not. Nelson will have to sit out awhile waiting for a settlement deal or a court decision. But it is what it is. Its basically a side effect of the current structure of the sport. It’ll get worse before it gets better.
by VirtualBalboa on Nov 14, 2010 11:27 AM EST up reply actions
Frankly, a promoter who doesn’t plan on running any more mixed cards or MMA shows trying to hold a guy to a contract is foul.
Oh beyond a doubt, but if the clause was in the contract and Nelson ignored it then they are legally in the right. It’s not a defense of Square Ring(they are showing themselves to be quite slimy here) it’s just that in the end all of this will fall on Roy Nelson for not keeping up with what he legally agreed to. If you sign a contract (any contract) and you don’t know or don’t keep up with what is in it then you are a fool who is just asking for trouble.
Morally is it right? Of course not. Nelson will have to sit out awhile waiting for a settlement deal or a court decision. But it is what it is. Its basically a side effect of the current structure of the sport. It’ll get worse before it gets better.
It happens in most sports from time to time, the problem isn’t the structure it’s that when you talk sports contracts and morality you are talking about things that are very foriegn to each other. The days of athletes being able to be their own managers/legal advisors has been over for quite a while now, MMA is no different. Roy Nelson didn’t protect himself when he needed to and now he is paying the price.
It doesn’t really happen in most sports from time to time. Most pro sports offer arbitration over contractual issues thanks to the unions in them. And before you mention holdouts, this is a very different thing. It happened a lot in boxing until that was made illegal. The reason those old contracts and methods of business are now being carted over to MMA is because it is now a financially successful sport and legal to do it there. And better yet, the powerhouse MMA promoter in the sport wants no change to the current rules or regulation because of how it might affect their own business plan.
The thing about MMA that really changes the picture versus boxing is that amateur MMA is a hot business and amateur boxing hasn’t been a ticket mover in 30 years. That leads to an artificially low number of pay/pro fighting spots in a sport in which 6 years ago virtually everyone was paid to participate in. For small promoters to artificially limit the number of pay spots is a very business savvy and profitable move – the definition of “smart business” should you be a promoter dependent on selling tickets and DVDs for your business.
You’re seeing smaller and smaller promotions then start to sign guys up to multifight deals then as the fighter turn pro – if you aren’t a multitime All American or ADCC champ signed to a major team, you’re probably going to have to sign one of those contracts to get paid. And from there, we get into the discussion about these promoters and managers trying to take percentages for life, cash for releases, etc. This is only a start.
by VirtualBalboa on Nov 14, 2010 8:52 PM EST up reply actions
It is interesting to see the reaction of Kid Nate and the posters here. From Kid Nates stand point this is a horrible, slimey, under handed thing that is totally wrong. Unless the UFC does it then it is just fine.
As for the posters in the forum I see every one so far is against these actions. But you can find a million posts where people crucified Strikeforce for not having these clauses in their contracts in the past and the contracts they inherited from EliteXC. Go back and look at what people were saying when Shields was leaving for example.
Hypocrisy reigns supreme.
when did I defend the UFC?
people call me Kid Hate because I’m so critical of Zuffa.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I'm still pissed that you caused
the Ole Miss Rebels to change their mascot.
I'm the best ever. You're the most average in a minute.
by slapjaw ackrite on Nov 14, 2010 3:56 PM EST up reply actions
when did I defend the UFC?
Right here. When you said the following knowing fully well that not only does Zuffa do the same thing, but that they were the leaders in bringing those clauses to MMA.
I do have to agree with Dana White that this appears to be one time where questionable boxing business practices have come over into MMA.
the UFC doesn't tie fighters into matching options when
they have no intention of offering them fights.
I’ve been a big and consistent critic of the UFC’s champion’s clauses and will continue to do so, but that doesn’t mean that what Roy Jones and company are doing to Nelson is anything but sleazy bullshit.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Someone is tryna teach Roy a lesson...and it aint Square Ring
Reppin' the NYMMAI.
Black Lesnar aka Slap ya Favorite MMA Writer
Follow me on Twitter
Read me at WatchKalibRun . Imma write til the wheels fall off.
by S.C. Michaelson on Nov 14, 2010 11:05 AM EST reply actions
agreed
a part of me thinks that Dana knew of this for a while. the JDS fight w/ Nelson was a litmus test, even if Roy won i think Dana may have brought this up. I think Dana really wants Nelson under his thumb. This relationship (Dana/Roy) has always been off putting to me.
by F'n Clownshoes on Nov 14, 2010 11:09 AM EST up reply actions
I’m not quite clear on what Square Ring thinks they are gaining by suing Nelson beyond a possible cash settlement
A cash settlement is EXACTLY what they are looking for. They are hoping that Zuffa throws money at the problem to make it go away. Unfortunately for Square Ring, Zuffa has already protected themselves from this kind of scam and the only person being hurt is Roy Nelson. This is basically the exact same thing that Bjorn Rebney is trying to do with Jon Brookins, and I would not be surprised if he gets stuck in a similar limbo after the TUF finale..
Does anybody in the know have solutions for this?
Is it as simple as throwing some money at RJJ? I think it’d have to be worth it, considering how Nelson sort of has a large cult following and really isn’t being paid much if he’s on the standard TUF contract.
"Tim Sylvia’s sphincter is demonstrably weaker than Andrei Arlovski’s chin." – hlebtasic
depends on where the contract was signed
if it was in california, it’s pretty much unenforceable due to public policy, as Cliff said earlier. Other states are a little more lenient on no-compete clauses. It depends if the terms are unconscionable comparatively (don’t really seem to be), or if they were boiler-plate clauses that weren’t very noticeable (seems likely, Nelson probably would have had an issue with this if he saw it). overall, it’s a sticky situation.
by Body Triangle on Nov 14, 2010 2:05 PM EST up reply actions
Tell RJJ that if he agrees to release Nelson...
…they’ll sign him to a 1 fight deal against Anderson Silva.
A suddenly thin seeming division
just got thinner. Ironic considering this is a Big Country story.
www.ninjasplace.com
I dont care to follow anything like this...
but something makes me think Dana white won’t lose.
Man's gotta eat
Seriously. He’s very hungry.
"I'm gonna go after number one, whoever it is. If it's Anderson, or I gotta go up after the guys at 205, or go on a diet and go after Jose Aldo-- it doesn't matter." -Chael Sonnen
As a lawyer who barely remembers this stuff from the bar....
Does anyone know if the defense of laches would be appropriate in this action?
Dennis Hallman, Bobby Lashley, Jeff Monson, and Din Thomas all fought on that same card. I wonder if anything has come up for those fighters either. I hope they aren’t locked into the same bullshit.
Lashley fought his whole Strikeforce career without a peep from RJJ
Hallman is back in the UFC now.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Aware of that, but Nelson fought several times before Square Rings Inc. started knocking on the door, including in a title eliminator. Hallman is a marginal welterweight by UFC standards and Lashley has never been more than a high-exposure prospect (which he still is). Then again I’m sure Lashley has a good agent who likely managed to avoid such legal traps. Not sure about the other guys I listed.
The UFC is probably actively looking for more FWs and Din Thomas would be a decent addition, even if he’s very far from Top 10 these days.

by 























