There have been two other pieces written on this topic already, and you might believe another one is overkill. That's fine. I just have a point of view to express that apparently no one wants to touch, because it seems like everyone wants to make excuses for Nick Diaz and his actions. "It's just Nick being Nick, they should have known better before they signed him". "People love Nick Diaz because he's a rebel, and we want to see him anyway." And so on.
There are many, many people spouting stuff like this all over the place, not just here. But why? Why would you blame the UFC for bringing him in, given the circumstances (boxing clause, purchase of Strikeforce, etc)? And why would you blame the UFC for pulling the plug on someone that didn't meet his obligations? My fellow partner-in-crime Mike Fagan would have you believe that it doesn't make sense to punish the beast for acting like the beast. And both Leland Roling and Mike have stated that they should have never hired Nick Diaz in the first place if they didn't expect these sorts of actions. That, my friends, is a bunch of hooey.
Dana White loves to use the cliche "it's the fight business". Well, it is. Nick Diaz is a commodity to the UFC, a tool they can make money off of. Nothing more, nothing less. He was signed for that reason. Whether it was a risky signing or not is completely irrelevant. The use of it is a copout, meant to deflect blame from the real violator here. Why is it a copout? Because risk is manageable.
The problem in dealing with commodities that have a mind of their own is that sometimes they go off the reservation. That's what contracts are for, to mitigate the risk involved. So, when you choose to enter into a contract with someone that doesn't meet their obligations, you're not the one at fault when they're hurling colorful metaphors at people on the freeway instead of sitting on a stage next to the boss. Their fault. Not yours.
Nick Diaz is a 28-year-old adult male. He is not a child. He is not an animal. He's a man completely in control of his own actions. He is a man that put pen to paper and signed a contract that obligated him to meet certain criteria. One of those items was press conferences. He bailed on his end of the deal, he got the boot. People think the UFC is being too harsh? No way. They're just managing future risk, and it's perfectly reasonable. Don't give me the "it's not a big deal" spiel. Diaz is lucky he still has a job.
Diaz should not be pandered to or forgiven because he's done this sort of thing sporadically throughout his troubled career. Let's not forget that Nick HAS shown up for press conferences in the past too. Frank Shamrock remembers that vividly. Nick made a conscious choice to miss these ones, when he had everything on the line. Why?
Unlike a wild animal, instinct isn't causing him to attack his handlers this time. Neither is anxiety, or an expired drivers license, or running with the dreaded "wrong crowd". Being enabled for so long is what made him choose to do this. Enabled by his bosses, his camp, and yes, even his fans. He's been allowed to do whatever he felt like for a long time, and he's skated by because people want to see him fight. Well guess what Nick? Like Fagan's proverbial brother on the couch, you're getting the boot. But unlike the lazy brother, no one feels guilty about dropping you like a sack of dirty laundry. Because it's your own fault, and that's business. And every time one of you "fans" tries to steer the blame away from the real guilty party, you're just enabling Nick Diaz too.