General UFC Chit Chat/News

Foxtrol

Davei141 wrote: »

You know full well what game you trying to play painting him as some kind of employee who is far too much trouble than he is worth. He already said himself the UFC salary minus the sponsors was rubbish, so pretty much sounds "not worthwhile" to me. He was well prepared to get sacked over this (we all know how the UFC operate) issue so thats pretty much confirms it wasn't "worthwhile" to him.

Maybe the Klitschos paid him a proper wage with no sponsors. Do you think he fell on his sword for the craic? He was actually getting loads of money from the UFC and it turns out he is just greedy.

You and Marty are probably the only 2 people i know who are defending the indefensible. UFC can do no wrong.

I’m playing the game of telling the whole story, not just the part that makes him out to be a martyr with no previous run ins with the UFC for making negative comments against them to the media. The UFC were understandably extremely pissed about the A-team comments, as I’m sure all the other cut men he put down were.

If he was ‘well prepared to get sacked over this’ then he got his wish so what’s the big deal? I’d say more likely is that he hoped media comments might put pressure on the UFC give him more cash and miscalculated his worth.

So you have no idea what the Klitschos paid him, he could be on the exact same wage as the UFC for a nights work and isn’t allowed to display his own sponsors.

You do understand that no matter how many times you say something is indefensible it doesn’t make it so, especially as you’ve shown you’re incapable of putting holes in my argument.

Foxtrol

scudzilla wrote: »

No he wasn't, he probably wanted to be on the same as he's been on, his income has been slashed due to the sponsor fiasco. Tell me who else would be happy in that situation

Tell me what employee anywhere who is happy to get a pay cut? It doesn’t give him the right to go to the media and have a go at his employer (especially as he has previous issues with making inappropriate comments to the media).

Would you get away without anything being said if you went on the news complaining about a pay cut in your job?

Easy Rod

scudzilla wrote: »

No he wasn't, he probably wanted to be on the same as he's been on, his income has been slashed due to the sponsor fiasco. Tell me who else would be happy in that situation

Well yeah, to go back to the old way means more money than his current situation, obviously. I'm just saying he wasn't William Wallace seeking martyrdom for the greater good of his people. He was just pissed off he had less money than before. Nobody would be happy earning less, Im not arguing he should be happy.

scudzilla

Foxtrol wrote: »

Tell me what employee anywhere who is happy to get a pay cut? It doesn’t give him the right to go to the media and have a go at his employer (especially as he has previous issues with making inappropriate comments to the media).

Would you get away without anything being said if you went on the news complaining about a pay cut in your job?

Why not? Dana is all too quick to use the media when it suits him

dave1982

HBO doing special on domestic violence in mma, Dana refused to be interviewed.

Easy Rod

scudzilla wrote: »

Why not? Dana is all too quick to use the media when it suits him

I'm not sure if you're being facetious or not but Dana is the voice of the employer in the current scenario so it's completely different.

If the Fertittas decided to fire Dana because he gave an interview saying he had to fly business class instead of first class and was losing out...who's side would you be on? My guess is you'd be laughing your ass off that he got fired. Just my guess.

Foxtrol

dave1982 wrote: »

HBO doing special on domestic violence in mma, Dana refused to be interviewed.

Do you have an issue with this?

dave1982

Foxtrol wrote: »

Do you have an issue with this?

Nope it news is all, have you issue with me posting it ?

Warlock45

You wonder what road this whole thing is gonna go down..Brendan Schaub said he was taken off the reebok website for talking out about the deal,stitch gets fired for talking out, rogan has talked out about it a bit and if he gets stitch on the podcast one can only assume if they talk about it could put rogans job in jeopardy etc? Farcical how Dana is dealing with this as a whole and supposedly reeboks sales on the kits are shocking

John_D80

dave1982 wrote: »

HBO doing special on domestic violence in mma, Dana refused to be interviewed.

Would that be the same HBO that is haemorrhaging viewers by the hundred thousand for their boxing coverage?

Obviously no hidden agenda there. :rolleyes:

weemcd

Phase 2 of this deal, and it should be a quick change by the way it's going - is to have fighters wear and design signature shorts. I need to know who is who, I instantly want to see a highlight clip and know it's Anderson in the Bruce Lee colours. Fighter's need to sell, they need to standout. It becomes very hard to do this when everyone looks identical.

Warlock45

weemcd wrote: »

Phase 2 of this deal, and it should be a quick change by the way it's going - is to have fighters wear and design signature shorts. I need to know who is who, I instantly want to see a highlight clip and know it's Anderson in the Bruce Lee colours. Fighter's need to sell, they need to standout. It becomes very hard to do this when everyone looks identical.

Very true was thinking this myself the other day

raze_them_all_

Warlock45 wrote: »

You wonder what road this whole thing is gonna go down..Brendan Schaub said he was taken off the reebok website for talking out about the deal,stitch gets fired for talking out, rogan has talked out about it a bit and if he gets stitch on the podcast one can only assume if they talk about it could put rogans job in jeopardy etc? Farcical how Dana is dealing with this as a whole and supposedly reeboks sales on the kits are shocking

seriously who would actually buy them?? Imagine if someone showed up with a Giblert Melendez top? You would utterly rip them a new one them and not because its spell ed wrong. The reason kits work in other sports it's the athletes actually wear them while competing not while walking somewhere then to wear something completely different

Dtp1979

weemcd wrote: »

Phase 2 of this deal, and it should be a quick change by the way it's going - is to have fighters wear and design signature shorts. I need to know who is who, I instantly want to see a highlight clip and know it's Anderson in the Bruce Lee colours. Fighter's need to sell, they need to standout. It becomes very hard to do this when everyone looks identical.

I think mcgregor would be better suited to Bruce lee's colours

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

You think UFC base salary would beat sponsorship + salary in other orgs?

I'd say it probably does tbh.

A year of UFC shows at base salary only would be better than a year of WSOF or Belator. Belator fighter salary starts at $1,500 - so I've low expectations for cut man pay.
I really doubt the sponsors need to pay much to get their gear on those cards, be it fighters or cut men.
UFC do more shows too. WSOF do about 12 shows a year, Belator do about 22. But even on a per fight basis, I'd say you earn more in the UFC.

I'm just answering the above question btw, not Stitch was in the wrong. If it was me, I'd have made sure I was wearing a Reebok vest and paud for it.

nxbyveromdwjpg

Dana White is mega active on twitter today/last night for some reason, seems to be arguing with fans and all, almost trolling

https://twitter.com/danawhite/with_replies

Zero-Cool

nm wrote: »

Dana White is mega active on twitter today/last night for some reason, seems to be arguing with fans and all, almost trolling

https://twitter.com/danawhite/with_replies

Wow that's a lot of tweets! I was looking for any Q's about Stitch but gave up after I saw this :eek: :pac:

Davei141

Mellor wrote: »

I'd say it probably does tbh.

A year of UFC shows at base salary only would be better than a year of WSOF or Belator. Belator fighter salary starts at $1,500 - so I've low expectations for cut man pay.
I really doubt the sponsors need to pay much to get their gear on those cards, be it fighters or cut men.
UFC do more shows too. WSOF do about 12 shows a year, Belator do about 22. But even on a per fight basis, I'd say you earn more in the UFC.

I'm just answering the above question btw, not Stitch was in the wrong. If it was me, I'd have made sure I was wearing a Reebok vest and paud for it.

I'm not sure, maybe by sheer volume they can compete but that also frees up boxing opportunities (i know it is kind of veering off the other org point but i guess the point was not worth his while). As we are only guessing as there are not any figures, he recently called the base salary rubbish (pretty strong words) and mentioned that as cutmen he gets pretty big sponsorship as he is visible during the entire broadcast + they are at most shows. Leads me to believe it is very possible to get more, even in other orgs.

Yeah the fact he not only got his sponsors taken away but was not being paid to essentially sponsor a new product, that is just indefensible. When he asked about it they just said you are getting nothing, just a horrible way to do business.

Mr. CooL ICE

Just realised Costas Philippou retired

Zero-Cool

Botter reporting 2 epic fights will be happening

Jeremy Botter ‏@jeremybotter 2h2 hours ago Peccole Ranch, Las Vegas One last bit of breaking news before bed: Robbie Lawler vs Carlos Condit and Tyron Woodley vs. Johny Hendricks are happening.


Hope it's true. Was seriously pissed when I read Hendricks wanted to wait for Robbie, hope Woodley absolutely smashes him. As much as I'd love to see Condit beat Robbie, I just don't see it happeneing.

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

I'm not sure, maybe by sheer volume they can compete but that also frees up boxing opportunities (i know it is kind of veering off the other org point but i guess the point was not worth his while). As we are only guessing as there are not any figures, he recently called the base salary rubbish (pretty strong words) and mentioned that as cutmen he gets pretty big sponsorship as he is visible during the entire broadcast + they are at most shows. Leads me to believe it is very possible to get more, even in other orgs.

I've no doubt he was getting good money for UFC broadcasts. But how many people do you think watched the last WSOF undercard? Not many I'd say, sponsors there prob pay peanuts (speculation)

Yeah the fact he not only got his sponsors taken away but was not being paid to essentially sponsor a new product, that is just indefensible. When he asked about it they just said you are getting nothing, just a horrible way to do business.

He wasn't wearing Reebok gear afaik. That was a mistake on his behalf, he should have went to them to try get some logis on his best.

Davei141

Mellor wrote: »

I've no doubt he was getting good money for UFC broadcasts. But how many people do you think watched the last WSOF undercard? Not many I'd say, sponsors there prob pay peanuts (speculation)


He wasn't wearing Reebok gear afaik. That was a mistake on his behalf, he should have went to them to try get some logis on his best.

Looking at a few ratings report WSOF doesn't do great but Bellator matches the fight night viewership and easly competes with the UFC on free TV. PPV would be usually way below the 800k average viewership that most free cards get also so plenty of eyes would be on the Bellator cards which is all sponsors care about really. Like you said though we are just speculating either could be right or wrong.

I guess he did go to them about getting a part of the Reebok action (i think he said as much) and was told there was nothing left for cutmen. Probably wouldn't do him much good.

Davei141

Zero-Cool wrote: »

Botter reporting 2 epic fights will be happening

Jeremy Botter ‏@jeremybotter 2h2 hours ago Peccole Ranch, Las Vegas One last bit of breaking news before bed: Robbie Lawler vs Carlos Condit and Tyron Woodley vs. Johny Hendricks are happening.


Hope it's true. Was seriously pissed when I read Hendricks wanted to wait for Robbie, hope Woodley absolutely smashes him. As much as I'd love to see Condit beat Robbie, I just don't see it happeneing.

Hendricks is getting dicked over so much it is not even funny. Carlos Condit beats Thiago Alves and gets a title shot while Hendricks beat Lawler twice (IMO) beat Condit and Brown and here he is fighting bloody Tyron Woodley. Like the guy or not he has been treated disgracefully.

dulux99

Davei141 wrote: »

Hendricks is getting dicked over so much it is not even funny. Carlos Condit beats Thiago Alves and gets a title shot while Hendricks beat Lawler twice (IMO) beat Condit and Brown and here he is fighting bloody Tyron Woodley. Like the guy or not he has been treated disgracefully.

I disagree with you there. I think Lawler beat Hendricks clearly the second time, and he's only won one (quite lacklustre) fight since then. Condits destruction of Alves was far more impressive.

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

Hendricks beat Lawler twice (IMO) beat Condit and Brown and here he is fighting bloody Tyron Woodley. Like the guy or not he has been treated disgracefully.

I think I'm missing something. How is he being treated badly?
It's not like he beat those guys and got passed over.
He got a title shot after the Conduit fight. And the next two were title fights too. He had 3 in a row. Since then he beat Brown. Not making the Lawlor rubber match after 1 win is hardly disgraceful.

As I said, am I missing something?

Davei141

dulux99 wrote: »

I disagree with you there. I think Lawler beat Hendricks clearly the second time, and he's only won one (quite lacklustre) fight since then. Condits destruction of Alves was far more impressive.

We can disagree but no way was there anything clear about scoring it for Lawler. Most people just didn't care about Hendricks so were happy with the him losing to Lawler no matter how it happened, even reading all the twitter reactions and even on this forum nobody thought Lawler won until he actually won then tried to justify it. Condit beat somebody probably outside the top 15 at the moment, Hendricks beat Matt Brown an infinitely better opponent and also beat Condit. It isn't even a contest, i don't see Condit having a hope of winning this fight.

xtal191

What the hells the point of the rankings if they never use them?

MartyMcFly84

What the hells the point of the rankings if they never use them?

As far as I am aware the rankings are media based and are used only as a guideline for some match making by the UFC.

As its a private company and not a sports association so they can pretty much do what they want with regard to match ups. What ever makes sense at the time or they feel will be a more exciting match up.

Davei141

Mellor wrote: »

I think I'm missing something. How is he being treated badly?
It's not like he beat those guys and got passed over.
He got a title shot after the Conduit fight. And the next two were title fights too. He had 3 in a row. Since then he beat Brown. Not making the Lawlor rubber match after 1 win is hardly disgraceful.

As I said, am I missing something?

He was promised the fight after beating Matt Brown. Now Condit (someone who he beat) jumps ahead of him after beating Thiago Alves? Condit isn't even top 5 at the moment how does that make sense? Now he has to fight somebody again, somebody like Woodley who has looked disgraceful against a top opponent (Rory).

Does Condit deserve the title shot over Hendricks?

CurryFlavoured

Davei141 wrote: »

Hendricks is getting dicked over so much it is not even funny. Carlos Condit beats Thiago Alves and gets a title shot while Hendricks beat Lawler twice (IMO) beat Condit and Brown and here he is fighting bloody Tyron Woodley. Like the guy or not he has been treated disgracefully.

Agree completely. Even if you think Lawler beat him 2nd time round (I don't) there's no way of putting Condit ahead of Jonny. It'll be a better fight though.