General UFC Chit Chat/News

jcd5971

dulux99 wrote: »

I know that. But for that to be Dana's only real explanation on the matter is what's bizarre. They should not have to be close, the cut man does a real, important job.

I've said it before, but I really mean this. Dana and Lorenzo are constantly talking about how they're striving to be considered a proper sports league, but with Dana's erratic behaviour at the helm, it will never be. Imagine the head of the NFL insulting people's looks on twitter, and calling them "goofballs" etc. . It just wouldn't happen

Lorenzo is getting more and more vocal I think he is driving along of this tbh

dulux99

jcd5971 wrote: »

Lorenzo is getting more and more vocal I think he is driving along of this tbh

Maybe with the stitch thing, but you wouldn't catch Lorenzo on twitter slagging off 9 year olds

jcd5971

dulux99 wrote: »

Maybe with the stitch thing, but you wouldn't catch Lorenzo on twitter slagging off 9 year olds

Thats vintage dana that will never change, and apparently he is on very good terms with ferttitas, and has undeniably advanced ufc so I'd say he is safe as houses with job, and as long as he is safe I don't see him reigning himself in. Plus why should he I prefer him honest rather that political correctness gone mad

dulux99

jcd5971 wrote: »

Thats vintage dana that will never change, and apparently he is on very good terms with ferttitas, and has undeniably advanced ufc so I'd say he is safe as houses with job, and as long as he is safe I don't see him reigning himself in. Plus why should he I prefer him honest rather that political correctness gone mad

I wouldn't have a problem with him slagging off everyone on twitter, if his put downs had a bit more imagination and humour to them. He has about four responses that he alternates, where he either mocks someone's avatar, critiques their amount of followers, or else just says something like "quiet down goofball". It's very playground-esque stuff.

jcd5971

dulux99 wrote: »

I wouldn't have a problem with him slagging off everyone on twitter, if his put downs had a bit more imagination and humour to them. He has about four responses that he alternates, where he either mocks someone's avatar, critiques their amount of followers, or else just says something like "quiet down goofball". It's very playground-esque stuff.

Yeah that's true as well

MartyMcFly84

Dana is certainly not a public relations dream.

But in a company the size of the UFC its rare the president of the company personally fires everyone. He said they have 10 cut people, and they have their own department that looks after them. So it would make sense that whomever was the manager of that department or HR was the person who called to terminate the contract. Its pretty standard procedure

Foxtrol

If you’ve watched Dana over the years the interview about Stitch is the normal way he reacts when he believes someone has had a go at him in the media – he focuses on one minor point the other side have made and will rant about it in great detail. The annoying thing is that the point he usually chooses has nothing to do with the issue at the heart of the problem so we gain zero insight.

slicus ricus

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

Dana is certainly not a public relations dream.

For a normal organisation, he would be a PR nightmare. For an organisation that runs MMA fights and thrives on getting people's attention through hype, he is pretty much ideal.

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

But in a company the size of the UFC its rare the president of the company personally fires everyone. He said they have 10 cut people, and they have their own department that looks after them. So it would make sense that whomever was the manager of that department or HR was the person who called to terminate the contract. Its pretty standard procedure

Agreed, in a large organisation, HR department should look after the logistics of hiring and firing once a decision has been made by management. Can't expect the CEO or President of the Company to be worrying about that, they're a little too busy trying to run the business. In Microsoft, you would hardly expect Bill Gates (or anyone on the high level management team) to be the one to relieve people of their duties.

Davei141

slicus ricus wrote: »

For a normal organisation, he would be a PR nightmare. For an organisation that runs MMA fights and thrives on getting people's attention through hype, he is pretty much ideal.



Agreed, in a large organisation, HR department should look after the logistics of hiring and firing once a decision has been made by management. Can't expect the CEO or President of the Company to be worrying about that, they're a little too busy trying to run the business. In Microsoft, you would hardly expect Bill Gates (or anyone on the high level management team) to be the one to relieve people of their duties.

Like I saw mentioned elsewhere if he could waste hours acting like a child on twitter i'm sure a 5 minute phone call wouldn't be too much in regards to the too busy points.

Reebok deal made to be appear more professional apparently yet hes allowed in front of a camera.

Tazzimus

Davei141 wrote: »

Like I saw mentioned elsewhere if he could waste hours acting like a child on twitter i'm sure a 5 minute phone call wouldn't be too much in regards to the too busy points.

Reebok deal made to be appear more professional apparently yet hes allowed in front of a camera.

He did a twitter session for his followers, lots of people do that. Granted he acted like a 5 year old but we've come to expect that from him, he's a giganticly rich man child.

As for the phone call, HR look after the hiring and firing, not senior management. He was under no obligations to actually call and do it himself, no matter how pally/unpally he was with the person.

Ken Shamrock

It Is baffling to me the amount of people that seem to love Dana White and how he does his business..I think he's a disgusting human being.

EDIT: "as for the phone call, HR look after the hiring and firing, not senior management." Also It's funny you say that when Dana White directly hired Stitch...

Tazzimus

Ken Shamrock wrote: »

EDIT: "as for the phone call, HR look after the hiring and firing, not senior management." Also It's funny you say that when Dana White directly hired Stitch...

That still has no relevance on him being obligated to personally call the guy and fire him.
My point is that Senior management generally don't do the HR stuff, that's not to say they don't make an exception sometimes.

I could be best pals with the CEO of my job and have him personally hire me. I wouldn't expect him to fire me as well though if it came to that, it's not his job. I wouldn't have a mickey fit cos someone else did it, it's called business.

jcd5971

Look if dana wanted him fired he'd fire him it's not as if he's a shrinking Violet our dana.
It was just business so he did it.

Face it reebok is getting a lot of ****, aldo has said he won't wear it, mcgregor wouldn't wear it for weigh ins an apparently was an issue back stage, he also refused to put on champion gear after beating mendes despite dana handing it to him.

Breedon Schaub had all his reebok stuff pulled of sale as he promoted Nike on his twitter.
They spelt Gilbert melendez as giblert and at the fightnight Chicago the gear failed and left a fighter exposed. So it's been a real disaster for UFC and Reebok. Stitch was the first really cutable person to slate the deal and was hammered as a statement of intent from zuffa to the rest of the organisation.

dulux99

Reebok can't be happy with all this drama that's gone on since the rollout of the gear. The word "reebok" seems to be a dirty sacrilegious word amongst most fighters and fans!

jcd5971

dulux99 wrote: »

Reebok can't be happy with all this drama that's gone on since the rollout of the gear. The word "reebok" seems to be a dirty sacrilegious word amongst most fighters and fans!

Thats what happens when you pay fighters **** and then turn around and charge fans 95 dollars for plain **** with a different colour name on it.

The whole thing smells of a cash grab, but despite the general belief that we are all bloodthirsty hooligans most mma fans are intelligent enough to recognise it for what it is.

Foxtrol

Ken Shamrock wrote: »

It Is baffling to me the amount of people that seem to love Dana White and how he does his business..I think he's a disgusting human being.

EDIT: "as for the phone call, HR look after the hiring and firing, not senior management." Also It's funny you say that when Dana White directly hired Stitch...

It’s not that people love Dana; it’s just that unlike you they don’t let their feelings towards him blind them at how a business is run.

Would you honestly expect the President of another multi-national firm worth over 1.5 billion and thousands of contractors to give personal calls to inform each contractor of their termination?

Davei141

The phoning/friends thing is a minor side issue which serves as a nice smokescreen because the actual issue is indefensible.

Had a nice laugh at people saying what a CEO should do when talking about DW btw, like he follows the CEO handbook...

The Tom Lawlor interview on MMA hour further crapping on Reebok.

Foxtrol

Davei141 wrote: »

The phoning/friends thing is a minor side issue which serves as a nice smokescreen because the actual issue is indefensible.

Had a nice laugh at people saying what a CEO should do when talking about DW btw, like he follows the CEO handbook...

The Tom Lawlor interview on MMA hour further crapping on Reebok.

Once again, it’s plenty defensible.

A guy spoke out to the media against the company he had a contract with (after being warned previously for doing similar); the company didn’t like it and terminated his contract.

You mightn’t like it but continuously trotting out the line that it’s indefensible doesn’t make it so.

Davei141

Foxtrol wrote: »

Once again, it’s plenty defensible.

A guy spoke out to the media against the company he had a contract with (after being warned previously for doing similar); the company didn’t like it and terminated his contract.

You mightn’t like it but continuously trotting out the line that it’s indefensible doesn’t make it so.

Well defensible to you and the UFC. No mention of why he spoke out, of course that doesn't matter. Something something still getting a salary, something something should have been happy to have a job and been a good company man.

All that lead to it is indefensible, Reebok deal isn't and the loss of income isn't. I'm sure you will parrot the Dana White rubbis hprofessionalism defence though.

Foxtrol

Davei141 wrote: »

Well defensible to you and the UFC. No mention of why he spoke out, of course that doesn't matter. Something something still getting a salary, something something should have been happy to have a job and been a good company man.

All that lead to it is indefensible, Reebok deal isn't and the loss of income isn't. I'm sure you will parrot the Dana White rubbis hprofessionalism defence though.

It’s defensible to anyone who has ever worked or been a contractor for a large company. You can’t go out in public and slate your employer and expect no reaction (especially if you’ve had a previous issue with this). The only time what you’re talking about would matter is if you’re whistleblowing on a major issue but moaning about ancillary salary that has already been widely reported in the media is not a case for this.

In these situations you only have as much leverage as your worth to the company and Stitch absolutely miscalculated his worth to the UFC, he thought of himself as ‘the A team’ and friends with senior management when neither were the case.

I think the UFC also miscalculated how attached people were to the old faces but their miscalculation results in a few people moaning on the internet (the most vocal here are ones who have stated how much they dislike Dana and the UFC anyway). Stitch had so much more to lose so shouldn't have gambled.

dulux99

Foxtrol wrote: »

It’s defensible to anyone who has ever worked or been a contractor for a large company. You can’t go out in public and slate your employer and expect no reaction (especially if you’ve had a previous issue with this). The only time what you’re talking about would matter is if you’re whistleblowing on a major issue but moaning about ancillary salary that has already been widely reported in the media is not a case for this.

In these situations you only have as much leverage as your worth to the company and Stitch absolutely miscalculated his worth to the UFC, he thought of himself as ‘the A team’ and friends with senior management when neither were the case.

I think the UFC also miscalculated how attached people were to the old faces but their miscalculation results in a few people moaning on the internet (the most vocal here are ones who have stated how much they dislike Dana and the UFC anyway). Stitch had so much more to lose so shouldn't have gambled.

All stitch said was that he didn't like the new Reebok gear. Can he not have an opinion?

At the end of the day the people who will ultimately suffer, are the fighters. Theyve lost their best and most experienced cut man because Dana got a little bit butthurt about someone stating the obvious about their terrible new clothing line.

dave1982

Foxtrol wrote: »

It’s defensible to anyone who has ever worked or been a contractor for a large company. You can’t go out in public and slate your employer and expect no reaction (especially if you’ve had a previous issue with this). The only time what you’re talking about would matter is if you’re whistleblowing on a major issue but moaning about ancillary salary that has already been widely reported in the media is not a case for this.

In these situations you only have as much leverage as your worth to the company and Stitch absolutely miscalculated his worth to the UFC, he thought of himself as ‘the A team’ and friends with senior management when neither were the case.

I think the UFC also miscalculated how attached people were to the old faces but their miscalculation results in a few people moaning on the internet (the most vocal here are ones who have stated how much they dislike Dana and the UFC anyway). Stitch had so much more to lose so shouldn't have gambled.

Nothing wrong with standing up for yourself, his basic wages may be small, it's sponsors that make him his money and other people like him.Dana decides to sign ****ty deal for everyone except Reebok and UFC.(Dan claims UFC got no money from deal) I'm sure UFC get cut from from the crazy prices Rebook charge for the "uniforms".


Stitch is probably the "face" of all cut men maybe he thought he could deal for him and other cutman, but once again Dana has the monopoly on MMA so he is king and no one can do anything about it.

UFC not what it was anymore, too many events watered down cards.there was a time any fight on the main card could be a main event.

dave1982

Dana White has come under criticism following the dismissal of beloved cutman Jacob “Stitch” Duran after he questioned UFC’s new sponsorship deal with Reebok. Duran hasn’t been the only one to speak out against the deal, which effectively ended any independent sponsorships fighters, cutmen, and anyone else had inside the octagon.

White decided the best way to deal with this criticism was to belittle his Twitter followers. MMA Junkie was the first to spot White’s unhinged tweets. Some of the highlights are below …

"If you are credentialed by the UFC, then it is almost assumed that you are a little bit corrupted," he explained. "It has less to do with the actual people credentialed and more to do with the fact that Dana has thrown so many people out. That was something that I was certainly aware of when I was working for USA Today full time. I knew that the feeling was that if you were inside the circle that you had to be compliant."

Given Dana's history of banning media members like Loretta Hunt and Josh Gross, it is understandable why some would question those who are able to get access. However, USA Today says they have nothing to hide regarding their relationship with the UFC.

USA today http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/dana-white-spent-last-night-humiliating-every-ufc-fan-who-dared-to-criticize-him

Foxtrol

dave1982 wrote: »

Stitch is probably the "face" of all cut men maybe he thought he could deal for him and other cutman, but once again Dana has the monopoly on MMA so he is king and no one can do anything about it.

He’s made it perfectly clear that he thinks he’s above the other cut men and don’t be silly, he was looking out for his wallet (not that there’s any problem with that but you live with the consequences).

UFC not what it was anymore, too many events watered down cards.there was a time any fight on the main card could be a main event.

Poor you, I’m sure you’re raging that they’ll have been to Ireland twice in less than 18 months.

You can’t have your cake and eat it.

Foxtrol

dulux99 wrote: »

All stitch said was that he didn't like the new Reebok gear. Can he not have an opinion?

He complained to the media about a salary cut when he’d already been warned about outbursts to the media. There’s a difference in having an opinion and going to the media and complaining giving my employers bad PR.

I’m very interested to know what jobs people have where they think there’d be no issues with them going to the media complaining about a change in contract terms, when they’d already had a warning about it in the past.

At the end of the day the people who will ultimately suffer, are the fighters. Theyve lost their best and most experienced cut man because Dana got a little bit butthurt about someone stating the obvious about their terrible new clothing line.

Ah come on, from that you’d swear he had magic healing powers while the other cut men are just random joes picked off the street. If he was so good in comparison to the other guys you’d hear fighters at every event complaining that they didn’t have Stitch or give that excuse after losing.

Wrongway1985

dave1982 wrote: »

UFC not what it was anymore, too many events watered down cards.there was a time any fight on the main card could be a main event.

It's not what it was true but the cards this year on the most part have delivered.

They appear watered down as the UFC doesn't do a great job IMO of promoting the fighters as they did before and a lot of that was down to hey look what this guy did in Pride etc, you knew every fighter on the main card, a main card nowadays it's highly likely it could be your first viewing of a fighter.

Another thing the TUF allum of the past transitioned into the UFC and you knew them too, Compare the 2 TUFs coached by BJ Penn for instance the one in 2014 (vTeam Edgar) just 4 fighters are under contact after that including the two winners one of which Eddie Gordon has lost 3 fights in a row, one of the other lads is Cathal Pendred (we know how good he is ).

But from 2007 (vTeam Pulver). Nate Diaz,Manny Gambuyian,Matt Wiman,Joe Lauzon,Gray Maynard & Cole Miller are all still on the UFC payroll.

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

All that lead to it is indefensible, Reebok deal isn't and the loss of income isn't. I'm sure you will parrot the Dana White rubbis hprofessionalism defence though.

Stitch didn’t deserve to be cut in my opinion, just want to make that clear. But at the same time his actions were really stupid. Even if his grievances were legitimate (they were I feel) going to the media is utterly retarded. Stitch isn’t a sports person, his relationship with the UFC is purely business. Doing what he did is grounds to be fired in most large companies. For example, my company also have a deal with Reebok, they’ll be providing uniforms for us too soon. I haven’t seen them yet, but if I was to slate them publically in some form or whatever I’d expect to be in hot water if the exec team got wind.
I think Stitch knew he messed up, which is why he has offered to mend bridges and return to the UFC. They should bring him back, but they probably won’t. If Reebok are smart they’d stick him in a Reebok vest and get the exposure.

dulux99 wrote: »

All stitch said was that he didn't like the new Reebok gear. Can he not have an opinion?

I thought he said a little bit more than that tbh.
Criticizing the clothing line is one thing, but he was criticising how the management acted with the cutmen. Bad move imo, not undeserving to be cut but still not smart.

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

Another thing the TUF allum of the past transitioned into the UFC and you knew them too, Compare the 2 TUFs coached by BJ Penn for instance the one in 2014 (vTeam Edgar) just 4 fighters are under contact after that including the two winners one of which Eddie Gordon has lost 3 fights in a row, one of the other lads is Cathal Pendred (we know how good he is ).

But from 2007 (vTeam Pulver). Nate Diaz,Manny Gambuyian,Matt Wiman,Joe Lauzon,Gray Maynard & Cole Miller are all still on the UFC payroll.

Yeah S1 was immense to be fair. At that state the UFC was making the jump from random fight cards to organised promotion. TUF 1 put the call out, and TUF 2 got of these great guys from the regional scene the exposure they needed. The UFC got solid guys to build a roster with.
TUF 10-20, the UFC’s roster is built, openings in the roster are fewer, the standard in the UFC is higher, and external guys who are good enough are getting signed directly.

Davei141

I think he knew he was playing with fire speaking out, but it obviously wasn't worth it financially to keep quiet and accept the drastically reduced income. My indefensible comments are the way it has all been handled from the start that created this mess, it has been disaster after disaster and i know he is a cutman but it is very common to speak out in the sports world which he is apart of.

Davei141

dave1982 wrote: »

USA today http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/dana-white-spent-last-night-humiliating-every-ufc-fan-who-dared-to-criticize-him

http://www.cagepotato.com/tag/shill-em-all/

Check this out, 5 part series about the state of MMA media and how they're basically PR people for the most part because they get blacklisted/bullied otherwise.

bur

Even Dana's mother thinks he's an asshole.