Official Conor McGregor thread (part 6) *Read Mod Note in Post 1* Revised 13-01-19

Effects

Mr. Manager wrote: »

I was at that carnival and didn't see it how'd I miss that one!?

You drank too much Proper 12 I'd say.

The Nal

Conor vs Cowboy not happening apparently because neither are champs and the headliner bout has to be for a belt.

BigMo1

The Nal wrote: »

Conor vs Cowboy not happening apparently because neither are champs and the headliner bout has to be for a belt.

Both fights against Nate were non-title headliners.

AlmightyCushion

The Nal wrote: »

Conor vs Cowboy not happening apparently because neither are champs and the headliner bout has to be for a belt.

They make a title fight a headliner because it puts more bums on seats and sells more PPVs. They don't really need to do that with McGregor as proved by the 2 Diaz fights.

The Nal

BigMo1 wrote: »

Both fights against Nate were non-title headliners.

Yup, only going by what Joe Rogan said. They don't need a belt with Conor of course.

Subcomandante Marcos

Both fights with Nate were before WME-IMG took over the UFC. The "all headline fight have to be a title fight" rule was brought in my the new owners.

AlmightyCushion

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Both fights with Nate were before WME-IMG took over the UFC. The "all headline fight have to be a title fight" rule was brought in my the new owners.

It doesn't matter when WME-IMG took over. It would be a stupid rule to implement in the case of McGregor or anyone else that becomes as big as him. What happens if McGregor doesn't hold a belt at any time in the future? They have him co-main and have someone like Usman or TJ headline the event? There is no way that will happen.

Whilst McGregor is as big as he currently is, he will headline any card he is on regardless of if it's for a title or not. Same with anyone else who sells as many PPVs as he does.

The Nal

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Both fights with Nate were before WME-IMG took over the UFC. The "all headline fight have to be a title fight" rule was brought in my the new owners.

So hence this "interim" bullsh1t?

ASOT

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Both fights with Nate were before WME-IMG took over the UFC. The "all headline fight have to be a title fight" rule was brought in my the new owners.

They took over the UFC before the second fight did they not?

It doesn't matter anyway there's more chance of me being a co main in the UFC than McGregor unless he loses his next 4 on the trot.

BigMo1

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

It doesn't matter when WME-IMG took over. It would be a stupid rule to implement in the case of McGregor or anyone else that becomes as big as him. What happens if McGregor doesn't hold a belt at any time in the future? They have him co-main and have someone like Usman or TJ headline the event? There is no way that will happen.

Whilst McGregor is as big as he currently is, he will headline any card he is on regardless of if it's for a title or not. Same with anyone else who sells as many PPVs as he does.

100% this.

Also WME completed the takeover in July 2016, the second Nate fight headlined UFC 196 in late August.

I can't make sense of that claim by Rogan.

If Conor says he won't be co-main to Usman vs whoever then UFC would surely agree. They can put whatever title fight on any other card. They want him to fight at least once a year, he prints money for them, I can't see such a trivial matter being a sticking point.

Unless they were aiming for a huge card - Lesnar vs DC ? And Conor is not willing to share a card with guys on huge PPV cut. But this seems unlikely, we already know Conor doesn't want to be on these type of cards, UFC would know it as well.

Mellor

Deleted User wrote: »

Unless they were aiming for a huge card - Lesnar vs DC ? And Conor is not willing to share a card with guys on huge PPV cut. But this seems unlikely, we already know Conor doesn't want to be on these type of cards, UFC would know it as well.

Conor's gets in whatever rate he got previously or is in his contract. Having Lesnar on the card only increases Conor's earning potential. Even being co-main to Usman won't affect the buys he can generate.

If anything if makes less sense for the UFC to stack Conor with Lesnar or any other legitimate title fight. People can only buy the POV once.

Paully D

3 years to the day since McGregor v Diaz 1 at UFC 196!

Mellor

Mellor wrote: »

Conor's gets in whatever rate he got previously or is in his contract. Having Lesnar on the card only increases Conor's earning potential. Even being co-main to Usman won't affect the buys he can generate.

If anything if makes less sense for the UFC to stack Conor with Lesnar or any other legitimate title fight. People can only buy the POV once.

Several fighters have gone on record saying Conor is reluctant to share cards with fighters who get a PPV cut (aside from his opponent obviously).

Woodley said it and I believe DC also. They would not have plucked it out of the air, it's surely something they became privvy to during their own negotiations.

Regarding his reasons, you would have to ask Conor.

It's also my understanding that Conor's contracts tend to be re-negotiated more or less each time he fights. His previous contract is a starting point but he's in a position where he can negotiate something new each time, no matter if the previous one was for 5 fights or 10 fights or whatever. It stands to reason that there will be less on the table if someone like Lesnar was on the same card.

The Nal

They wont waste a good PPV by putting Lesnar on the same card. That would be financial madness.

Effects

Paully D wrote: »

3 years to the day since McGregor v Diaz 1 at UFC 196!

That fight wasn't on a Tuesday.

Mellor

Deleted User wrote: »

Woodley said it and I believe DC also. They would not have plucked it out of the air, it's surely something they became privvy to during their own negotiations.

Regarding his reasons, you would have to ask Conor.

Having other fights on the card with a PPV share means there's less to be split between Conor and the UFC (% wise). I'd imagine that the UFC factor that in.

I'm saying Conor has established his going rate right now. He should negotiate as if he's solo, lock in his contract. And if the UFC want to put other PPV earners on there after that, then it doesn't affect his share.

FWIW, most of the time there's a second title fight on Conor's cards. He has headlined 6 cards, and there have been 5 other titles fight across 4 of them.

AlmightyCushion

Effects wrote: »

That fight wasn't on a Tuesday.

That doesn't change anything. The same date in different years will fall on different days.

paulieeye

would love another card like 189, that was some night of fights

ElBastardo1

Effects wrote: »

That fight wasn't on a Tuesday.

Facepalm:pac:

Effects

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

That doesn't change anything.

Of course it does, no ones going to pay for PPV on a Tuesday. Buy rates would be way down.

AlmightyCushion

Effects wrote: »

Of course it does, no ones going to pay for PPV on a Tuesday. Buy rates would be way down.

What are you talking about??? It lines up perfectly with dole day. The UFC would make a killing.

Mr. Manager

Effects wrote: »

You drank too much Proper 12 I'd say.

Nothing but the finest Cisk that Malta has to offer passes my lips

derfderf

They should just give Conor some belt like Ted Dibiase and let him headline with that.

Still Ill

Is there anything to be said for a UFC 'Money Belt'? :pac:

evil_seed

derfderf wrote: »

They should just give Conor some belt like Ted Dibiase and let him headline with that.

Still Ill wrote: »

Is there anything to be said for a UFC 'Money Belt'? :pac:

Great minds think alike, but fools seldom differ :pac:

Still Ill

The Red Panty Belt then?

Raekwondo

Not a direct post about Conor but could affect him in the future, Paulie Malianaggi just signed up to Bare Knuckle Boxing to fight Artem Lobov in june.

Ultimate Seduction

Raekwondo wrote: »

Not a direct post about Conor but could affect him in the future, Paulie Malianaggi just signed up to Bare Knuckle Boxing to fight Artem Lobov in june.

Are those events sanctioned by an official commission?

Raekwondo

Ultimate Seduction wrote: »

Are those events sanctioned by an official commission?

The org that they signed for is yeah I think. There is another org though that is awful and didn't even pay their fighters.