PDA

View Full Version : UFC boss says to the Iceman: Dazzle me or hang up the gloves


MattHughesRocks
03-14-2009, 06:08 AM
By Neil Davidson, THE CANADIAN PRESS
Mar. 13, 2009

Will Montreal be the Iceman's last hurrah?

Rashad Evans (left) rushes in after knocking Chuck (The Iceman) Liddell to the canvas at UFC 88 on Sept. 6, 2008, at the Philips Arena in Atlanta. THE CANADIAN PRESS/ho-UFC-Josh Hedges

Chuck (The Iceman) Liddell has lost three of his last four fights and, at 39, the clock is ticking. The last image many fight fans have of the former light-heavyweight champion is face down on the canvas after Rashad Evans knocked him out with a right to the chin at UFC 88 in September.

Liddell (21-5) looks to revive his flagging career against Mauricio (Shogun) Rua in the co-main event of UFC 97 at Montreal's Bell Centre on April 18.

UFC president Dana White says the Iceman needs to put on a show north of the border.

"I've made it very clear to Chuck. Very clear," White told The Canadian Press. "It's not about money, it's not about this, that. Chuck is one of my good friends. Chuck (has) cemented his legacy in the UFC and in the fight game. I'm not even saying if he wins, unless he looks incredibly impressive (in Montreal) - I mean, he's going to have to go out there and dazzle me, for me to want Chuck to still fight."

"I love him, and I don't want to see what I saw in his last fight ever again," he added.

Liddell was once the most feared fighter in mixed martial arts, with knockout power in both hands and legs. With his mohawk and tattooed skull, he was also the menacing face of the sport.

But in recent fights, it seems his opponents have figured out Liddell's game.

Quinton (Rampage) Jackson took away Liddell's title at UFC 71 in May 2007, felling Liddell with a crushing right to the chin after the champion left himself exposed throwing a lazy left.

"I made a mistake and got caught," Liddell said after the fight.

Liddell hired a chef to help with his diet and said trainer John Hackleman was working on tightening his game.

At UFC 76 in September 2007, Keith (The Dean of Mean) Jardine took advantage of Liddell's stance to punish him with leg kicks. Liddell connected early - "I was seeing stars the whole first round," Jardine said later - but Jardine put Liddell down in the second round with a left.

As the fight wore on, the kicks took their toll and Liddell's left side was splashed with red welts.

"I've been to fights with him (Liddell) all over the world," White said last week in Columbus, Ohio. "I've never seen his body look like it looked after the Keith Jardine fight."

"He comes in with a wide, kind of tilted stance, so he can't really block kicks that way," Jardine explained.

Liddell did not dispute Jardine winning split decision (29-28, 29-28, 28-29). "I left it too close to complain about it," he said.

The Iceman bounced back by winning a decision against Wanderlei Silva in a wild brawl at UFC 79 in December 2007. Liddell used his reach to good effect against the shorter Brazilian, even showing off his wrestling skills late in the fight when he took Silva down several times.

"I thought I did all right out there for an old man, I guess," Liddell said after the fight.

Like Liddell, however, Silva is widely seen as being on the downside of his career.

Just how far down was shown at UFC 88 by Evans, who drew Liddell in and then knocked him senseless as he attempted to throw an uppercut.

"I got caught, man. What do you want me to say?" Liddell said afterwards.

Greg Jackson, Evans' trainer, summed up Liddell's current predicament as he explained the Evans camp had seen the opening for the big right hand.

"That's what we planned for," said Jackson, who also helped mastermind Jardine's win over Liddell. "He (Liddell) always does the same thing."

There is talk that Liddell has taken steps to change that for the Rua fight, adding to his training. It's clear the status quo is no longer working.

Liddell is a counter-puncher who can create great power from odd angles. He is also unorthodox as a striker, to the extent that he can wave one hand as a distraction and then hammer you with the other. He also mixes kicks and punches well.

But against the herky-jerky Jardine, Liddell was unable to find his rhythm. And Jackson and Jardine saw openings and made him pay for them.

What were once idiosyncrasies are now cracks in the armour.

Perhaps most importantly, the intimidation factor is largely gone thanks to his recent losses.

Prior to Jackson, Liddell had been on a roll. He had won 15 of his 17 UFC fights, with the last loss to Randy Couture at UFC 43 in June 2003. Between the Couture and Jackson losses, Liddell registered seven straight knockouts.

Liddell still remains a draw. And while he is a wealthy man today, the big paycheques are no doubt always welcome. Liddell's purse has been listed at US$500,000 for each of his last four fights and that doesn't include a cut of the lucrative pay-per-view revenue.

Rua, 27, also needs to look good in Montreal. Sidelined by double knee surgeries since losing his UFC debut to Forrest Griffin at UFC 76 in September 2007, the Brazilian looked rusty in his UFC 93 TKO over 44-year-old Mark (The Hammer) Coleman at UFC 93 in January.

Rua (17-3) has run out of gas in both fights and looked a shadow of the young buck who tore through Pride opposition in Japan.

Liddell and Rua were slated to meet at UFC 85 last June in London but the fight was shelved because of injuries to both men - Liddell (hamstrung) and Rua (knee).

The bottom line in Montreal is both Liddell and Rua need to show they still have it.

"A year and a half ago, people were arguing over who's the best light-heavyweight in the world. Shogun or Chuck," White mused. "And here we are, with these guys basically fighting to see who's going to really stick around in that division."

http://www.thescore.com/mma/mma_news_article.aspx?eventid=NEWS-CP-13203048063

Josh
03-14-2009, 12:16 PM
If Shogun looks the same this fight as he did against Coleman Chuck barely needs to train. If Shogun is back to old form Chuck looses.

billwilliams70
03-14-2009, 01:05 PM
If Shogun looks the same this fight as he did against Coleman Chuck barely needs to train. If Shogun is back to old form Chuck looses.
I couldn't agree more. Shogun looked terrible against Coleman. I think that both of them need this fight. Shogun was signed by the UFC in the Pride 'buy-out', but hasn't been as impressive as everyone thought he would be.

http://forum.mmaspot.net/images/smilies/domo-kun.gif

Later.

Chuck
03-14-2009, 01:08 PM
I couldn't agree more. Shogun looked terrible against Coleman. I think that both of them need this fight. Shogun was signed by the UFC in the Pride 'buy-out', but hasn't been as impressive as everyone thought he would be.

Later.

Do you think the PRIDE fighters were over rated?

billwilliams70
03-14-2009, 01:16 PM
Do you think the PRIDE fighters were over rated?
Yeah. I was really thinking that Pride had the superior fighters, but it really seems otherwise.

There isn't a single Pride fighter in the UFC now that has made the impact that anyone thought they would. I think that Rampage has had the most success out of all of them, correct me if I'm wrong.

Later.

Chuck
03-14-2009, 01:21 PM
Yeah. I was really thinking that Pride had the superior fighters, but it really seems otherwise.

There isn't a single Pride fighter in the UFC now that has made the impact that anyone thought they would. I think that Rampage has had the most success out of all of them, correct me if I'm wrong.

Later.

I agree.

I know a few years ago if you "followed" PRIDE and could name a couple Japanese fighters you were looked at as some sort of "MMA Expert" but I just never saw it. I followed PRIDE a little but not to much.

I guess I just thoguht after reading the "experts" post as much as they did that those guys would have came over to the UFC and cleaned house. So far that certainly hasn't happened.

Oh well... you coming back stateside anytime soon?

Straight Right
03-14-2009, 01:47 PM
Yeah. I was really thinking that Pride had the superior fighters, but it really seems otherwise.

There isn't a single Pride fighter in the UFC now that has made the impact that anyone thought they would. I think that Rampage has had the most success out of all of them, correct me if I'm wrong.

Later.


Ummm, Anderson Silva springs to mind.

rearnakedchoke
03-14-2009, 01:49 PM
Yeah. I was really thinking that Pride had the superior fighters, but it really seems otherwise.

There isn't a single Pride fighter in the UFC now that has made the impact that anyone thought they would. I think that Rampage has had the most success out of all of them, correct me if I'm wrong.

Later.

i loved pride, but i always thought they were on par with ufc guys ... rampage is the most successful from them, but even he lost to a TUF guy (so we know some TUF guys were underrated cuz of their being on the show) ...

but i think shogun takes this .. sure he looked horrible in his last fight, but he gassed .... getting taken down by a natural HW over and over will gas anyone .. he gassed against forrest cuz he was taken down over and over again .. chuck isn't going to take him down and is gonna look for the KO, so this is gonna be a good fight, i am thinking shogun is gonna win

mikthehick
03-14-2009, 02:10 PM
I really like Chuck and don't want to see him go away, that would be sad.

Hopefully he can prove to Dana that he still has 'game'

rockdawg21
03-14-2009, 02:18 PM
Ummm, Anderson Silva springs to mind.
That's exactly what I was thinking. But really, aside from Silva and Rampage, nobody else has really left a mark.

CroCop didn't do anything and many thought he'd blast right to the top of the HW division. He was 1-2.

billwilliams70
03-14-2009, 02:25 PM
Ummm, Anderson Silva springs to mind.
That's exactly what I was thinking. But really, aside from Silva and Rampage, nobody else has really left a mark.
Anderson Silva had only five fights in Pride prior to coming to the UFC, his last two fights (prior to the UFC) were Cage Rage fights. To the best of my knowledge Anderson Silva's contract was not one of the ones that was purchased when Zuffa bought out Pride, because he was signed in April of '06 and Zuffa bought Pride in March of '07, nearly a year later.

So much for thread integrity. (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/showthread.php?p=21038#post21038) :frantics:

Later.

Tyburn
03-14-2009, 02:43 PM
Anybody else think that if Dana White can be so mean to someone whose his "friend" and who the his insitution have enjoyed and used...that he could say that eventually to someone like Matt Hughes?

Sorry...but it should be the fighters choice. The insitution doesnt need to keep them on the top of the card, or keep up their money...but it has no right to force them into retirement.

If they havent broken their contract Dana White should STFU making stupid and dumbass comments like this about the Higher eschelons! :angry:

Straight Right
03-14-2009, 03:16 PM
Anderson Silva had only five fights in Pride prior to coming to the UFC, his last two fights (prior to the UFC) were Cage Rage fights. To the best of my knowledge Anderson Silva's contract was not one of the ones that was purchased when Zuffa bought out Pride, because he was signed in April of '06 and Zuffa bought Pride in March of '07, nearly a year later.

So much for thread integrity. :frantics:

Later.


Didn't know that Silva's contract status at the time of the buy-out had anything to do with it. The fact remains he is a former Pride fighter that has done pretty well in the UFC.

As for thread integrity, I wasn't the one that brought up Pride, but yeah we should be talking about Dana and Chuck.

Personally, I think the younger fighters have caught up with Chuck and he has lost a step. I like him but think he is unfortunately past his prime and going to keep "getting caught" if he stays around. Dana is right, he is a legend and doesn't need to stay around if he isn't on top of his game.

ufcfan2
03-14-2009, 03:22 PM
Anybody else think that if Dana White can be so mean to someone whose his "friend" and who the his insitution have enjoyed and used...that he could say that eventually to someone like Matt Hughes?

Sorry...but it should be the fighters choice. The insitution doesnt need to keep them on the top of the card, or keep up their money...but it has no right to force them into retirement.

If they havent broken their contract Dana White should STFU making stupid and dumbass comments like this about the Higher eschelons! :angry:
:sign0011:

billwilliams70
03-14-2009, 03:22 PM
Didn't know that Silva's contract status at the time of the buy-out had anything to do with it. The fact remains he is a former Pride fighter that has done pretty well in the UFC.

As for thread integrity, I wasn't the one that brought up Pride, but yeah we should be talking about Dana and Chuck.

Personally, I think the younger fighters have caught up with Chuck and he has lost a step. I like him but think he is unfortunately past his prime and going to keep "getting caught" if he stays around. Dana is right, he is a legend and doesn't need to stay around if he isn't on top of his game.
Semantics. I consider Anderson Silva a fighter that fought in Pride, not a Pride fighter......but it's all in how it's worded. I agree though, Anderson Silva has done terrific in the UFC.

I wasn't aiming the thread integrity comment @ you, it was a blanket statement......and the integrity was lost a while ago, which was the reason behind starting the poll.

Later.

F34R
03-14-2009, 05:15 PM
Anybody else think that if Dana White can be so mean to someone whose his "friend" and who the his insitution have enjoyed and used...that he could say that eventually to someone like Matt Hughes?

Sorry...but it should be the fighters choice. The insitution doesnt need to keep them on the top of the card, or keep up their money...but it has no right to force them into retirement.

If they havent broken their contract Dana White should STFU making stupid and dumbass comments like this about the Higher eschelons! :angry:

I believe fully that if need be, he'll make any business decision that they think benefits the UFC, regardless of friendships, championships, wins, etc.

MattHughesRocks
03-14-2009, 05:20 PM
The man has a business to run. Who going to pay for ticktes to see Chuck keep getting his ass kicked? It's not about friendship at all.The UFC didn't get where it is based on friendship. It's based on business decisions as is any successful company.


Anybody else think that if Dana White can be so mean to someone whose his "friend" and who the his insitution have enjoyed and used...that he could say that eventually to someone like Matt Hughes?

Sorry...but it should be the fighters choice. The insitution doesnt need to keep them on the top of the card, or keep up their money...but it has no right to force them into retirement.

If they havent broken their contract Dana White should STFU making stupid and dumbass comments like this about the Higher eschelons! :angry:

Bonnie
03-14-2009, 05:38 PM
The man has a business to run. Who going to pay for ticktes to see Chuck keep getting his ass kicked? It's not about friendship at all.The UFC didn't get where it is based on friendship. It's based on business decisions as is any successful company.

It is a business and shouldn't be run on the basis of friendships, however, it would piss me off if he ever disrespected Matt. Matt's been very loyal and ready to step in (UFC 85 when Chuck got hurt and the TUF shows) when Dana has called and asked him. I don't think in a couple of those incidences that Dana had Matt's best interests in mind either, but rather, how he was going to make the "card" work. IMHO :)

Miss Foxy
03-14-2009, 05:46 PM
It is a business and shouldn't be run on the basis of friendships, however, it would piss me off if he ever disrespected Matt. Matt's been very loyal and ready to step in (UFC 85 when Chuck got hurt and the TUF shows) when Dana has called and asked him. I don't think in a couple of those incidences that Dana had Matt's best interests in mind either, but rather, how he was going to make the "card" work. IMHO :)
Well put Bonnie.....For the sake of mankind he better*never*ever go there with Matt!! :Whistle:

MattHughesRocks
03-14-2009, 05:54 PM
Well Dana will do whatever it takes to make a card "work". That's just how it goes no matter if it's Matt Hughes,Chuck, or, as we have seen,Randy Coutoure.I'm sure Dana considers them all good friends. Money is money. That's what some people put first.


It is a business and shouldn't be run on the basis of friendships, however, it would piss me off if he ever disrespected Matt. Matt's been very loyal and ready to step in (UFC 85 when Chuck got hurt and the TUF shows) when Dana has called and asked him. I don't think in a couple of those incidences that Dana had Matt's best interests in mind either, but rather, how he was going to make the "card" work. IMHO :)

matthughesfan21
03-14-2009, 06:39 PM
Ummm, Anderson Silva springs to mind.he fought in pride, he wasn't a superstar pride fighter...He is more of a cage rage fighter than a pride fighter....I think they were talking about the superstars: shogun, CC, Big Nog, Wandy...they have all underachieved given their performances in pride

que
03-14-2009, 06:48 PM
Anybody else think that if Dana White can be so mean to someone whose his "friend" and who the his insitution have enjoyed and used...that he could say that eventually to someone like Matt Hughes?



i wouldn't worry about that because hughes has already publicly stated he intends to hang it up soon. whereas iceman has not.

Tyburn
03-14-2009, 07:02 PM
It is a business and shouldn't be run on the basis of friendships, however, it would piss me off if he ever disrespected Matt. Matt's been very loyal and ready to step in (UFC 85 when Chuck got hurt and the TUF shows) when Dana has called and asked him. I don't think in a couple of those incidences that Dana had Matt's best interests in mind either, but rather, how he was going to make the "card" work. IMHO :)
I'm Glad someone sees it my way...and before you all said its just business, how about THIS for business

if you dont breach your contract, they shouldnt be able to sack you, and if they are too vocal and mean to you, then they are liable for Slander.

Now If he wants to oust Liddell its simple, pay him less, drop him down the card, dont renew his contract, fire him if he fails thrice.

what you DONT do is go to the public and say words to the effect of "he's shyte, passed it, and if he's crappy at the next event I want rid of him" a true business man is PROFESSIONAL...and Dana White IS NOT :ninja:

Bonnie
03-14-2009, 07:43 PM
Well Dana will do whatever it takes to make a card "work". That's just how it goes no matter if it's Matt Hughes,Chuck, or, as we have seen,Randy Coutoure.I'm sure Dana considers them all good friends. Money is money. That's what some people put first.

The thing that "bugs" me about Dana and the UFC is it appears like they want to OWN these fighters lock stock and barrell. From their sponsors, what they wear, their dolls (actions figures for the guys :wink: ); I mean where will it end...their souls? :blink:

I think the fighters need to have some autonomy, some say so, some leverage to keep the power, if not balanced, then at least not wholly one-sided. As far as I can see the UFC has the run of the sport, as for being the "big show", if not a monopoly, pretty close.

They need another organization or two (sound one(s)) that can keep them from becoming this huge out-of-control monster. Competition is usually always a healthy thing in the business world. :ninja:

Tyburn
03-14-2009, 07:47 PM
The thing that "bugs" me about Dana and the UFC is it appears like they want to OWN these fighters lock stock and barrell. From their sponsors, what they wear, their dolls (actions figures for the guys :wink: ); I mean where will it end...their souls? :blink:

I think the fighters need to have some autonomy, some say so, some leverage to keep the power, if not balanced, then at least not wholly one-sided. As far as I can see the UFC has the run of the sport, as for being the "big show", if not a monopoly, pretty close.

They need another organization or two (sound one(s)) that can keep them from becoming this huge out-of-control monster. Competition is usually always a healthy thing in the business world. :ninja:
:w00t: id forgotten how much i loved you :w00t:

Bonnie
03-14-2009, 07:51 PM
:w00t: id forgotten how much i loved you :w00t:

You forgot? :cry: I obviously have way too much competition on this forum; time to take someone out. :laugh:

Not to mention this new budgie, Jens. How am I suppose to compete with that. :tongue0011:

Llamafighter
03-14-2009, 08:56 PM
Sure Chuck's stock drops a bit by losing, but he'll be a draw no matter what. I think Dana was talking about how he personally doesn't want to see his buddy get knocked unconscious anymore. Dana deep down knows that when the sport blew up Matt and Chuck and Rich were the guy that stood by him and have remained totally loyal. plus he was Chuck's promoter from way back so there is a much stronger bond there then most people know.

For the record I've heard that Chuck is in super training mode. He isn't logging on to his MMA site much at all as he used too and the administrator said it's because he's training his ass off.

I think if we get the old Shogun and the old Chuck it is going to be fight of the year!!

I'm bummed that Chuck and Matt aren't on the same card. I love the vid of Chuck backstage watching Matt's comeback against Trigg, and then them meeting in the hall before Chuck goes out to fight Randy and Matt wishing him good luck.

Miss Foxy
03-14-2009, 09:01 PM
Sure Chuck's stock drops a bit by losing, but he'll be a draw no matter what. I think Dana was talking about how he personally doesn't want to see his buddy get knocked unconscious anymore. Dana deep down knows that when the sport blew up Matt and Chuck and Rich were the guy that stood by him and have remained totally loyal. plus he was Chuck's promoter from way back so there is a much stronger bond there then most people know.

For the record I've heard that Chuck is in super training mode. He isn't logging on to his MMA site much at all as he used too and the administrator said it's because he's training his ass off.

I think if we get the old Shogun and the old Chuck it is going to be fight of the year!!

I'm bummed that Chuck and Matt aren't on the same card. I love the vid of Chuck backstage watching Matt's comeback against Trigg, and then them meeting in the hall before Chuck goes out to fight Randy and Matt wishing him good luck. Right on!! I would love to see both Matt & Chuck pound the crap outta them just for old times sake!! And also to prove a point to the haters that talk about them for losing a few fights!! :punch:

Tyburn
03-14-2009, 09:42 PM
You forgot? :cry: I obviously have way too much competition on this forum; time to take someone out. :laugh:

Not to mention this new budgie, Jens. How am I suppose to compete with that. :tongue0011:
Noone competes with Jens...niether of them :laugh:


*now do I mean Jens Pulver and Jens the Budgie....or Jens the Budgie and Lil Evil, or Jens Pulver and Lil Evil....* :blink:


just make sure you dont inadvertantly take me out :scared0015:

rearnakedchoke
03-14-2009, 09:56 PM
i also think that dana has his favourites, he would have never asked matt and rich to fight in their heyday ... i know he tells rashad he has to fight jardine, but that is just him pushing his weight, and he is not as close to them as he is matt and rich ...

rockdawg21
03-14-2009, 10:07 PM
It's a business. (I'm not fan of him, but) when Emmitt Smith stopped producing in Dallas, they got rid of him. Nothing wrong with that.

Vizion
03-14-2009, 10:56 PM
I thought the Iceman hung up his gloves awhile back......

fame and fortune made him do it

Chuck
03-15-2009, 04:52 AM
Anybody else think that if Dana White can be so mean to someone whose his "friend" and who the his insitution have enjoyed and used...that he could say that eventually to someone like Matt Hughes?

Sorry...but it should be the fighters choice. The insitution doesnt need to keep them on the top of the card, or keep up their money...but it has no right to force them into retirement.

If they havent broken their contract Dana White should STFU making stupid and dumbass comments like this about the Higher eschelons! :angry:

Would a "friend" just sit back and watch somebody they care about get the crap kicked out of them fight after fight after fight????

You call that a friend??

Here we go again... :cry:

I know you don't like it but the fighters are employees Dave... it's as simple as that.

It may not be nice... or fair but it IS a fact. And as employees Dana and The Brothers have the right to terminate their contract with OR without cause.

I know it's mean bro but it's a fact. And really mean looking posts in all bold just won't change that. :)

REMY
03-15-2009, 06:26 PM
The thing that "bugs" me about Dana and the UFC is it appears like they want to OWN these fighters lock stock and barrell. From their sponsors, what they wear, their dolls (actions figures for the guys :wink: ); I mean where will it end...their souls? :blink:

I think the fighters need to have some autonomy, some say so, some leverage to keep the power, if not balanced, then at least not wholly one-sided. As far as I can see the UFC has the run of the sport, as for being the "big show", if not a monopoly, pretty close.

They need another organization or two (sound one(s)) that can keep them from becoming this huge out-of-control monster. Competition is usually always a healthy thing in the business world. :ninja:


...at the end of the day MMA is a sport, and just like the major sports in the USA (Baseball, Basketball, Football) there is 1 major organization, and 1-2 smaller ones. The major ones being the MLB,NFL and NBA.

And just it's the same way in those organizations as it is in the UFC, you can only wear certain things while you are on the field, heck the NFL/NBA/MLB limit what color your cleats/shoes, and sweat bands are!

The way I see it - the UFC is basing its' business off of the NFL/MLB/NBA, and doing things the way they do it because they have been around for years and its' always worked.

Think about it like this - one of the greatest football players of all time, the greatest quarterback of all time, Joe Montana played for the SF 49ers for 13 years, and during that time brought them to and won 4 superbowls (also won 3 SB MVP's) in 1990 he won Sportsman of the Year, and led the 49ers to the best record in the NFL, in 1991 he got injured and missed most of that season, in 1992, they named Steve Young as their starting QB...not letting Montana compete for the job, so he was traded to a different team.

the 49ers saw it as they had a younger guy who could get the job done for years to come, so they stepped away from the old guy...in Montana's last season in football (1994) he not only beat John Elways team (bronco's) BUT also beat the 49ers who had steve young...showing he could still play.

It's the same thing in the UFC they have too look out for the future of the organization and if that means stepping away from the people who were the "go to guys" then so be it,


oh and Dave - the UFC can't cut Hughes' and Chucks' pay like you said - they have contracts that state how much they get paid, if dana goes to either and says "hey your 500,000$ a fight is dropping to $50,000" they can say "nope" and be let go to fight somewhere else if they wish.

Bonnie
03-15-2009, 06:56 PM
I understand what you're saying Remy (and Chuck, R.D. and Michelle), really.

But the NFL, NBL, and NBA are all "teams". Yes, individuals make up those teams and of course they are all going to wear the same uniform. But what do their contracts say about doing commercials/advertisements? Do the owners get a piece of that? I think it's a little different with MMA (and maybe other "individual" based sports). Don't you?

A player on a team gets traded and Dana/the brothers cut a fighter (looks like after 3 losses) who isn't producing--that's totally understandable. I wasn't commenting on them letting them go rather what is "protecting" the MMA fighters from being totally consumed/controlled by their organization (whether it be the UFC or another).

If y'all say this is the "standard" as for MMA--the organization (in this case UFC) rules every aspect of the fighter, then I guess that's how it's done. :)

REMY
03-15-2009, 07:15 PM
. But what do their contracts say about doing commercials/advertisements? :)


I don't know what their contracts say but i do know that 2 years ago when the Bears were in the superbowl, Brian Urlacher (Chicago Bears' LB) was fined $100,000 when he was giving a interview during one of the media days, because he wore a "vitamin water" hat, and vitamin water doesn't sponser the NFL so he couldn't wear the hat during the interview, and when he did bam the fine came lol

Bonnie
03-15-2009, 07:29 PM
I don't know what their contracts say but i do know that 2 years ago when the Bears were in the superbowl, Brian Urlacher (Chicago Bears' LB) was fined $100,000 when he was giving a interview during one of the media days, because he wore a "vitamin water" hat, and vitamin water doesn't sponser the NFL so he couldn't wear the hat during the interview, and when he did bam the fine came lol


I meant commercials like Michael Jordan did for FOL, etc... (wasn't sure you understood when I asked about "commercials/adverts"). Do they have to run that by the organization before they make deals to do commercials for products or sponsors?

You know how Matt makes appearances for his sponsors--does Dana/UFC have any say so in what Matt does? :unsure-1:

I guess the CB's guy knew he wasn't supposed to do that, huh. Probably, pocket change for him. :laugh:

Tyburn
03-15-2009, 07:46 PM
. And as employees Dana and The Brothers have the right to terminate their contract with OR without cause.


See thats where Working in the US is dangerous.

In England they cant just do that. Its called Employment Law :angry:

Tyburn
03-15-2009, 07:48 PM
rather what is "protecting" the MMA fighters from being totally consumed/controlled by their organization (whether it be the UFC or another).
:)

Nothing. Thats the issue :ninja:

They havent much in the way of "Rights" :ninja: :ninja:

MattHughesRocks
03-16-2009, 02:09 AM
To tell you the truth, I'd do the same thing. What is anyone fighter going to do about it? Nothing that's what. Unless half of the top fighters take a stand at the same time ( and that will never happen) it'll never be any different.That's how the UFC got to where they are today. Like it or not, business is business. They went into this to make money, not friends.


The thing that "bugs" me about Dana and the UFC is it appears like they want to OWN these fighters lock stock and barrell. From their sponsors, what they wear, their dolls (actions figures for the guys :wink: ); I mean where will it end...their souls? :blink:

I think the fighters need to have some autonomy, some say so, some leverage to keep the power, if not balanced, then at least not wholly one-sided. As far as I can see the UFC has the run of the sport, as for being the "big show", if not a monopoly, pretty close.

They need another organization or two (sound one(s)) that can keep them from becoming this huge out-of-control monster. Competition is usually always a healthy thing in the business world. :ninja:

Hughes_GOAT
03-16-2009, 02:23 AM
To tell you the truth, I'd do the same thing. What is anyone fighter going to do about it? Nothing that's what. Unless half of the top fighters take a stand at the same time ( and that will never happen) it'll never be any different.That's how the UFC got to where they are today. Like it or not, business is business. They went into this to make money, not friends.

Tito got them to spend more money by himself :tongue0011:

Spiritwalker
03-16-2009, 02:24 AM
Ummm, Anderson Silva springs to mind.

Including....
Gomi
Filipović
Wandy


and some guy named Fedor

MattHughesRocks
03-16-2009, 02:24 AM
Whos Tito? :tongue0011:


Tito got them to spend more money by himself :tongue0011:

Bonnie
03-16-2009, 02:26 AM
To tell you the truth, I'd do the same thing. What is anyone fighter going to do about it? Nothing that's what. Unless half of the top fighters take a stand at the same time ( and that will never happen) it'll never be any different.That's how the UFC got to where they are today. Like it or not, business is business. They went into this to make money, not friends.

Got it! :wink:

I'm going to have to start calling you "Ruthless Rocks". :laugh:

Hughes_GOAT
03-16-2009, 02:27 AM
Whos Tito? :tongue0011:

your favorite HB citizen :wink:

MattHughesRocks
03-16-2009, 03:13 AM
Hey! Money talks....bullshyte walks :laugh:


Got it! :wink:

I'm going to have to start calling you "Ruthless Rocks". :laugh:

CAVEMAN
03-16-2009, 09:01 PM
IMO, Dana has a lot more to worry about than Chuck winning a fight. Dana better start putting some good cards together. With the exception of the GSP/Penn fight, the last few ppv's have sucked! With hard economic times, people are going to quit spending $50 a month to only watch 2 decent fights.

The last ppv with Rampage and Jardine was absolutely boring!