Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > MMA Related > UFC

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:18 PM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdawg21
I agree with this. If anything, split the money somehow between the fighter and the UFC, as the UFC are paying for the broadcast.
Are you serious?

The UFC is RAPING the fighters as it is, and you think it's okay of them to take MORE money out of their pockets?

Tell that to the guy who loses a sponsor because they can't afford $100,000, and his salary for his next fight is only 10g's.....



C'mon Rock, you're the Pac-Man fan, you are supposed to be all about the people! Not the greedy Mayweathers of the world.....lol
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:22 PM
rearnakedchoke
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB Rattlesnake
What would be fair?

I would suggest that FAIRLY compensating their fighters would be a good start. They pay their fighters PEANUTS compared to the profits they are making. This is exactly how unions get started, and then eventually f**k everything up.

You are looking at this the wrong way. Sure, it's fair of the UFC to say they want to get paid for sponsors that are featured on their broadcasts, but $100,000 is an ABSURD amount of money for the actual amount of promotion these companies get.

How many people do you know that have flocked to CondomDepot.com since seeing it on a fighters shorts?

Charging that amount of money to the fighters sponsors is ridiculous, and it will only serve to lessen the amount of companies that actually sponsor fighters. Dana White has openly used the argument that fighters are making good money BECAUSE OF their extra sponsorship deals. NOW, he is going to hinder that by charging an absurd amount of money to show a companie's logo for a VERY short period of time.

How is THAT fair?

Keep in mind, I did say I think it's fair of the UFC to "ban" certain sponsors IF they cause a conflict of interest with one of the UFC sponsors. That I can understand. However, what they are doing is basically extortion, and it's wrong.
I really don't think the UFC pays the fighters that bad ... like in any sport, you gotta prove yourself ... the guys that have gotten to the main cards and get $30,000 ... say they fight 3 times a year, that's $90,000 .. not bad ... the guys who fight on the under card or i mean non-televised are getting nothing, but they are just time fillers ... nobody is buying tickets to see them, it is a chance for them to shine .... if they do, great, they may get a promotion .. you gotta remember that MMA is a new sport and the UFC have done the lions share in making it mainstream .... they weren't profitable for years ... now they gotta be smart, make the money to keep the business a float or overpay your fighters and end up like affliction, pride and the rest of em ...
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:31 PM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB Rattlesnake
Are you serious?

The UFC is RAPING the fighters as it is, and you think it's okay of them to take MORE money out of their pockets?

Tell that to the guy who loses a sponsor because they can't afford $100,000, and his salary for his next fight is only 10g's.....



C'mon Rock, you're the Pac-Man fan, you are supposed to be all about the people! Not the greedy Mayweathers of the world.....lol
Ugh, not this again, lol

Yeah, the UFC sucks when it comes to paying the bottom fighters' salaries, but anytime you start a new career, you're usually working for peanuts until you earn your top spot. At least, in the UFC, this doesn't always take decades. Look at Shane Carwin, he's already a top 10 guy in just a couple of years, I'm sure he'll make great pay on his next fight, as he'll probably be fighting for the title anyways. Also, people are buying the PPV to see Brock Lesnar, GSP, etc., not Alan Belcher.

Most of the guys know when they join the UFC they won't make much money anyways. But, that's not really this discussion.

Besides, I doubt posting on Matt's forum is really taking action and being for the people.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:34 PM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke
I really don't think the UFC pays the fighters that bad ... like in any sport, you gotta prove yourself ... the guys that have gotten to the main cards and get $30,000 ... say they fight 3 times a year, that's $90,000 .. not bad ... the guys who fight on the under card or i mean non-televised are getting nothing, but they are just time fillers ... nobody is buying tickets to see them, it is a chance for them to shine .... if they do, great, they may get a promotion .. you gotta remember that MMA is a new sport and the UFC have done the lions share in making it mainstream .... they weren't profitable for years ... now they gotta be smart, make the money to keep the business a float or overpay your fighters and end up like affliction, pride and the rest of em ...
No no no no no no.......

You are making ASSUMPTIONS by saying that the fighter fights 3 times a year. We know that is not always the case. Also, $90,000 is crappy pay for a professional athlete.

You also fail to address the fact the profit to payout ratio is completely jacked. They are not even spending 10% of their profits on fighters pay, and THAT IS RIDICULOUS, no matter how you try to cut it.

The undercard fighters may be "time-fillers" but guess what, they still have to train, and they still have families to feed and bills to pay. Don't act like they are meaningless.

You cannot use the "MMA is a new sport" argument, when Dana is using practices that rival that of much bigger sports. Charging $100,000 would be fair, IF THE FIGHTERS WERE ALREADY MAKING GOOD MONEY. You also cannot say Affliction is going under because they "overpay" their fighters. The reason Affliction will fail is because the UFC has the entire sport on lockdown. The fair-weather fans who think MMA IS UFC are going to keep this business afloat.

There is nothing fair in what they are doing here.

Last edited by J.B.; 06-25-2009 at 07:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:40 PM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdawg21
Ugh, not this again, lol

Yeah, the UFC sucks when it comes to paying the bottom fighters' salaries, but anytime you start a new career, you're usually working for peanuts until you earn your top spot. At least, in the UFC, this doesn't always take decades. Look at Shane Carwin, he's already a top 10 guy in just a couple of years, I'm sure he'll make great pay on his next fight, as he'll probably be fighting for the title anyways. Also, people are buying the PPV to see Brock Lesnar, GSP, etc., not Alan Belcher.

Most of the guys know when they join the UFC they won't make much money anyways. But, that's not really this discussion.

Besides, I doubt posting on Matt's forum is really taking action and being for the people.
Again, go back and read my previous post.

You tried to compare this to the Super Bowl, but the minimum salary for a FIRST YEAR rookie in the NFL is $285,000. That is GOOD MONEY for ONE YEAR, and those guys USUALLY sit the bench their first season.

You admit that the UFC underpays it's fighters, but then think it's okay that they rob them of the chance to have more sponsors just so they can make some extra cash? Are they gonna take the 100g's and up the fighters pay scale? I DOUBT IT. Not to mention that when Dana has come out and used the argument that fighters make good money in MMA because of sponsors, it's a bit hypocritical of him to then make moves that will ultimately HURT that.

This is simple to see. It's not even a point that is really arguable. You have a better shot at convincing me that Floyd is ducking everybody then you do of passing this off as "fair".

EDIT: Just to add, a 10 year vet in the NFL, even if they suck and ride the bench, makes $820,000, which is a lot more that even the highest paid fighters get, and more money than a lot of fighters will EVER see.

Last edited by J.B.; 06-25-2009 at 07:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:40 PM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB Rattlesnake
No no no no no no.......

You are making ASSUMPTIONS by saying that the fighter fights 3 times a year. We know that is not always the case. Also, $90,000 is crappy pay for a professional athlete.

You also fail to address the fact the profit to payout ratio is completely jacked. They are not even spending 10% of their profits on fighters pay, and THAT IS RIDICULOUS, no matter how you try to cut it.
Unless any of you have some sort of hard evidence that shows us UFC's financial status, or words straight from Dana's mouth please don't assume you know what you are talking about.

Honestly though, does anybody have proof that shows profit vs. payout? I hear it discussed all the time, but never seen any numbers. IMO, it's just opinion rather than fact.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:41 PM
rearnakedchoke
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB Rattlesnake
No no no no no no.......

You are making ASSUMPTIONS by saying that the fighter fights 3 times a year. We know that is not always the case. Also, $90,000 is crappy pay for a professional athlete.

You also fail to address the fact the profit to payout ratio is completely jacked. They are not even spending 10% of their profits on fighters pay, and THAT IS RIDICULOUS, no matter how you try to cut it.

The undercard fighter may be "time-fillers" but guess what, they still have to train, and they still have families to feed and bills to pay. Don't act like they are meaningless.

You cannot use the "MMA is a new sport" argument, when Dana is using practices that rival that of much bigger sports. Charging $100,000 would be fair, IF THE FIGHTERS WERE ALREADY MAKING GOOD MONEY. You also cannot say Affliction is going under because they "overpay" their fighters. The reason Affliction will fail is because the UFC has the entire sport on lockdown. The fair-weather fans who think MMA IS UFC are going to keep his business afloat.

There is nothing fair in what they are doing here.
I have friends who play in the NLL (national lacrosse league) and if you are good you get $30,000 a year .. sure the revenues are the same, but I would consider them pro athletes and that is not good pay ... they still have to train and hold down another job ....
afflicition is going to go down because their costs outweigh their revenue by a lot ... they thought they were going to get UFC type PPV's by signing big names and paying big dollars ... they didn't ... and now they are as good as done ... UFC is right in this situation, these clothing companies better pay-up or ship out .. normal business practice
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:45 PM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB Rattlesnake
Again, go back and read my previous post.

You tried to compare this to the Super Bowl, but the minimum salary for a FIRST YEAR rookie in the NFL is $285,000. That is GOOD MONEY for ONE YEAR, and those guys USUALLY sit the bench their first season.

You admit that the UFC underpays it's fighters, but then think it's okay that they rob them of the chance to have more sponsors just so they can make some extra cash? Are they gonna take the 100g's and up the fighters pay scale? I DOUBT IT. Not to mention that when Dana has come out and used the argument that fighters make good money in MMA because of sponsors, it's a bit hypocritical of him to then make moves that will ultimately HURT that.

This is simple to see. It's not even a point that is really arguable. You have a better shot at convincing me that Floyd is ducking everybody then you do of passing this off as "fair".
The comparison was simply that NBC is taking advantage of the situation in the same way that the UFC is taking advantage of this current situation.

But yes, I agree with you that Dana is being a hypocrite, he almost always is.

And yeah, Floyd is half Ebeneezer Scrooge and half Daffy.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:47 PM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdawg21
Unless any of you have some sort of hard evidence that shows us UFC's financial status, or words straight from Dana's mouth please don't assume you know what you are talking about.

Honestly though, does anybody have proof that shows profit vs. payout? I hear it discussed all the time, but never seen any numbers. IMO, it's just opinion rather than fact.
Dude, go look at the fighters salaries for any UFC, then add up the total number of PPV buys, and it becomes VERY clear.

I am not assuming anything.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 06-25-2009, 07:51 PM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke
I have friends who play in the NLL (national lacrosse league) and if you are good you get $30,000 a year .. sure the revenues are the same, but I would consider them pro athletes and that is not good pay ... they still have to train and hold down another job ....
afflicition is going to go down because their costs outweigh their revenue by a lot ... they thought they were going to get UFC type PPV's by signing big names and paying big dollars ... they didn't ... and now they are as good as done ... UFC is right in this situation, these clothing companies better pay-up or ship out .. normal business practice
Sorry, but Lacrosse does not even register on the meter as a popular sport in the mainstream.

I will say that NO pro athlete who is a member of professional league should be having to worry about holding down a second job, that is just nuts in this day and age.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.