UnderGround Forum >> why do ufc fighters sign long term contracts?

Billy Joe Rottoncrotch - 

orcus - 

"I don't consider any contract that gives Zuffa the right to cut fighters after two loses, regardless of how many fights are on the deal, to be a true contract."

The number of fights on the deal is the maximum. Just because it's casually referred to as a "6 fight deal" doesn't mean that is the minimum. If the contract states it lasts until 6 fights, or two years, or a loss, whichever comes first, why is that not a "true" contract? Because you have it in your head that it's a minimum guaranteed fight deal, which it never was or was claimed to be?

Because the point of the maximum number of fights is give Zuffa control over the fighters, like an indentured servant.

"We own you for this length of time and there's nothing you can do about it regardless of whether you think the deal is fair or not, but we can get rid of you anytime we want if we don't like how you're performing"

Just because the fighters have virtually no alternative but to sign the contracts they're presented with doesn't make them fair.

No, they can't get rid of you anytime they want, assuming you win, as stated in the contract.

"No one knows for sure what Benson Henderson is getting on his new contract, or whether it's actually a fair deal numbers wise."

What is a fair deal numbers wise?

"And that's exactly the way Zuffa wants it."

Apparently it's also the way Benson and every other fighter want it, as they are free to tell us exactly how much they make.

Even in a lawsuit when Randy was trying to breach a contract he claimed was unfair, he didn't publicly reveal what he made...why not? In fact Zuffa were the ones who publicly released his pay.

Why have the fighters who have left the UFC, even under bad terms, not badmouthed the pay or stated their pay/bonuses/etc? 

Certainly many fighters have publicly badmouthed the UFC and Dana over the years on many other topics.

JOESONDO - One time I spoke to a fighter about the contracts. He had just resigned with a 6 fight contract with UFC. He was happy to have a guaranteed number of fights over a certain period. He knew the contracts were slanted in the UFCs favour and they could cut him as soon as he loses. He also was aware it mostly just kept him from fighting in organizations but there are few options for the vast majority of fighters. The alternatives are just not there. That is ultimately why they sign these lopsided contracts.

khaynes21 -

OnlyTheStrongSurvive -  Who is signing long term contracts that aren't top notch fighters who have no reason to fight somewhere besides the UFC?

+1

The UFC are not handing them out either. Only a select few, such as Champions and or ex-Champions are getting these type of lucrative offers.

"I do know that fighters who want any shot of ever fighting in the UFC again would never cross a line they know they're not supposed to cross."

So talking about what they're paid, even though their official salaries and of the night bonuses are public record, is the one line they are not supposed to cross, but they can badmouth the UFC and Dana in any other way?

"Plenty of them have."

Like who? What did they say? So they can get away with revealing their pay after all? Did they also say that they were pressured not to say a word about their pay?

orcus -

Billy Joe Rottoncrotch - 

orcus - 

"I don't consider any contract that gives Zuffa the right to cut fighters after two loses, regardless of how many fights are on the deal, to be a true contract."

The number of fights on the deal is the maximum. Just because it's casually referred to as a "6 fight deal" doesn't mean that is the minimum. If the contract states it lasts until 6 fights, or two years, or a loss, whichever comes first, why is that not a "true" contract? Because you have it in your head that it's a minimum guaranteed fight deal, which it never was or was claimed to be?

Because the point of the maximum number of fights is give Zuffa control over the fighters, like an indentured servant.

"We own you for this length of time and there's nothing you can do about it regardless of whether you think the deal is fair or not, but we can get rid of you anytime we want if we don't like how you're performing"

Just because the fighters have virtually no alternative but to sign the contracts they're presented with doesn't make them fair.

No, they can't get rid of you anytime they want, assuming you win, as stated in the contract.

 

Standup29 - I love how people claim these contracts are bad somehow. Of hundreds of fighters, very few ever complain about pay. Sure you can easily think it is out of fear but you can just as easily think it's because they are paid very well.

Only a handful of fighters have ever wanted out of their contracts and even more rare is for a fighter to leave on a win to fight somewhere else.

And lets also not forget almost any job is the same. You can be released at anytime and you may not get paid what your worth. It's called life. If the grass is greener somewhere else, go there.

Dont mistake what I'm saying for thinking I wouldn't like to see fighters paid more. But when you don't know how much they actually make its tough to say how much more they should make.

orcus -

Even in a lawsuit when Randy was trying to breach a contract he claimed was unfair, he didn't publicly reveal what he made...why not? In fact Zuffa were the ones who publicly released his pay.

Why have the fighters who have left the UFC, even under bad terms, not badmouthed the pay or stated their pay/bonuses/etc? 

Certainly many fighters have publicly badmouthed the UFC and Dana over the years on many other topics.

 

"As a practical matter. Yes they can get rid of your pretty much whenever they want."

In the history of the UFC, how many fighters have been released with fights remaining on their contract who did not lose? Almost none afaik. The only ones I can think of are Marquardt (tested positive before a headlining fight) and Lindland (banned sponsor or something?). Maybe Torres for his rape tweets? Can't remember if he lost immediately before that.

Orcus Knows MMA Better Than Goku - 

orcus -

Even in a lawsuit when Randy was trying to breach a contract he claimed was unfair, he didn't publicly reveal what he made...why not? In fact Zuffa were the ones who publicly released his pay.

Why have the fighters who have left the UFC, even under bad terms, not badmouthed the pay or stated their pay/bonuses/etc? 

Certainly many fighters have publicly badmouthed the UFC and Dana over the years on many other topics.

 

Pretty sure there is some type of confidentiality clause

I thought you had Eddie's contract. Is there a confidentiality clause regarding pay?

orcus -

"As a practical matter. Yes they can get rid of your pretty much whenever they want."

In the history of the UFC, how many fighters have been released with fights remaining on their contract who did not lose? Almost none afaik. The only ones I can think of are Marquardt (tested positive before a headlining fight) and Lindland (banned sponsor or something?). Maybe Torres for his rape tweets? Can't remember if he lost immediately before that.

orcus -

Orcus Knows MMA Better Than Goku - 

orcus -

Even in a lawsuit when Randy was trying to breach a contract he claimed was unfair, he didn't publicly reveal what he made...why not? In fact Zuffa were the ones who publicly released his pay.

Why have the fighters who have left the UFC, even under bad terms, not badmouthed the pay or stated their pay/bonuses/etc? 

Certainly many fighters have publicly badmouthed the UFC and Dana over the years on many other topics.

 

Pretty sure there is some type of confidentiality clause

I thought you had Eddie's contract. Is there a confidentiality clause regarding pay?

 

"If there aren't any repercussions to disclosing the details of their contracts as you say there aren't, then why don't any of them do it while on the Zuffa roster?"

I don't know. Why don't they do it once they're off the Zuffa roster and don't have to worry about those repercussions? Tim Sylvia is never getting back in the UFC. Paul Daley appears to have no shot either. For whatever reason Arlovski doesn't seem to either. Throw Huerta and many others in there as well.

Randy obviously wasn't worried about repercussions when he flat-out attempted to violate the entire contract by fighting for another promotion, but he still didn't talk about his deal.

GSP has in fact said he makes around $4 million a fight. Coincidentally he is one of the few with a real agent like the guys in those other sports you mentioned.

By the way Dana has publicly said that while he will never reveal money, the fighters are free to do so. Obviously this could be a lie, but no fighter has called him out on this, yet they do call him out on every other topic.

Is it also in the contract that they can't say Dana is lying about their being free to talk about pay if they want?

Are you saying they are legally unable to disclose the terms of their contract for life? And that presumably they must also be legally unable to even disclose the fact that they are under such an NDA, since not one of them has ever said "I can't talk about money, I'm under NDA"? Hopefully Goku will be able to answer this since he has the Bellator contract to Alvarez, a literal duplicate of the UFC contract.

But we don't even need a breakdown of their terms in any case...most of us are just talking about a broad "how much they make". 

For example, when GSP said in an interview not long ago: "For me, a fight is (worth) $4-to-$5 million." 

By the way, no need to post a contract (it's their intellectual property I'm sure). But just stating general terms I'm sure is fine. I don't think Heath is getting re-signed any time soon.

"Guarantee you that every single one of those guys still holds out a small amount of hope that maybe one day they'll get another shot in the UFC."

So what you're saying is that the greatest repercussions are reserved for saying how much you make/made. All other badmouthing is fair game. Complaining about low pay is fine, saying you made $500k per fight will get you banned for life. And you also aren't allowed to say that you aren't allowed to talk about your money.

Why has not one fighter, EVER, said that he is not allowed to talk about money?

P.S. George Roop detailed his earnings, including show/win money, of the night bonuses, "discretionary" bonuses (the infamous "locker room" bonuses), and sponsorship money. He wasn't cut (despite losing) and is still in the UFC. In the same article, Volkmann also details his earnings, and is also continuing to fight in the UFC despite his revelations and despite his loss to Sass.

Obviously these guys can talk about it if they want to. As in most walks of life, the ones making big money don't want to broadcast it (except GSP apparently who had no problem saying he makes $4-5 million per fight).

"Did George Roop or Jacob Volkmann come out and say "The UFC contracts suck and I'm getting a raw deal"? Of course not. Does that mean there aren't fighters on the UFC roster who feel that way but would never go public about it for fear of being blackballed? No it doesn't."

Plenty of fighters both in and out of the UFC complain about their bad UFC deals on the high and low ends of the scale, according to posts in this thread. Fighters on the low end have publicly detailed exactly how much they made. GSP has publicly ballparked his total take. Benson was just publicly complaining about Eddie's publicly-known deal (kind of implying it was superior to his own) and then signed a new deal he is "HAPPY" about (by the way, as champion, he was not obligated to be given a superior deal to his old one afaik). Not one fighter ever has said they are told not to talk about money or been pressured not to.

I don't know how you get from this that they are pressured not to talk about it by the UFC, or that Dana is lying when he says they are free to talk about how much they make.

Orcus Knows MMA Better Than Goku -

khaynes21 -

OnlyTheStrongSurvive -  Who is signing long term contracts that aren't top notch fighters who have no reason to fight somewhere besides the UFC?

+1

The UFC are not handing them out either. Only a select few, such as Champions and or ex-Champions are getting these type of lucrative offers.

There's plenty of fighters with long terms contracts. Pretty sure a bunch of tuf guys are on low paying long term contracts. Pretty sure benson was on a long term low paying contract.

OnlyTheStrongSurvive -

Orcus Knows MMA Better Than Goku -

khaynes21 -

OnlyTheStrongSurvive -  Who is signing long term contracts that aren't top notch fighters who have no reason to fight somewhere besides the UFC?

+1

The UFC are not handing them out either. Only a select few, such as Champions and or ex-Champions are getting these type of lucrative offers.

There's plenty of fighters with long terms contracts. Pretty sure a bunch of tuf guys are on low paying long term contracts. Pretty sure benson was on a long term low paying contract.

I need examples. The tuf guys are getting screwed with long term contracts? Even guys like Cody McKenzie are making 10 and 10, almost twice as much as they would make upon entry to the UFC without tuf given their talent level.

Benson was getting 39 and 39, from a contract he either signed as a non champion or before he wasn't even in the UFC. I don't really see how he got screwed because he signed a "long term deal." Normally it's the athletes who want long term commitment.

You think Brandon Vera makes 70k to show against Shogun without getting that deal a long time ago with a long term contract? Does he even make more than 20 and 20 without that long term deal? Guillard is making 41 and 41 and is 1-4 in his last 5. He lost 3 fights in under 5 minutes combined. Does he make that much without the long term deal?