Rampage: This is a dream come true


Earlier today it was revealed that Quinton Jackson had signed an inclusive deal with Bellator, TNA, & Spike TV that will see him compete in mixed martial arts, pro wrestling, and take part in a reality series. Jackson made his first statement about the deal exclusively to TMZ:

Rampage tells TMZ, "When you look at my deal in the UFC, and the scope of what my deal with Bellator and TNA is, this is a dream come true."

He adds, "When other fighters get the chance to see everything I'm able to do with this deal and the benefits it provides, you're going to see a big change in MMA. I guarantee it."

read entire article...


tags: Quinton Jackson (detail)  TMZ   


Get the MMA Underground app. for iPhone and Andriod devices.
iPhone Application Andriod MMA Underground Application

Recent Comments »

Macedawgg site profile image  

6/6/13 5:43 PM by Macedawgg

I agree they have the right to use footage--that was never in dispute--both in MMA and in the other sports.  Its all the other things that the UFC obtains the right to do that are not present in any of the other sports. Free to get whatever sponsorship outside of the UFC.  That is my point--Zuffa retains their ancillary rights (far beyond the usage of footage) forever--well after you are no longer with the UFC.  That damages your endorsement ability forever.  As to Lorenzo's statement, he doesn't say everyone has the right to audit at all--and certainly doesn't say its of all revenue sources.  Video games are not the only difference.  The difference is enormous.  Sure--a list of examples from each sport would be useful.  This is not the place.   Nice post 12er.      

time traveling 12er site profile image  

6/6/13 4:22 PM by time traveling 12er

Mace I think you have a mistaken view on how other unionized sports treat their athletes. In other sports, even if you're sponsored by powerade, you have to do the interview with gatorade in front of you. You're forced to drink from cups that say gatorade on them on the sidelines even if you're drinking water. Fighters in the UFC are free to get whatever sponsorship they want outside the octogon, just like players are allowed to get whatever they want outside their sports. But they're all very strictly controlled while performing. What's really going to happen with a union is probably going to be an increase in minimum pay, better guarantee's on contracts and probably severance money for terminating contracts early or even not allowing contracts to be terminated at all. But in exchange the fighters are likely going to lose a lot of leverage as far as who they fight and when. You can also probably say good bye to lots of the discretionary bonuses and you'll see a huge cut at the bottom of the roster.

time traveling 12er site profile image  

6/6/13 3:46 PM by time traveling 12er

1-2 They do. Any footage they have of the athlete is owned by the sport. Just like the UFC owns the right of any footage they take of the fighter. The only difference is specifically in video game rights where the players union get's paid separately and distributes the money evenly. Strangely enough Bellator has even more restrictive likeness rights that are far more abusive but no one seems to complain about it.3. So they are getting paid then. Just not specifically... like in the other sports? There's a set percentage of gross profits on merchandise that gets paid out to all athletes? Kobe Bryant doesn't get paid money directly for anything with his name on it that the NBA puts out.4. Sorry you're wrong. At least according to Lorenzo Fertitta anyone has the right to audit any event they're a part of. It's in Fertitta's interview response to the outside the lines episode.5. Changing what? You just throw up hypotheticals with no examples of other unionized sports. I'm questioning that. I could come up with an infinite list similar to yours. 1. Unions could negotiate retroactive payment of past useage of likenesses. 2. Unions could enforce ring card girls to massage them as they enter the ring. 3. Unions could get fighters paid for every time someone mentions their name on a per-syllable basis.The list is pretty worthless without any kind of example of other sports unions doing anything similar.6. Are you kidding? So you think players aren't running around with banners and shaving sponsors names in their heads because they don't want to? Lol. At least fighters can have banners and patches on their shorts that they can negotiate individually. What specific restrictions are you talking about here that fighters have that unionized athletes don't have? I'm pretty sure every sport very strictly controls who and what gets sponsored on their shows.

Macedawgg site profile image  

6/6/13 2:21 PM by Macedawgg

No, I am not confusing the UFC with anything.  Going forward, UFC gear will be written into athlete contracts.  Source?  Lorenzo Fertitta. Further,for many, this will be without any additional compensation.  Source?  Lorenzo Fertitta.  Google it. Further, other sponsors are excluded (see Rampage/Reebok) that are not offensive, conflict with site hosts, etc. 

Lynchman site profile image  

6/6/13 6:17 AM by Lynchman

When did the UFC force somebody to wear sponsor gear? You are confusing the UFC with the IFL.

Macedawgg site profile image  

6/6/13 6:03 AM by Macedawgg

If the NBA was run like the UFC, the athlete would not be able to sign a shoe deal and wear those shoes during games.  The shoe deal would go instead to the team owner, who would force the athlete to wear, for no compensation, the particular shoe for whom the owner struck a deal.  Thank you NBAPA. . .

Macedawgg site profile image  

6/6/13 5:59 AM by Macedawgg

Just saw your list. 1-2.  False.  Unionized sports do not hold lifetime rights to merchandise and otherwise exploit the image of the athlete.  Your statement is just not true--in any fashion. 3.  Per the contracts, they are entitled to nothing for the video game, and 10-20% of Zuffa gross on merchandise.  Many fighters have said they have seen product with them included, and never received any payment.  4.  No, all fighters do no have the right to look at financials, and the financials that some are entitled to review are not of all revenue sources.  False again.  5.  You are changing the question now to a different one.  The question was what possible benefits could be obtained.  Not what legislation is pushed.  But here is just one--antitrust exemptions. . . so, even with moving the goal posts, you were still incorrect.  6.  False.  Again--you keep suggesting the contracts are the same.  They are far from the same.  The only thing they are restricted on is their uniform during event.  The reason for this restriction is that it maximizes league revenue--which is in turn given to the players pursuant to the negotiated split.  (So in this case, the restriction actually benefits the players as a whole).  That is it.  Further, the sports don't have their fingers in any other aspect of those endorsements., unlike MMA.   

Macedawgg site profile image  

6/6/13 5:37 AM by Macedawgg

I believe I have answered that question--three times now. Rampage's earning capacity has already been greatly impacted due to the sponsorship and contractual practices employed (google rampage and reebok--you will find examples given by Jackson directly), and will continue to be throughout and even after his career. The real value of endorsments for any product lies in the ability to offer an exclusive.  He no longer has the ability to offer such exclusives--the real "genius" of those "non-exclusive" assignments. 

MarkRobinson site profile image  

6/6/13 5:24 AM by MarkRobinson

Sound like a really good deal for him. he could be a big star in wrestling."Hulk Hogan! Yo bref stank!"I won't watch it but I imagine he has the charisma to make it in that market.

time traveling 12er site profile image  

6/6/13 4:01 AM by time traveling 12er

When I said one example, I'm saying you only gave on real world example, I wasn't talking about your list of hypotheticals. I'm saying you keep making statements but the only real world example you gave was a guy with no union. So it's a bad example to give if you're making a pro union argument. Ali did well without a union right?Going down your list. (Which, by the way, still doesn't answer any of the questions specifically about Rampage. His main beef was having to fight wrestlers wasn't it?)1+2 Unionized sports hold lifetime likeness rights too, so how is having a union going to help? If you're talking about collectively bargaining... then again this is something that helps the little guy much more than that stars who already have a disproportionate amount of negotiating leverage. CBA's allow fighters with little to no leverage have a say. Unionized sports have contractual provisions that are literally illegal in normal business practices but are allowed under the idea that they are under a mutually agreed collective agreement.3 Do fighters get nothing from licensing? If so, there's something unions can do. It would be surprising to hear that guys like Anderson Silva get no money from licensing.4 All fighters already have the right to have themselves or a representative look over all financials. So this is a moot point.5. What legislation have other unions pushed forward for their athletes? The Muhammad Ali act? Again, an example that a Union was not responsible for, proving it can be done without a union. What legislation are you looking for? Zuffa has probably been responsible for more positive mma legislation than any organization to date. 6. What unionized sports contain these protections and uniform standards for sponsorships? Unionized sports are even more restricted on sponsorships. If most of these things don't exist in sports that have unions, then why would you expect them to exist in a hypothetical fighters union?In the end you STILL haven't explained how the items on your list answer the original question that spawned it. What would a union have done to change Rampages current position? As far as I know his problem was with matchups and being mad that he wasn't allowed to wear Reebok. Well... no unionized sport is going to allow a player to wear un-approved gear during a game. Hell they don't even let players wear gear from approved sponsors. A union also isn't going to protect him from Wrestlers. Maybe if he was getting some action figure money he would have stuck around?