Gennady Goblin -
Gennady Goblin -
T?bikan J?dan -
And if he lost and had no bonus his purse would only be 10k. That's too much variance to say the pay is good. It would be more accurate to say the pay has the potential to be good.
"When you talk about backroom bonuses and discretionary bonuses, they're awesome, they're cool, but it's not a steady salary, it's not promised," Henderson told Bleacher Report. "Some guys never get a bonus. It's all at the whim of the higher-ups. And you shouldn't have a problem paying your mortgage because of the whim of the higher-ups, because they didn't feel your fight was worthy of a bonus.
"That struck me as wrong. It's not right at all. Fighters are professional athletes. As much as we sacrifice, we shouldn't have to live hoping that we get a bonus, hoping that we did enough to impress them."
This argument doesn't hold any weight. If you choose to accept a contract for a certain amount, your lifestyle choices should be made based on that contract. If you choose to take on a mortgage that requires you to depend on a potential bonus to pay it, what you're doing is placing a bet on yourself. If it pans out then it was a smart gamble. If it doesn't, you have nobody to blame but yourself.
If you're not happy with the contract you signed, you shouldn't have signed it. It is absolutely ridiculous to complain about occasionally receiving extra pay that your employer has no obligation to give you, pay that is above and beyond the contracted amount you BOTH agreed to.
Except Dana and fans always talk about how you earn so much in the ufc from "backroom locker room" bonuses, performance bonuses, etc...fighters are dumb and believe it and then realize there's a small chance of it happening, while they work a second job to pay for their shitty apartment.
There's clearly a reason top fighters like Bader, Rory, Davis, Mousasi, etc... are leaving the ufc.
What's wrong with that? You SHOULD sell your labor to whoever is willing to pay you the most. Bader, Rory, Davis, Mousasi, etc. all were able to raise their stock by doing well in the UFC. If you want to be even close to competitive in the market, you need to acquire top fighters, so when top UFC fighters become available you're forced to open up your wallet to get them. That's what allowed those guys to negotiate for a great contract with Bellator.
I'm not seeing what you dislike about this scenario.
You don't understand the concept of selling your organization through locker room bonuses and fight bonuses, despite the fact that fighters will likely never get one?
How about just paying a livable wage for fighters that are the reason for revenue in a $5B organization?
You act like the whole roster is getting 10k/10k. That's just for first time fighters. I domt understand this sense of thinking a fighter has hit the jackpot and should get a massive payday for just being signed without even having a fight int he organization. Especially when 10k/10k is a raise in pay from what they made where they fought previously. You keep ignoring the point that if you think the ufc isnt paying a living wage in your opinion then every other organization is worse, but for some reason they get a pass while you are only focused on the ufc. Yeah, I know its because theyre a $5B organization so they should pay newcomers 50k/50k while everyone else gets away with paying 1k flat which is scandalous. But muh sponsors and superbowl of mma.
Why speak up for an organization that could shut up every critic at the drop of a hat if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is explain what % of revenue they are paying fighters. Show some evidence of this. Show us what fighters bring in and what they make. Be transparent.
Instead they chose to work in secrecy and blame people like fighter managers for getting a fighter a bad deal.
Think about that. They lowball fighters. Then blame their managers for getting lowballed. Then tell you at a fighter summit paid for by the company you don't need them.
Why would you ever put your name out there to defend that shadiness.