Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: The Culinary Union appeals to FOX exec to remove Jeremy Stephens from UFC On Fox 5

Your Message

Click here to log in

What is the last name of UFC's President?

 
 

You may choose an icon for your message from this list

Additional Options

  • Will turn www.example.com into [URL]http://www.example.com[/URL].

HTML

Topic Review (Newest First)

  • 12-07-2012, 03:42 PM
    sonofsteven
    If a UFC contracted fighter has a court date for child molestation, the UFC should not offer employment to him/HER until it is resolved that he/her was NOT guilty. It's the same thinking that should keep Jeremy S./ANY fighter arrested for anything violent . Man I personally work at a fucking machine shop( not high profile or anything at all) and ccould quickly be fired for even being arrested on childporn/goddamn near any charge. So i do not feel bad for JS or the wifebeater. Not guilty? cool, it'll show after the trial and we'll let you work.
  • 12-07-2012, 06:18 AM
    joeodd2
    They may be right, but in this case I'll side with Dana and say FUCK THOSE MOTHERFUCKERS....They are hungry for power and want to strong arm people into letting their "Union" into their private businesses. That's what it boils down to. And I say FUCK EM'. Valid points scribbled in shit.
  • 12-07-2012, 03:59 AM
    Rise
    Quote Originally Posted by rivethead View Post
    The vast majority of PR is blatant hypocrisy. To hold you to the same standard you'd like to hold the casionos, why aren't you strident and outraged every time dana massages the truth in a statement, or goes back on his word?

    Because you care about some things, and you don't care about others. Everybody does.
    I'm just as bothered when Dana does something stupid or says things he shouldn't. I'm far from a Dana White fan and hold him to the standards I'd expect from someone else. I don't in general give people passes when they do things that bother me.


    I actually see that as a good thing. I see it as pressure for zuffa to tighten up it's game and make fewer mistakes to be exploited in the media. It's not like they're in a position to topple zuffa and there is no UFC. But the pressure can make the product better, and that's what I want.
    We both know how Dana responds to things of this nature and it usually doesn't involve taking the message to heart and usually involves a lot of swearing. So probably not going to be a good thing.

    I can't tell if this is someone who is pretending to care, or someone who genuinely takes an interest in these issues and is coincidentally focused on looking for weakness in zuffa. I don't think anyone can.
    I think it's pretty easy to see if they care or not based on the continual target of their letter campaigns. Not once have they ever expressed a concern about anything else but the UFC in this manner. They don;t have websites deriding the NFL or any number of other organizations that have issues with employees being charged with serious crimes

    But ultimately, they're right. To me, it doesn't matter where the information comes from, if it's accurate. I don't care about their agenda, because they're actually right.
    To each their own personally I always consider the source of the message.
  • 12-06-2012, 09:13 PM
    Sniggles
    Quote Originally Posted by rivethead View Post
    I'm not saying Stephens is guilty--I actually hope he isn't, for his sake and for the sake of MMA in general. But I am saying he shouldn't be fighting for zuffa until the case is resolved.


    rh
    Dirty stinkin' liberal!
  • 12-06-2012, 04:04 PM
    rivethead
    Quote Originally Posted by Rise View Post
    You don't see the difference between a union trying to hurt a company because they can't get a foot hold into some of the businesses they own and competing against another company that offers the same product as you ? Really ?
    I don't an enormous difference. They're both in business to make money. They're both doing things that are legal.

    I'm curious as well how exactly did Dana fuck Fedor's career ? I could see the Strikeforce buy out maybe as being an arguement here but I'm pretty sure that would have happened with or without Fedor there.
    I'm not saying dana fucked Fedor's career. I'm saying he did everything he could to fuck his career. Big difference.

    When negotiations first failed between Fedor and Zuffa, Fedor was unilaterally considered #1 p4p on the planet. Immediately, dana looked to discredit him every chance he could, saying he wasn't even a top 5 HW. Fedor wasn't nearly as well known as dana, wasn't in front of cameras and microphones as much as dana, and suddenly you have a ton of completely ignorant fans who are repeating dana's assertion that Fedor hadn't beaten a top 10 fighter since 2005. Which is obviously bullshit, if you know anything at all about MMA. But repetition bred belief among an easily impressionable fanbase.

    There's more to it than that, but I'm tired of typing about it already.

    If they are not being underhanded an actually showing true concern here why are we not hearing this more from them? How many countless entertainers have been through just Las Vegas alone that have had criminal issues that they've probably never given a thought about if they played in a union establishment.
    I'm not saying the CU is great and awesome and above criticism.

    I'm saying in this case, virtually every point they've brought up is actually valid. They win this round.

    I don't have a job in the food service industry. I don't care if Station Casino's ever unionize or not.

    But that doesn't change the fact that everything this guy mentioned is accurate.

    While it may not be corrupt it's still nothing but blatant PR hypocrisy.
    The vast majority of PR is blatant hypocrisy. To hold you to the same standard you'd like to hold the casionos, why aren't you strident and outraged every time dana massages the truth in a statement, or goes back on his word?

    Because you care about some things, and you don't care about others. Everybody does.

    Right now, the CU has a hard on for zuffa.

    I actually see that as a good thing. I see it as pressure for zuffa to tighten up it's game and make fewer mistakes to be exploited in the media. It's not like they're in a position to topple zuffa and there is no UFC. But the pressure can make the product better, and that's what I want.

    I agree with everything you said here except the constructive criticism part there is no need for the culinary union to be sticking their nose in here.

    If I thought there was an actual true concern behind what they CU said I'd give them more credence. Realistically though we can all form our own opinions without them coming off like a bunch of tattle tales and trying to make problems.
    I can't tell if this is someone who is pretending to care, or someone who genuinely takes an interest in these issues and is coincidentally focused on looking for weakness in zuffa. I don't think anyone can.

    But ultimately, they're right. To me, it doesn't matter where the information comes from, if it's accurate. I don't care about their agenda, because they're actually right.


    Quote Originally Posted by AnchorPunch View Post
    Actually it's wildly different. In this case, Stephens is being denied his ability to make a living and a salary. In almost all cases of teacher accusations, the offending teacher is paid until the matter is resolved, regardless of whether or not they can still be in the classroom.
    It depends on a lot of different cases.

    I've seen teachers/police/politicians suspended without pay in certain cases. I'm not sure that a teacher accused of a brutal beating is going to get paid leave. It would depend on their contract...and that brings up a different point: the teacher chose a job with a contract that would cover them in cases like this, Stephens didn't. It goes back to him, and the choices he's made.

    In addition, there is nothing preventing zuffa from choosing to support him and paying him his show money while it's being resolved. If dana really believes in him 100%--and isn't just trying to keep a fighter with a fanbase off of a blacklist he may deserve to be on--he can show that with cash. He's made financial gestures in the past that wouldn't rule this out.

    In fact, that makes it much more like what I was saying, innocent until proven guilty, though with a special precaution to protect children from heinous crimes.[/QUOTE]
    So when a teacher has an extra glass of wine at kareoke and blows a .09, it's a heinous crime that her students need to be protected from in the classroom? Like she's going to plow her RAV4 through the wall and run over the Glee Club?

    What's more heinous, allegedly driving under the influence, or two men allegedly beating one man until he stops breathing? Neither one is great, but one is most often negligence, and the other is outright malicious.

    I'm not saying Stephens is guilty--I actually hope he isn't, for his sake and for the sake of MMA in general. But I am saying he shouldn't be fighting for zuffa until the case is resolved.


    rh
  • 12-06-2012, 10:59 AM
    Pasha K
    They are actually right.
    However I really wonder if the CU has nothing better to do than to spend time writing letters to the UFC.
  • 12-06-2012, 08:39 AM
    Sniggles
    Quote Originally Posted by Luc1an View Post
    everyone in this fucking world should just learn to mind their own fucking business.
    But how would people feel better than themselves if they didn't relish in others mistakes or even things that others don't even know are even the truth?

    Innocent until proven guilty.
  • 12-06-2012, 08:33 AM
    AnchorPunch
    Quote Originally Posted by rivethead View Post
    I see situations all the time where individuals in public positions are suspended from their positions while the case is resolved. It literally happens all the time.
    Absolutely agreed, but I think it's just as shitty then too.

    Quote Originally Posted by rivethead View Post
    But I can think of two teachers who are currently suspended in our vaguely local news, simply because they're "going to court." And by that, I mean, not just visiting, they're facing charges.

    It's all well and good to say that everyone is innocent til proven guilty, and that's a cornerstone of our nations history. It's also well and good to have it say "give us your tired and meek" on the base of the statue of liberty, and we're kicking them out of Southern Florida every day and sending them back to Mexico. Nobody is saying that Stephens is guilty, and he's not being illegally detained pending trial. Removing him from a card isn't violating his civil rights, it would simply be denying him a privilege...and there is an enormous difference between rights and privileges.


    It's not extreme. Google "teacher suspended" and nothing else and see how many teachers come up suspended for allegedly doing something, pending resolution of their respective cases.

    rh
    Actually it's wildly different. In this case, Stephens is being denied his ability to make a living and a salary. In almost all cases of teacher accusations, the offending teacher is paid until the matter is resolved, regardless of whether or not they can still be in the classroom.

    In fact, that makes it much more like what I was saying, innocent until proven guilty, though with a special precaution to protect children from heinous crimes.
  • 12-06-2012, 04:55 AM
    Rise
    Quote Originally Posted by rivethead View Post
    And how is that any different from the tactics dana and zuffa routinely employ? When zuffa does things like counterprogramming other competitive orgs, it's considered a great business move. When dana gets a personal hard-on for Fedor and does everything he can to fuck his career, it's hilarious...but when the CU does this it's suddenly corrupt and dirty?
    You don't see the difference between a union trying to hurt a company because they can't get a foot hold into some of the businesses they own and competing against another company that offers the same product as you ? Really ?

    I'm curious as well how exactly did Dana fuck Fedor's career ? I could see the Strikeforce buy out maybe as being an arguement here but I'm pretty sure that would have happened with or without Fedor there.

    If Stephens is found to be guilty, it wouldn't be the best for him to have fought on this card. If he's found to be innocent, he can fight on future cards without any concern. If Stephens needs money now for legal defense, and dana is 100% supportive, zuffa can financially assist him until the critical parts of his case are resolved.
    Agreed the smart thing to do would be to have Stephens clear this up first.

    With Trujillo, his case happened years ago, and it's public record; but there doesn't seem to be anything about resolution and/or anger management classes or other educational outreach. Minimally, if he's done things to turn himself around, that should be public knowledge as well. I'm all in favor of giving people second chances, but none of what the CU has done here is in any way corrupt in my eyes.
    If they are not being underhanded an actually showing true concern here why are we not hearing this more from them? How many countless entertainers have been through just Las Vegas alone that have had criminal issues that they've probably never given a thought about if they played in a union establishment.

    While it may not be corrupt it's still nothing but blatant PR hypocrisy.

    Fundamentally, I want the MMA to get better. I look at things like this as constructive criticism. I want zuffa to address the concerns constructively--I do not feel Stephens should be fighting until his case is resolved, nor any other fighter who is under investigation for violent crimes--and grow as a result.
    I agree with everything you said here except the constructive criticism part there is no need for the culinary union to be sticking their nose in here.

    I think the kneejerk reaction is to simply hate on the CU because they have an agenda. But their agenda doesn't mean that anything they've stated here is anything less than accurate.

    rh
    If I thought there was an actual true concern behind what they CU said I'd give them more credence. Realistically though we can all form our own opinions without them coming off like a bunch of tattle tales and trying to make problems.
  • 12-06-2012, 12:02 AM
    TheDoucheyWun
    I would think most nice innocent guys dont just wake up one day and decide they wanna fight...Fighting is kind of in you and im sure 50 % or so of fighters had troubled pasts and were criminals and they found a legal way to do what they enjoy and make money.

    The other 50 % would likely be collage wrestlers.

    If they were to hold all fighters accountable for their past's...You know how many great fight's we would have never seen? how many champions would have never been?

    MMA is a sport filled with douchebags and always will be. Just like it's fans us are the same way.. Most strait laced blue collar goody goods don't care to watch MMA it's those who have that chip on their shoulders or a bit of anger in us or do a bit of drugs that enjoy watching people get banged out.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •