Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: Escaping the money trap

Your Message

Click here to log in

What Is Quinton Jackson's Nickname?

 
 

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)

  • 07-23-2006, 01:27 AM
    Hypergit
    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    No, I totally agree If the NPO will guarentee the card then it would certainly work, however surely the purpose of the NPO would be to get the fighter the best possible deal. Therefore it couldn't possibly object to a fighter under their cloak to getting a better pay for the same work just under another fight card.?
    The way I’m currently thinking, the NPO would arbitrate the signing of a single fight contract with the highest bidding promotion. NPO would also bind the fighters to the card (as the fighters would be signed up to NPO’s conditions – and sticking to a commitment would have to be in that contract). Each promotion that is viable to bid for the fight would get their chance. If they then tried to tempt the fighters with a better offer after bidding had closed, there would be repercussions for future dealings with NPO, and presumably they could also be sued. If a promotion did so anyway, then the fighters would also be putting themselves in a poor legal and future earnings position if they accepted the offer to switch cards.

    NPO is committed to the bettering of MMA first and foremost – that entails looking after the fans and promotions as well as the fighters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    As an earlier poster already stated, the NPO would progress to become a union & run well it would do well. But how many unions are run well?
    I still don’t think it is a union. There are undoubtedly similarities, but also major differences imo. I will be thinking of this further for my response to Matt’s post.

    git.
  • 07-23-2006, 12:46 AM
    Alvin
    No, I totally agree If the NPO will guarentee the card then it would certainly work, however surely the purpose of the NPO would be to get the fighter the best possible deal. Therefore it couldn't possibly object to a fighter under their cloak to getting a better pay for the same work just under another fight card.

    But the end of the day you the fight fan have missed out.

    Incidentally how ironic is it that this thread went this way & then the WFA had this exact problem?!?!?!

    Maybe it will prove a point to see how many people get upset with the WFA show & don't buy the ppv.

    As an earlier poster already stated, the NPO would progress to become a union & run well it would do well. But how many unions are run well?
  • 07-22-2006, 06:50 PM
    Hypergit
    Sorry Alvin, my objection to your last post is going to make you

    Your entire post (in addition to the portion of your previous post that I ignored) is based on the erroneous assumption that NPO would not be contracting the fighters.

    Maybe I didn't make it clear enough earlier, but NPO would be contracting the fighters to the promoters (per card) and/or to NPO. Therefore, there is no reason why problems like the one you describe (or similar such as the current WFA farce) would be increased. In fact, it is quite possible that they could be decreased in some way through the strength of a global NPO (more threatening punishments to unreliable fighters), or a 'double' contract (both NPO and the promoters are binding the fighter to the card).

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    Say what you like about promoters, but they do a damn good job most of the time & without them there would be no mma as we now know it.
    I would agree they have done a good job, and that mma has grown massively because of them (hell, I would still be a pure Aikidoka if it wasn’t for Bushido & K1s efforts). Much progress in all fields of life is through competition. However, I think the point is near (or has arrived) where working together or having a regulatory body is preferable to outright war.

    A rather tenuous analogy could be the cooperation of the European countries (which officially began in the 1950s I believe). Much political, scientific, and social progress was made through the competition between countries. However, once the major players decided that singing from the same song book was the way forward, their wealth, political strength, culture, general ethics etc improved greatly. Lol there’s gotta be a better example than that, but you catch my drift I’m sure.

    git.
  • 07-21-2006, 06:13 PM
    Alvin
    Ok, one more then!

    I would have to fall in your global fan category as I couldn't care less who was promoting the fights at all. If Lindland Vs Rampage was on a KOTC, ROTR or WFA it wouldn't make a difference to me.

    However I'll put this theory to you.

    King of the Cage (or any other "smaller" promotions) signed a deal that had
    Rampage Vs Babalu
    Henderson Vs Franklin
    Fedor Vs Arlovski
    Gomi Vs BJ Penn.

    They spent a small fortune in getting these fights, they then spend another fortune promoting it.

    You see this & think, fuck yeah, I'm going. You book tickets & flights to see this card. The same night the WFA or Strikeforce (I don't wanna seem that I'm picking on the UFC) have Frank Shamrock scheduled to fight Tito Ortiz, but Tito pulls out two weeks to fight night. They then offer Henderson more bux to switch cards. No contract involved so Hendo makes his apologies & switches. Then the same happens & Fedor pulls out to fight in Pride & Penn is now fighting in ROTR, with Babalu fighting at Cage Rage.

    The KOTC promotors are looking at their bill & thinking WTF. They then get a few journeymen to fill in the gaps.

    You turn up after spending a fortune to get there & instead of watching an awesome card you left with a card of exhibition type mis-matches.

    Now the point of this is KOTC did nothing wrong, neither did any of the other promotions that poached their card (they gotta fill seats too), you could say that the fighters shoud have stayed to their word & not switched, but like I said earlier they got mouths to feed so the more money they get for fighting the better.

    However you as a mma fan have just been royally screwed. As a one off situation you may forgive KOTC, however it happens the very next card as well. That's it you are pissed off & never go to another KOTC event again cos you know it's gonna fall through.

    The result is you the fan have been ripped off & are disillusioned with mma & KOTC folds. Through no-ones fault.

    Say what you like about promoters, but they do a damn good job most of the time & without them there would be no mma as we now know it.

    Hmmmm...... shit I went on there. Not bad to say that I was done with this topic!!!
  • 07-21-2006, 02:52 PM
    Hypergit
    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    Before I finish on this subject I'd like to mention Matt Lindland.

    Matt Lindland was booked to fight at Cage Rage 16 & they advertised the fight with him being once a top contender at UFC an-all. His match was a big selling point with Cage Rage (a growing promotion). However a few weeks prior to fight night he bailed on them cos he got offered a better deal fighting in the US.

    I can't blame him from doing it cos he's got mouths to feed, but as Cage Rage used to sign up fights based on the honour of the fighters word they didn't have a leg to stand on. Now the are introducing legal contracts for their fighters.

    Anderson Silva was another of their fighters & was their World MW title holder. He has now signed to the UFC leaving them without one of their most exciting fightes & biggest draws.

    So with that said you can kind of understand why promoters use legal contracts to keep their assets (fighters) in house. It gives them & their fans a little bit more security.
    This post got me thinking a little. My knee-jerk response was ‘who cares about the promoters?!? Of course they want long term contracts, but they’ll be fine - it’s the fighters and fans that matter most!’ However, I quickly realized that you make a point that deserves far more consideration:

    “[Promoters use legal contracts to give] them & their fans a little bit more security.”

    I think there are several types of fan, with two types being relevant here: Local and Global (I’m only talking about real fans, not the beer swilling blood lust crews btw).

    --- Global is fairly self explanatory - they are the fans who are knowledgeable about the worldwide MMA scene and care to see the best fights regardless of the promotion or location. Most fans that frequent forums such as this are global fans even if they have a strong preference for one promotion or region.

    --- Local would be fans that are mostly passionate for a portion of MMA (such as the UK scene, or a single promotion like UFC). IMO, many local fans simply aren’t well educated in MMA (eg fans who feel UFC is –the- promotion for MMA). Most of these fans will become global soon enough through the ‘schooling’ of other fans. Some local fans, however, are well connected to their scene (such as the UK) through having friends who compete there or who assist in the promotions. These fans may currently, and in the near future, have little interest in the global scene.

    NPO style single fight contracts would, as you suggest, cause quicker and more regular migration of the best local fighters. This, as we’ve already established, would be much better for the fighter, who can now earn better money and win new fans without having to see out an unfavourable long contract against weak opposition. There is no doubt it would also be much better for the global fans, so we are left with only the effect it has on the local fans….

    The migration of fighters would assist in the ‘globalization’ of single-promotion local fans. Take a UFC fan for example – and let’s say Anderson Silva takes Franklins belt. UFC fan could then become interested in where this badass came from, and googles his name. Immediately he will be introduced to Cage Rage and Pride amongst other promotions, and realise that there is more than just UFC out there to follow. It works the other way round too. A Cage Rage fan could be gutted that Silva is gone, just as a Rage/Warriors fan would have initially been gutted to see Bisping go (how ironic that CR booted him out anyway for no good reason lol). However, this disappointment will be replaced with elation the moment they see their favourite fighters kicking ass on the big stage. This will also help globalize even the die-hard local fans – ‘I was watching him when…’ etc.

    Although the draw may be lower until a replacement is warmed to by local fans, this will be offset by global fans attending due to their newly acquired knowledge that there –is- good fighters/match-ups right on their doorstep outside of, for example, UFC/Pride. A huge draw ‘homecoming’ fight would also be a possibility too with NPO. After the old boys have done their thing on the world stage, they can simply out-bid the big promotions. That is a possibility that is currently implausible with the bully type contracts utilised by the big promotions, and would be superior for both the finances and reputation of the local promotion than an extra couple of squash fights before the fighter moves on.

    I know you said you are finished on the subject, Alvin, but I do appreciate your opinions and I hope that, now we’ve had a break lol, you can find the time and energy to continue for another post or two.

    Git.

    PS.
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Boone
    This is one of my favourite debates in the short history of the new version of this forum. You two are doing an awesome job.
    Thanks Matt, I’ll be replying to your excellent points later – this is hard work for me because I’m not naturally too good at debate, so I am grateful for the compliment.
  • 07-21-2006, 01:36 AM
    Matt Boone
    This is one of my favorite debates in the short history of the new version of this forum. You two are doing an awesome job.

    "Anyways, this has mostly been tangents.... do you think my idea would be good, and do you think it could work?"

    Great idea, wouldn't work. It's hard to keep up with all the different tracks I got to cover in explaining it, and seeing your post-style I know I'm going to be quoted so I have to be careful what I say. I have a lot of questions between the differences in this NPO and a union, as your arguer pointed out. It seems pretty much the same to me.

    Anyways, UFC is in position to ignore an NPO, no matter how many "big-time" fighters join up with such an organization. They have several television and PPV outlets and as they're doing already, they could, and will-be regardless of this topic, building their own stars to avoid situations like this.

    Tim Sylvia can be their Heavyweight champion because as far as 90% of people in America aware of the sport knows, PRIDE's Heavyweight division or Fedor in particular don't exist. And to any new fan UFC gains along the way via television, PPV, or media - it will be the same for them.

    They'll let their Middleweight champion Murilo Bustamante go, their Lightweight champion Jens Pulver go, their biggest star in Tito Ortiz go, one of their best pound for pound fighters in B.J. Penn can hit the road. They control this thing.

    They get away with it because it's a new sport that has yet to be fully established. They can kind of tell people what to think. I mean, like Ivan Trembow was saying in his article I posted earlier (that I think this thread-starter replied to so he knows the reference) mainstream media outlets like the Boston Globe, New York Post or whoever they're all printing whatever Dana White or the UFC says. Why? They don't know any better. The mainstream world is just starting to get familiar with the sport. It'd actually be better to say the mainstream world is starting to realize this thing is a sport.

    Seems like I'm off topic, but my whole point is an NPO thing wouldn't work because UFC wouldn't have to comply with it. In their main market, they are mixed-martial arts. They are the sport. Just like NFL is football even though there's other leagues out there, UFC is mixed-martial arts. Until something like an NPO ...or UFC just decides on their own to treat their company like a sport with no flaws (I can't just say "sport" because all sports have their own corruptions) they pretty much control how this thing works. It's their way or the highway. We're pretty much here to eat what we're fed, and I don't see a lot anyone can do at this point to change it.
  • 07-14-2006, 05:11 PM
    Alvin
    Before I finish on this subject I'd like to mention Matt Lindland.

    Matt Lindland was booked to fight at Cage Rage 16 & they advertised the fight with him being once a top contender at UFC an-all. His match was a big selling point with Cage Rage (a growing promotion). However a few weeks prior to fight night he bailed on them cos he got offered a better deal fighting in the US.

    I can't blame him from doing it cos he's got mouths to feed, but as Cage Rage used to sign up fights based on the honour of the fighters word they didn't have a leg to stand on. Now the are introducing legal contracts for their fighters.

    Anderson Silva was another of their fighters & was their World MW title holder. He has now signed to the UFC leaving them without one of their most exciting fightes & biggest draws.

    So with that said you can kind of understand why promoters use legal contracts to keep their assets (fighters) in house. It gives them & their fans a little bit more security.
  • 07-14-2006, 02:32 PM
    Hypergit
    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    In a utopian world yes the fighters would always get the best deal for the fight. Unfortunately companies like Pride, UFC etc sign up fighters based on how much revenue they will bring to the promotion & fighters sign for the guarenteed salary.
    I agree with what you say here, but I don’t think it needs to stay that way (with NPO, promoters would still be paying more for more revenue, just in a far fairer way for all). I mentioned a ‘snowball’ effect in my first post. What I meant was that a successful NPO launch would rapidly persuade the vast majority of fighters that NPO is better for their long term security as well as their general earnings & respect. Soon, very few would commit themselves to a single promotion, even though I’m sure the promoters would still try to tempt them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    Title belts don't always mean as much as a lot of people think. Frank Shamrock Vs Cesar Gracie & Royce Gracie Vs Matt Hughes sold the most seats in the US (so I believe), yet neither had a belt on the line.
    regarding Hughs vs Royce - after the November UFC, we will see that (kinda obviously) the fans would prefer elite match-ups/unifications.

    Regarding belt importance - if Chuck loses his belt to Babalu, would we still be desperate to see him fight Silva? Sure – it is an elite match-up thus would still break all records etc - but would it mean as much as with both belts on the line? Not imo. Having been starved of the possibility of bona fide world champions, perhaps we disregard how great it would be to have one champ per weight, ie. Title belts mean -more- than a lot of people think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    The are some promotions that are more fighter friendly (WFA for eg) but I cant think there'll ever be a time when promoters stop signing fighters on long term contracts.
    I also can’t see it happening. I’m sure there are reasons why no one would have the balls to attempt NPO, or why it wouldn’t work. We can’t explore those reasons and circumnavigate them without first stepping through such pessimism. It is clearly the ideal scenario for fans, fighters, the sport in general so, erm…, why not eh?

    git.
  • 07-14-2006, 08:29 AM
    Alvin
    In a utopian world yes the fighters would always get the best deal for the fight. Unfortunately companies like Pride, UFC etc sign up fighters based on how much revenue they will bring to the promotion & fighters sign for the guarenteed salary.

    Title belts don't always mean as much as a lot of people think. Frank Shamrock Vs Cesar Gracie & Royce Gracie Vs Matt Hughes sold the most seats in the US (so I believe), yet neither had a belt on the line.

    The are some promotions that are more fighter friendly (WFA for eg) but I cant think there'll ever be a time when promoters stop signing fighters on long term contracts.
  • 07-13-2006, 10:40 PM
    Hypergit
    Quote Originally Posted by kickass32
    So basically unionize the fighters?????
    Not really. A union is for employees, and would be a good idea (that is if the promoters couldn't prevent it). However, what I describe is more of a promotion company for freelance fighters - just a global and ethically sound one. If fans, fighters, and pundits all pulled together it could immediately be in a position of absolute strength (and democracy).

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    But what you're saying is the same in EVERY sport.

    The end of the day every professional team is assembled to make money for the owners of the team, be it basketball, football, whatever. By saying everyone should be allowed to play with whoever they want is perfectly ok, but it'll never happen.
    I don't agree that it is the same in -every- sport, and I don’t think a pool of fighters is generally a ‘team’ or should be owned – it is just a cage that is owned. Maybe you are correct in most sports to varying degrees, but that is probably a symptom of the evolution of a professional sport (ie it is not this way out of necessity, or out of it being the 'best' way - merely because it is the natural capitalist way). I could elaborate here but it is not worth me doing so because...

    Just because it is that way in other sports, it doesn't mean we must accept it in mma. I mean, hell this sport's barely been born - the direction it takes is not set in stone.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    Why would say the UFC allow Tito Ortiz Vs Ken Shamrock fight on another company's card?
    They wouldn't, because they 'own' them. They could still own them with the system I suggest, just they would be ineligible for the 'real' belts - which they couldn't win anyway (imo) but also they would lose potential peer, fan, and pundit respect by not being NPO. Besides, UFC could bid low and still buy that fight over other companies lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alvin
    Also it wasn't a trick question. Dana, for all his faults, knows that without these other promotions the talent would dry up & therefore the UFC go out of business. So unless he's in it for a quick buck & can't see the point of killing the competition.
    Let's say that Dana is happy for all small promotions that start up to succeed (I’m not sure – he has tried to kill off at least one small promotion I know of). He certainly doesn't want more large ones, he wants to keep them in their place:

    Currently there are 2 big ones, Pride and UFC, with approximately equal levels of talent. Logically it follows that their 'world championship' belts are actually only 1/2 the truth (sometimes more, sometimes less in fans eyes like Fedor/Sylvia, but on average 1/2). Now if just one more promotion gets big, each belt is worth even less. We're then in boxing territory almost exactly, and there will be even less big fights and even less validity to each belt. Dana wishes to avoid this, although in fact it would be best for the sport (competition, more room for pro fighters, more fans, growth etc.) only thing is we would then need a single world belt in each division, and a single governing/match-making body (NPO).

    Anyways, this has mostly been tangents.... do you think my idea would be good, and do you think it could work?

    git.
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
  •