Why exactly did the UFC get rid of Rory McDonald?

400k a fight says he is worth more. Nate only got more because Conor. He doesn't pull shit alone
Rory was making 59/59 in the ufc, he wishes he was worth as much as Nate.
 
He wanted more money but the UFC didn't think he was worth it. He had just come off a BRUTAL war with Robbie
That fight alone should've proved he earned him his keep.
It was the Griffin-Bonnar war of this generation.
I heard it being talked about all over the place, probably got a lot of new fans into the UFC.

But I get what you're saying - after looking like he was on the decline when being beat by Thompson, and then asking for more money, they probably felt he wasn't a future contender.
 
350p1lh.jpg


Bad for the company

Dana probably went to his house and found some bodies in the freezer in the basement

Came to an understanding, I wont shop you to the police but instead cut you
 
He $59K for the Lawler title fight.

Does anyone have a guess how much more money Rory asked for?
Are we talking double or something like a measly $10K extra?

(That being said, $59K is not that low for UFC show money standards. Gus got no more than $44K show money for his second title fight. (excluding the FOTN-bonus which was huge at $50K) and then in his next fight on Fox he got a shitty $10K according to MMAMania)
 
he isn't close to being a draw and has a really lame personality. plus, he's not that exciting to watch
 
I didnt like the move but to be honest he didnt capitalize when it counted. He will be back...
 
Who knows, their loss.

He's going to be better off in the long run beating up lesser competition for more money, health wise and wealth wise.
 
Stupid move to let him go. Should have paid him, but these are the people who let Hendo go.
 
He brings the Canadian market now that GSP is out.

Still young and has several big wins for example over the current champion.

Kill or be killed fighting style.

I guess he was asking for a lot of money but isn't he worth it?

Needle mover?
A heap of his fights b4 Lawler were the opposite of do or die.
 
I think it was a lowball strategy and to strike fear in other fighters and scare them from talking about free agency.
 
That's a double edged sword, since it implies decision victories aren't real victories.
They're both draws.

Winning by decision or losing by decision just means you've failed to get the job done by putting your opponent away, and now you must rely on 3 random incompetent judges to determine who they think won, since you couldn't do it yourself.
 
Back
Top