- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
- Messages
- 3,886
- Reaction score
- 7,363
Why should the ufc be responsible for their health after their career is over? That makes no sense.
Without fighters, there is no UFC.
Fighters are in essence the only valuable asset the UFC owns - the brand is worthless without them. We don’t watch the UFC to see Dana interviewed by the Schmo, we watch because we love fights/martial arts.
One would think in a highly dangerous sport you’d want to protect your assets to show them you value them. When you don’t offer long term health coverage and grossly underpay them, they realize they aren’t valued by the company they work for. This leads to less people getting into fighting as an athletic endeavor, which literally makes the sport worse in perpetuity (fewer participants, fewer high-level fighters).
They are literally intentionally hurting the sport and their ex-employees to make obscene profit when they are already making obscene profit....its the endless questions of capitalism - when is it ever enough profit/money? They made billions while doling out a pittance of revenue generated by the core assets of their business.
They are responsible in an ethical/moral sense, not a legal one - this is by their own design though, if Ali act comes to MMA their whole shit-show grinds to a complete halt.