Ending MMA “leagues” would allow for better pay.

[jeff7b9]

I’m not saying to end promotions such as The UFC or Bellator or ONE, those should be kept and so should the belts (we need more belts in my opinion). But the exclusivity of fighters and the lack of cross promotional matches is what hinders mma fighters from touching real money. There needs to be a mma oversight commission that allows for purse bids and open negotiations amongst fighters and fights. We just seen this in boxing with Triller outbidding Top Rank for Teofimo Lopez’s next fight even though top rank is Teo’s promoter. (Also the fight is a mandatory and not even a big fight).

imagine If Dhiego Lima and Usman were to have an open purse bid for a fight? Or Jon Jones and Francis Ngannou?

I understand that boxing or Conor Mcgregor money isn’t exactly sustainable for mma but I truly want these fighters to get better pay and have a CHANCE to touch some real life money.

You think Teofimo Lopez knows that Triller check is gonna bounce ?

 

[jeff7b9]

Yeah, not sure about the practical side, just saying, at least in theory, it would make sense and could be beneficial. If the roster feels defeated from the get go and none of the influential guys even try, then it's tough. Is that 30% number based on some kind of law?

And I agree with the other points. I think one of the worst things is that the contracts are ridiculously unbalanced in favor of the UFC. They can offer you 3 shitty fights a year until you complete the 8 contracted fights they made you sign when you were on TUF, or in the regionals, or whatever it is, and if you don't like the opponent, the pay, the venue or anything, UFC can sit you out forever, literally, and not allow you to work with anyone ever again in your life until you accept what they give you and complete all 8. I feel the contracts should expire after a set period of time.

At the same time, they can end your contract on a whim and cut you with no compensation. Since the other orgs do similar things, and the UFC has a huge historical advantage to the point of an oligopoly that brutally favors the UFC, this creates shitty conditions for many guys. How exactly could this change, is it a matter of legislation or what? I was thinking collective actions could help with that too, but I don't know.

The UFC needs a modern version of the Ali act, written with 2021 (+) Mixed Martial Arts in mind.


The problem is that Dana and his wealthy corrupt buddies have way more pull legally than the fighters do and way way way more financial resources.

And the Athletic Commissions are corrupt as fuck already and I highly doubt they would “do the right thing” and back the fighters or that any other organized government agency will step up.

 

[avenue94]

Is that 30% number based on some kind of law?

Yeah, NLRB oversees union elections in the U.S. (I'm not sure how they would handle an election involving contractors from other countries though), and 30 percent of labor is the cutoff for a card check to set up an election on whether or not that workforce will unionize.

I feel the contracts should expire after a set period of time.

Yeah the fact that Nick Diaz is still under contract is absurd, it resembles old pre-Haywood Hollywood.

I think one of the worst things is that the contracts are ridiculously unbalanced in favor of the UFC.

Yeah, contracts in mma heavily favor the promoter (Bellator contracts are nearly identical to UFC contracts FYI, it's an industry standard, not UFC thing per se). Plus people ignore that one of the advantages promoters have is it doesn't' cost them a dime if a fighter sits out. In other sports, that scenario can't be sustained long term because teams need to free up salary cap and have a limit on team size.

How exactly could this change, is it a matter of legislation or what?

The two main routes right now are expanding the Ali Act and the antitrust lawsuit.
-Ali Act has historically been interpreted as banning champion's clauses or at least heavily limiting them, but it's bundled with a lot of other things, like splitting promoters and sanctioning bodies (promoters act as both in mma). There is a decent chance that it passes in the next year or two, just as a fuck you to Dana for riding for Trump so hard, but it's still an uphill battle
-If the UFC loses the lawsuit, they're facing a huge fine but the plaintiffs also asked for injunctive relief. So the judge could rule that contracts have to be limited, etc. But we're 7 years in to the case and it's only half way through the process. Antitrust cases take forever if the parties aren't super important (no one in power gives a shit about mma).

The UFC needs a modern version of the Ali act, written with 2021 (+) Mixed Martial Arts in mind.

What changes from the Ali Act would you want or not want? Because the current mma Ali Act is transfers it wholesale (the text is mostly just "where original bill says boxer, add mma fighter")

 

[jeff7b9]

Yeah, NLRB oversees union elections in the U.S. (I'm not sure how they would handle an election involving contractors from other countries though), and 30 percent of labor is the cutoff for a card check to set up an election on whether or not that workforce will unionize.

Yeah the fact that Nick Diaz is still under contract is absurd, it resembles old pre-Haywood Hollywood.

Yeah, contracts in mma heavily favor the promoter (Bellator contracts are nearly identical to UFC contracts FYI, it's an industry standard, not UFC thing per se). Plus people ignore that one of the advantages promoters have is it doesn't' cost them a dime if a fighter sits out. In other sports, that scenario can't be sustained long term because teams need to free up salary cap and have a limit on team size.

The two main routes right now are expanding the Ali Act and the antitrust lawsuit.
-Ali Act has historically been interpreted as banning champion's clauses or at least heavily limiting them, but it's bundled with a lot of other things, like splitting promoters and sanctioning bodies (promoters act as both in mma). There is a decent chance that it passes in the next year or two, just as a fuck you to Dana for riding for Trump so hard, but it's still an uphill battle
-If the UFC loses the lawsuit, they're facing a huge fine but the plaintiffs also asked for injunctive relief. So the judge could rule that contracts have to be limited, etc. But we're 7 years in to the case and it's only half way through the process. Antitrust cases take forever if the parties aren't super important (no one in power gives a shit about mma).

What changes from the Ali Act would you want or not want? Because the current mma Ali Act is transfers it wholesale (the text is mostly just "where original bill says boxer, add mma fighter")

If the Ali Act was written in a way which applies seamlessly to a different sport decades later without any modification then god bless the geniuses who penned it.

I won’t pretend to know the ins and out of it and how they would translate

But I assume given that it is a different sport, with different organizational framework (companies with their own belts and in some cases different rules of the sport, operating as self contained organizations rather than independent overlapping sanctioning bodies)
That it would benefit from being adapted to MMA/2021, and the current revenue streams etc.

 

[avenue94]

If the Ali Act was written in a way which applies seamlessly to a different sport decades later without any modification then god bless the geniuses who penned it.

I won’t pretend to know the ins and out of it and how they would translate

But I assume given that it is a different sport, with different organizational framework (companies with their own belts and in some cases different rules of the sport, operating as self contained organizations rather than independent overlapping sanctioning bodies)
That it would benefit from being adapted to MMA/2021, and the current revenue streams etc.

Yeah the main changes fan would see is promoters can't have rankings or belts unless they want to take it to court and fight the DOJ. And some contractual changes, purse bids occasionally (UFC would still win most of them), and maybe some cross promotion. Most of the changes wouldn't really be visible to fans as they're requirements for promoter disclosures to the fighter and state. Oh and it cracks down on managers, so Ali might be in trouble since he's very cozy with PFL and the UFC.

And the sanctioning bodies would come a few years after, the athletic commissions are supposed to meet and create those bodies. The Ali Act doesn't actually create it, just mandates it. But yeah, as far as legalese, boxing and mma aren't super different.

 

[You Will Vote For Dreyga]

If the Ali Act was written in a way which applies seamlessly to a different sport decades later without any modification then god bless the geniuses who penned it.

It doesn’t. It makes a lot assumptions that apply specifically to boxing. Expanding won’t be a magic fix

I won’t pretend to know the ins and out of it and how they would translate

If you interested in learning the ins and out here

http://fordhamlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/pdfs/Vol_68/Baglio_May.pdf

It is law review they breakdown the Ali Act in layman’s terms

 

[jeff7b9]

Yeah the main changes fan would see is promoters can't have rankings or belts unless they want to take it to court and fight the DOJ. And some contractual changes, purse bids occasionally (UFC would still win most of them), and maybe some cross promotion. Most of the changes wouldn't really be visible to fans as they're requirements for promoter disclosures to the fighter and state. Oh and it cracks down on managers, so Ali might be in trouble since he's very cozy with PFL and the UFC.

And the sanctioning bodies would come a few years after, the athletic commissions are supposed to meet and create those bodies. The Ali Act doesn't actually create it, just mandates it. But yeah, as far as legalese, boxing and mma aren't super different.

I would be concerned with it creating a situation where MMA suffers from the same bullshit that hurts boxing.

mandatory title challenges that no one gives a fuck about getting in the way of fights fans want.


Especially if there was more than one sanctioned big body, then you have one body saying this guy needs a mandatory before someone else can get a fight and by the time the big fight happens it is 5 years too late.

and if it is one sanctioning body then you have all the same monopoly bullshit currently in the UFC.


I like the idea of a free market for fighters and I like the idea of rankings which aren’t affected by whether people will lose their press credentials if they don’t tow the company line...

I just hope it wouldn’t be trading one set of problems for a bigger more corrupt set of problems and I feel like there may be o way to know if that is the case until what’s done is done. Basically I don’t think there are going to be “easy answers”, as is often the case with complicated problems.

 

[jeff7b9]

It doesn’t. It makes a lot assumptions that apply specifically to boxing. Expanding won’t be a magic fix



If you interested in learning the ins and out here is law review they breakdown the Ali Act in layman’s terms

I would be interested. Is it an article or a video?

got a link?

is this what you are referring to?

https://mmathinker.com/the-muhammad-ali-act-good-for-mma

 

[Kvothe_the_kingkiller]

If the Ali Act was written in a way which applies seamlessly to a different sport decades later without any modification then god bless the geniuses who penned it.

I won’t pretend to know the ins and out of it and how they would translate

But I assume given that it is a different sport, with different organizational framework (companies with their own belts and in some cases different rules of the sport, operating as self contained organizations rather than independent overlapping sanctioning bodies)
That it would benefit from being adapted to MMA/2021, and the current revenue streams etc.

I think you're 100% right on this. The Ali Act was written to protect boxers from individual promoters, not fighters from promotions like UFC.

And though boxing had political legs, MMA has none. So Congress has virtually no incentive - and no popular personality like Muhammed Ali to lobby - to implement a federal change.

And CBA won't happen, for the reasons thousands of people have already posted about in these forums.

That's why I think if (big if) any change comes about, it will come from the courts. I've never heard a compelling argument against this opinion either.

But most likely, no change will come from the courts either. But if this class action even only ends the monopsomistic (is that a word?) practices of unilaterally extending contracts, that would be a win.

 

[You Will Vote For Dreyga]

I would be interested. Is it an article or a video?

got a link?

is this what you are referring to?

https://mmathinker.com/the-muhammad-ali-act-good-for-mma

Sorry forgot to post the link. I fixed it but here it is again

http://fordhamlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/pdfs/Vol_68/Baglio_May.pdf


It is a PDF. It’s a very dense but thorough review of the law.it goes over the circumstances that led to creation of the Act and then lols at each section of the law and explains how it attempts to remedy those issues.

 

[kflo]

If the Ali Act was written in a way which applies seamlessly to a different sport decades later without any modification then god bless the geniuses who penned it.

I won’t pretend to know the ins and out of it and how they would translate

But I assume given that it is a different sport, with different organizational framework (companies with their own belts and in some cases different rules of the sport, operating as self contained organizations rather than independent overlapping sanctioning bodies)
That it would benefit from being adapted to MMA/2021, and the current revenue streams etc.

the ali act is primarily designed to:

1. protect fighters from coercive contracts that require granting long term promotional rights to a promoter in exchange for being able to participate in any specific fight. if manny wanted to fight floyd, floyd can't require manny sign with mayweather promotions long term in order to get the fight. (this was abused pre-ali act)
2. set standards for sanctioning bodies
3. set disclosure requirements between commissions, sanctioning bodies, promoters and fighters
4. establish firewalls to minimize conflict of interests between promoters, managers, sanctioning bodies

 

[kflo]

I think you're 100% right on this. The Ali Act was written to protect boxers from individual promoters, not fighters from promotions like UFC.

And though boxing had political legs, MMA has none. So Congress has virtually no incentive - and no popular personality like Muhammed Ali to lobby - to implement a federal change.

And CBA won't happen, for the reasons thousands of people have already posted about in these forums.

That's why I think if (big if) any change comes about, it will come from the courts. I've never heard a compelling argument against this opinion either.

But most likely, no change will come from the courts either. But if this class action even only ends the monopsomistic (is that a word?) practices of unilaterally extending contracts, that would be a win.

you mean the champions clause?

 

[Kvothe_the_kingkiller]

you mean the champions clause?

I mostly mean the "well, you were injured for 6 months last year, so we're adding 6 months to your contract" crap. Which, from everything I can gather, they just sorta started doing a few years ago and justify it as a "new interpretation" of the contract language. Language that hadn't actually changed.

Champions Clause is a bit more understandable.

 

[avenue94]

Which, from everything I can gather, they just sorta started doing a few years ago and justify it as a "new interpretation" of the contract language. Language that hadn't actually changed.

The UFC doesn't actually use that option (tolling) very often and they likely toned down usage of it in recent years. But that's moot since the threat alone is very significant for a fighter. That and just being able to leverage matchmaking to lean on fighters in negotiations.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Getting rid of exclusive contracts is great for fighters but sucks for fans imo.

 

[Istryker]

You think Teofimo Lopez knows that Triller check is gonna bounce ?

Stop shilling for billion dollars corporations

 

[Istryker]

Sanctioning bodies call for the purse bids when the 2 promotions can’t agree on terms. The UFC #1 contender is a UFC fighter. Always. Should I ask if you are being retarded on purpose?

..<{chips}>

 

[Doug Money]

Mid tier, low end of the card boxers get paid peanuts. U gotta be a recognizable champ to bring in the milis and even then it aint a gaurantee.
If Diana would stop being greedy and just raise the base pay for the prelim and mid level guys hed have a lot less complaining.

 

[avenue94]

I would be concerned with it creating a situation where MMA suffers from the same bullshit that hurts boxing.

mandatory title challenges that no one gives a fuck about getting in the way of fights fans want.


Especially if there was more than one sanctioned big body, then you have one body saying this guy needs a mandatory before someone else can get a fight and by the time the big fight happens it is 5 years too late.

and if it is one sanctioning body then you have all the same monopoly bullshit currently in the UFC.


I like the idea of a free market for fighters and I like the idea of rankings which aren’t affected by whether people will lose their press credentials if they don’t tow the company line...

I just hope it wouldn’t be trading one set of problems for a bigger more corrupt set of problems and I feel like there may be o way to know if that is the case until what’s done is done. Basically I don’t think there are going to be “easy answers”, as is often the case with complicated problems.

Yeah that would be the risk. Theoretically, after the act the commissions could create just 1 ranking body that has sensible criteria for ranking fighters. But it's easy for that to get fucked up, be it incompetence of greed.

 

[avenue94]

Mid tier, low end of the card boxers get paid peanuts. U gotta be a recognizable champ to bring in the milis and even then it aint a gaurantee

Their pay is comparable or better than their mma counterparts in the quartile. There are very limited segments where boxers earn less than mma fighters if you look at AC purses, and that's in the upper middle class area usually, not prelim card fighters. People get confused because boxing prelim fighters are the equivalent of mma regional fighters, not UFC prelim fighters. Allt his isn't too say that lower tier boxers and mma fighters shouldn't be paid more.