Explaining the Ngannou & UFC contract situation, and Dana's white approach

[Shaddows]

Going through some threads, there seems to be some confusion about this.

Ngannou is ALREADY out of contract. He fought his last fight on contract, against Gane. The UFC have not been willing to offer Ngannou the kind of money that he wants in order for him to stay, and hence Ngannou has not re-signed with the UFC.

However, there is a 'championship' clause that automatically extends the contract for 1 year (or for 3 fights - whichever comes first). This gives the UFC time to renegotiate with their champion, without having their champion rush off to fight for someone else right away.



The extension clause expires in 1 year. Ngannou's management have executed their chess move brilliantly. Knowing that Dana would use the 1 year to bury Ngannou's name, like he does with everyone else - especially with the "Ngannou doesn't want to fight" move that Dana has used on GSP, Jones, and others... during their negotiations.

This way, Ngannou comes off as courageous - for fighting injured against Gane... and now has to get surgery.
Being out for 9 months means by the time he is healed, the extension clause is expired. Dana can't power play against his injured champ. So, Dana went for the management instead "We're going to get the deal done, we're going to meet and get it done". (Dana made this public comment)

Since Dana cannot attack Ngannou directly, Dana will attack Ngannou's management and make it seem like they are being greedy, and being unreasonable... and that he has already done everything he can to make this deal happen- Dana will probably say something like "you won't believe the amount of money we offered him. it's unheard of"... all to make it SEEM like Ngannou simply doesn't want to compromise.

How do we know this? Because Dana has consistently done the same thing for over a decade to his fighters. They ether roll over, or he buries them in front of the media.

Most recently, being the case of Islam where Islam volunteered to step up on short notice to fight RDA.
Islam had a stipulation for the fight that Dana didn't agree to - perhaps more money, for the risk he's taking to save a card on short notice?? That's not turning down a fight, that's having a condition for the fight. Dana is the one who turned it down. But nevertheless, fans are turning on Islam, who has also lost his title shot in the process.

This simply has always been the unfortunate case for fighters who don't give in to Dana White's authority.

I do agree with your view on Francis.
But I disagree with your example on Islam.
First of all, I don't think any Islam fan turned on him.
Islam fans are (IMHO very) blind and will never turn on him. And the ones who are not his rabid/vocal fans already viewed his raise as being rushed, so they are "vindicated" he is fighting a top opponent rather than getting an undeserving title shot.

And I find is a little dishonest to claim "the stipulation" is on Dana for turning it down. We don't know what is the stipulation, so we have no idea how illogical this could be.
For example: What pops into my mind would be that if he loses, he'd still gets a title shot... which I would disagree with as well.
If RDA could beat Islam, why would Islam be next on like for a title shot?
His ONLY victory over a top 10 ranked opponent was a last minute replacement.
A last minute fight loss to RDA should take that away IMHO.

So yeah, I am not blaming Islam, but I am not blaming Dana without knowing what was asked first, and I can see how a "small stipulation" can break the agreement..
But IMHO Islam made the mistake of making his intention to pick the RDA fight public. Because if you agree, then you agree. No adding further stipulations after agreeing (kind of how he did not agree to RDA's further stipulation of fighting at a lower weight after agreeing to fight at 170).

But not here nor there, I just don't think this example was the same thing as contract negotiations with Francis.

 

[kflo]

Conquests of civilization are really lost on some people

I’ve worked for global companies and have never known what coworkers made, except when I was controlling budgets (and then only for my team, not peers or above).

 

[amok attitude]

I really struggle to see how it will be worthwhile for anyone to guarantee a man who has never had a single boxing fight 50mill dollars. It's not happening.

Let me show you why wiht a REAL example -- the Tyson Fury vs Dillian Whyte HW boxing fight in April (5weeks away).
Apparently the numbers are :
Tyson Fury gets US$29.5million and Dillian Whyte US$7.4million, and the winner gets around an extra 4million bonus. this deal is reported to be highest successful purse bid in boxing history.
- Dillian Whyte is the WBC interim HW title holder.
- Multiple regional HW title holder.
- Pro Boxing record of 28 - 2. (19 KOs).
- Pro Boxing since 2011 (11years now).
- He fought Anthoy Joshua in 2015 (over 6 yrs ago). (one of his only 2 losses).
- in October he was ranked the 5th Best active HW boxer by the respected 'The Ring' magazine.

so....this guy is 28-2 and is current Interim WBC Champ, 11yrs a Pro, regarded as being the 5th best in the world, and he is getting "only" US$7.4million to fight Fury.

HOW on God's green Earth is any promoter with a brain going to give Mr. Francis 'Never Boxed pro' 0-0 Ngannou a sum of 50million dollars?!?! Not going to happen. He'd be damn lucky to get 5 or 6 million given the fact he has no boxing background at all, and anyone outside of MMA probably hasn't even heard of him.

Francis is the UFC champ and a beast.
He can be promoted right and earn more than White.
Not 50 millions though, you are right on this imo.

 

[amok attitude]

I'm not a legal expert nor an American, but the championship clause thing sounds shady as fuck, like explicitly unconstitutional level shady.

And aren't there laws to prevent the undisclosed pay?

One of the core principle of roman law is to prohibit perpetual contracts.
A champion clause without time limit could make the contract perpetual.
I m obviously not american or not even a specialist of common law systems but i m thinking it was something along those lines which makes them modify their contracts.

 

[The J0ker]

I thought there was a new rule that contracts could be cancelled 5 years after signing regardless of whether you're a champ or not?

Yes, this is it. The champions clause doesn’t just extend one year, it can extend again once the year has passed. In old contracts this could go on perpetually, but in newer contracts there is a 5 year termination date that overrides all other clauses.

 

[don't ask]

I'm not a legal expert nor an American, but the championship clause thing sounds shady as fuck, like explicitly unconstitutional level shady.

And aren't there laws to prevent the undisclosed pay?

Laws only work for the rich in America.

 

[NikLuk]

Going through some threads, there seems to be some confusion about this.

Ngannou is ALREADY out of contract. He fought his last fight on contract, against Gane. The UFC have not been willing to offer Ngannou the kind of money that he wants in order for him to stay, and hence Ngannou has not re-signed with the UFC.

However, there is a 'championship' clause that automatically extends the contract for 1 year (or for 3 fights - whichever comes first). This gives the UFC time to renegotiate with their champion, without having their champion rush off to fight for someone else right away.



The extension clause expires in 1 year. Ngannou's management have executed their chess move brilliantly. Knowing that Dana would use the 1 year to bury Ngannou's name, like he does with everyone else - especially with the "Ngannou doesn't want to fight" move that Dana has used on GSP, Jones, and others... during their negotiations.

This way, Ngannou comes off as courageous - for fighting injured against Gane... and now has to get surgery.
Being out for 9 months means by the time he is healed, the extension clause is expired. Dana can't power play against his injured champ. So, Dana went for the management instead "We're going to get the deal done, we're going to meet and get it done". (Dana made this public comment)

Since Dana cannot attack Ngannou directly, Dana will attack Ngannou's management and make it seem like they are being greedy, and being unreasonable... and that he has already done everything he can to make this deal happen- Dana will probably say something like "you won't believe the amount of money we offered him. it's unheard of"... all to make it SEEM like Ngannou simply doesn't want to compromise.

How do we know this? Because Dana has consistently done the same thing for over a decade to his fighters. They ether roll over, or he buries them in front of the media.

Most recently, being the case of Islam where Islam volunteered to step up on short notice to fight RDA.
Islam had a stipulation for the fight that Dana didn't agree to - perhaps more money, for the risk he's taking to save a card on short notice?? That's not turning down a fight, that's having a condition for the fight. Dana is the one who turned it down. But nevertheless, fans are turning on Islam, who has also lost his title shot in the process.

This simply has always been the unfortunate case for fighters who don't give in to Dana White's authority.

What happens after the one year if a fighter is still a champion but has not fought? Does the contract extend yet another year / 3 fights?

 

[NikLuk]

Wow that is fucked up

Only governmental pay should be open to the public, and only b/c it’s financed through taxes.

 

[El Panteron]

Only governmental pay should be open to the public, and only b/c it’s financed through taxes.

Not public, coworkers.

 

[NikLuk]

Not public, coworkers.

It was a principle. Only tax money should have to be disclosed since taxes are taken from most ppl.

Coworkers should be able to speak about it if they want to. But an employer shouldn’t be forced to disclose such information if it is a private company.

 

[El Panteron]

It was a principle. Only tax money should have to be disclosed since taxes are taken from most ppl.

Coworkers should be able to speak about it if they want to. But an employer shouldn’t be forced to disclose such information if it is a private company.

Surely you understand why coworkers need to be aware of pay structure and bonuses.

People that get an unfair advantage obviously have a huge incentive not to discuss it.

 

[NikLuk]

Surely you understand why coworkers need to be aware of pay structure and bonuses.

People that get an unfair advantage obviously have a huge incentive not to discuss it.

Ppl should be aware of their individual pay structure and potential bonuses. But I t’s not a collective thing. You shouldn’t automatically be payed more just because a coworker of yours is better payed. There might be good reasons for him being payed moe. Some ppl are better at their work than others. They should be payed more for that reason.

I don’t think you understand the concept of private property and why it is paramount to individual rights - and why individual rights are paramount to human prosperity.

 

[Robbocop]

Bit of a crazy situation and it feels like it devalues the whole sport of MMA, but at the same time I think Ngannou is a pretty unique character, who has migrated nationalities twice, from Cameroon to France, then from France to the USA, and it must be commented that there is a certain 'ladder climbing' element to moving upwards between those countries, and I am forced to wonder if Ngannou is bargaining too hard vs the UFC. You didn't get these same contractual problems with Stipe or Cormier or other HW champs in recent memory.

As to whether Ngannou is a bigger draw than Dillan Whyte, I reckon he is.

 

[TheWave111]

The UFC will never allow a boxing match.
Why should Dana White allow that.
If he gets his boxing money he will never fight again. He will ask for more money in the UFC or won't fight at all.
The UFC needs him to fight.
This is the dilemma of the UFC. They want big stars at a low price. Boxing will increase his popularity but it will increase also his salary.

Ngannou should leave the UFC. The clause of extending one year as a champion should be made illegal.
After a contract is ended there can't be ground for another contract.
The contract has an ending and then re activates. It's absurd and just human traffic and slavery.
If Ngannou is smart he leaves the UFC and box one fight.
After that he can negotiate with many mma organisations if he still wants to fight.

 

[El Panteron]

I don’t think you understand the concept of private property and why it is paramount to individual rights - and why individual rights are paramount to human prosperity.

Uh????
The fuck is this

 

[NikLuk]

Uh????
The fuck is this

You don’t seem to understand that a business is owned by someone. That it is their property. You want to force them to run it like you want it to be ran (e.g. to disclose your coworkers pay), not how they want to run it (e.g. not wanting to disclose anyone’s pay).

 

[El Panteron]

You don’t seem to understand that a business is owned by someone. That it is their property. You want to force them to run it like you want it to be ran (e.g. to disclose your coworkers pay), not how they want to run it (e.g. not wanting to disclose anyone’s pay).

Yeah no
Every rule isn't an infringement of capitalistic freedom, sometimes we just need them there so people don't get fucked over.
And again, what you preach is (justifiably) illegal in my country. Does it mean I live under communism?

 

[NikLuk]

Yeah no
Every rule isn't an infringement of capitalistic freedom, sometimes we just need them there so people don't get fucked over.
And again, what you preach is (justifiably) illegal in my country. Does it mean I live under communism?

Those are property rights. Individual rights.
No. It means that you live in a country that doesn’t respect individual rights

 

[El Panteron]

Those are property rights. Individual rights.
No. It means that you live in a country that doesn’t respect individual rights

Ahahaha sure thing buddy
Make it 3 countries because I move and work around Italy, Netherlands and Finland, laws are the same.
Apparently the US is the ONE getting it right, hats off

 

[NikLuk]

Ahahaha sure thing buddy

Like I said:

I don’t think you understand the concept of private property and why it is paramount to individual rights - and why individual rights are paramount to human prosperity.