How I would handle Okami and Fitch if I was Dana

I would give them the "Werdum" treatment.

Dana's mistake is not cutting them, that is a business decision. It's how he did it.

He should handle guys like he handled Werdum initially. After Werdum got KTFO by JDS, the UFC offered Werdum a substantial paycut to stay with the UFC. Werdum refused so they parted ways.

They should have done that with Fitch and Okami. Offer them new contracts at 50% paycut. If they say yes, cool. If they say no, then you part ways because you couldn't agree on financial terms. It's way cleaner than simply cutting them, because in a way it was partially their choice. You can say you wanted to keep them, but you couldn't come to a financial agreement. That happens all the time in all sports.

I don't see why the UFC seems to keep an all or nothing approach lately. At least offer less money to keep them, it can't hurt.

Your way is pretty smooth, but I'm not certain the UFC was trying to avoid controversy.

I think White wanted to make a point with these guys, just like I think he tried to make a point by keeping Garcia around so ridiculously long. They are trying to create an incentive to fight aggressively and with the finish in mind even at the cost of losing.
 
I would give them the "Werdum" treatment.

Dana's mistake is not cutting them, that is a business decision. It's how he did it.

He should handle guys like he handled Werdum initially. After Werdum got KTFO by JDS, the UFC offered Werdum a substantial paycut to stay with the UFC. Werdum refused so they parted ways.

They should have done that with Fitch and Okami. Offer them new contracts at 50% paycut. If they say yes, cool. If they say no, then you part ways because you couldn't agree on financial terms. It's way cleaner than simply cutting them, because in a way it was partially their choice. You can say you wanted to keep them, but you couldn't come to a financial agreement. That happens all the time in all sports.

I don't see why the UFC seems to keep an all or nothing approach lately. At least offer less money to keep them, it can't hurt.

While this would limit the backlash of those complaining about "unfair" cuts, there are a couple of problems with the approach you are suggesting:

1. If the fighter does NOT accept the new contract, in a way the UFC "loses face" by having a ranked fighter "choose" to leave the UFC for another organization. This gives a boost to whatever promotion the would-be cut fighter ends up in.

2. If the fighter DOES accept the pay-cut the strategy backfires. The reason Fitch and Okami are cut is because they are bad for business. Keeping them on the roster is costing the UFC money. Even if the UFC paid them nothing to fight, the UFC wouldn't want to keep them on the roster, due to the fact that these fighters' reputations lead to lower ratings, ticket sales, and PPV buys for being on a card. When they win, they also impair the ability of other stars to rise.
 
The answer to all of the UFC's problems is Tag Team fights.

Think of how entertaining it would be if a fighter getting lnp'd could tag his partner in to lay the boots to the boring wrestler. Now that would be entertaining!
 
Dana just became creative director of the "fights".

So true... He could get involved with movies or somehting and let the UFC alone
 
I'm convinced they're preparing for another season of TUF "Comeback Edition". Fire talented guys, then give them a chance to rise from the ashes.
 
Yeh, probably would have been smarter to go for a paycut and if refused "part ways." Would have looked more reasonable and caused less butthurt.
 
I'm convinced they're preparing for another season of TUF "Comeback Edition". Fire talented guys, then give them a chance to rise from the ashes.

Interesting idea. I would watch the hell out of that.
 
they could keep both if they made changes to the match making and the headlining bouts.
 
I dont mind that.....I dont like top talent being cut while other lesser fighters stay
 
Back
Top