managers express concerns over bellator's sticky contracts

[Furious George]

Obvious you can get out of the contracts. See Lombard and Askren.

UFC has contracts that are just as restrictive.

The amount of hate Bellator gets is insane.

No idea how Lombard got out but you know full well they didn't want Funky and would have let him go for anything.

 

[jamesgalb]

I agree that multiple extensions can be unfavorable to a fighter looking beyond Bellator...

So as I said.. The solution is simple... If you don't want to fight for Bellator long-term, do not enter their tournament or contend for a title... If you go for a title, you are agreeing to be a long-term Bellator fighter.

Cant have it both ways, fighters/managers.

PLENTY of fighters have fought in Bellator, elected not to join a tournament, and then moved on to another promotion after... Joining a tournament is a CHOICE to become a LONG TERM Bellator fighter. NO ONE is forcing anyone to make the personal decision of joining a tournament.

ffs, people are just searching for reasons to hate. Anyone who thinks a fighter should be allowed to join a Bellator tournament with the intentions of eventually leaving should they win, is insane.

 

[aker2703]

I agree that multiple extensions can be unfavorable to a fighter looking beyond Bellator...

So as I said.. The solution is simple... If you don't want to fight for Bellator long-term, do not enter their tournament or contend for a title... If you go for a title, you are agreeing to be a long-term Bellator fighter.

Cant have it both ways, fighters/managers.

PLENTY of fighters have fought in Bellator, elected not to join a tournament, and then moved on to another promotion after... Joining a tournament is a CHOICE to become a LONG TERM Bellator fighter. NO ONE is forcing anyone to make the personal decision of joining a tournament.

ffs, people are just searching for reasons to hate. Anyone who thinks a fighter should be allowed to join a Bellator tournament with the intentions of eventually leaving should they win, is insane.

nobody is saying anything like that....but thanks for playing.

oh and if you read the article, the non tournament bouts can be as much as 1/5 the tournament money. for fighters who are not rich, it is hard to turn that down.

 

[jodka]

ffs, people are just searching for reasons to hate. Anyone who thinks a fighter should be allowed to join a Bellator tournament with the intentions of eventually leaving should they win, is insane.

They are locked into an extension even if they are RUNNER UP. That is beyond silly.

I agree with your overall point, that fighters should know what they are getting into and shouldn't sign for a Bellator tourney unless they plan on spending 5 years under contract. It just sucks that most fighters at that level don't have attorneys or good agents, so they probably have no idea how much of their life they are signing away.

But the hate is justified. People have been hating on UFC contracts and pay for years. People are just being consistent in their hate this time, which is good.

 

[jamesgalb]

nobody is saying anything like that....but thanks for playing.

oh and if you read the article, the non tournament bouts can be as much as 1/5 the tournament money. for fighters who are not rich, it is hard to turn that down.

Don't join the tournament, simple as that...

If a job has a 5 year no-compete contract in it, but the pay is really good and you just cant pass it up, are you allowed to throw up your arms in 3 years because the entire time your real intentions were to work for someone else? NO... Either don't take the job in the first place, or get comfortable with the decision you made, smart guy...

 

[DamnSevern]

ahhhh.. now the rumors of why Michael Page won't enter a tournament make sense.

 

[jamesgalb]

ahhhh.. now the rumors of why Michael Page won't enter a tournament make sense.

BINGO...

If Michael Page has no intentions of being a long-term Bellator fighter, then he is doing the right thing, as MANY have before him...

 

[aker2703]

Don't join the tournament, simple as that...

If a job has a 5 year no-compete contract in it, but the pay is really good and you just cant pass it up, are you allowed to throw up your arms in 3 years because the entire time your real intentions were to work for someone else? NO... Either don't take the job in the first place, or get comfortable with the decision you made, smart guy...

most fighters who signed this type of contract would have no knowledge of what the got them self into. and yes that is on them and their shitty manager.

but nice to know that you give zero fucks for these fighters.

 

[jamesgalb]

most fighters who signed this type of contract would have no knowledge of what the got them self into. and yes that is on them and their shitty manager.

but nice to know that you give zero fucks for these fighters.

lol @ me giving zero fucks about the fighters... because I don't think they should be allowed to sign a no-compete contract and then shit on the contract and their employer all because they didn't read it. No, I don't support their screwed up intentions of using their opportunity-giving employer as a stepping stone while shitting on the title/tournament/brand that helped build them up...

In support of fighters, I have been calling for a fighter union for YEARS, specifically for the benefit of the fighters when it comes to a) revenue sharing and b) unfair contracts....

Not even a union would look twice at this type of contract. It is standard. It's not even 'unfair', ffs... Bunch of forum fools and joke journalists trying to make a story from the rantings of some horrible managers.

 

[ShaolinSubzz]

A lot of managers are unrealistic about contracts fullstop. Nothing here seems crazy, its up to the manger to weigh up the pros and cons and explain them to their fighters. If a fighter wins the tourny of course the brand will require him to stick around for an additional contract period - it would be ridiculous for them to not write this into the contract

 

[aker2703]

lol @ me giving zero fucks about the fighters... because I don't think they should be allowed to sign a no-compete contract and then shit on the contract and their employer all because they didn't read it and had screwed up intentions of using their opportunity-giving employer as a stepping stone while shitting on the title/tournament that helped build them...

I have been calling for a fighter union for YEARS for the benefit of the fighters when it comes to a) revenue sharing and b) unfair contracts....

Not even a union would look twice at this type of contract. It is standard. It's not even 'unfair', ffs.

and this fucking proves you didn't read the article. it is these type of contracts that caused the "Muhammad Ali Act" in boxing.....So YES a union would have issues with these contracts.

keep on nuthugging though....

 

[Roger FedorAIR]

What's up with the assclown ITT calling everyone haters just for commenting on the article.

And do we even have a known instance of a fighter that has openly stated that whether or not their fights were placed in the tournament was actually a CHOICE for them? Not that I support his notion that no fighter should ever enter a Bellator tourney if they had aspirations of competing in the UFC, fucking EVER (which from the looks of these contracts, would be damn near impossible to do).

Personally, I don't know how anyone could read this article and not think these contracts are fucking shady as all hell.

With the cumulative extensions, championship clauses, and matching periods, that all seems like they have made it so they can effectively keep a fighter for his ENTIRE FUCKING CAREER, all just for signing one contract.

Am I a "hater" now?

 

[aker2703]

What's up with the assclown ITT calling everyone haters just for commenting on the article.

And do we even have a known instance of a fighter that has openly stated that whether or not their fights were placed in the tournament was actually a CHOICE for them? Not that I support his notion that no fighter should ever enter a Bellator tourney if they had aspirations of competing in the UFC, fucking EVER (which from the looks of these contracts, would be damn near impossible to do).

Personally, I don't know how anyone could read this article and not think these contracts are fucking shady as all hell.

With the cumulative extensions, championship clauses, and matching periods, that all seems like they have made it so they can effectively keep a fighter for his ENTIRE FUCKING CAREER, all just for signing one contract.

Am I a "hater" now?

agree, they are shady as fuck.

are you a hater now? as far as James reckons......YES you are.

 

[jamesgalb]

and this fucking proves you didn't read the article. it is these type of contracts that caused the "Muhammad Ali Act" in boxing.....So YES a union would have issues with these contracts.

keep on nuthugging though....

If you don't know how the Muhammad Ali Act isn't applicable to MMA, since promoter and title are not separate in MMA, then I cant help you...

Outside of the Muhammad Ali act working to separate promoter and title (something which fundamentally cant be done in MMA without removing both the UFC and Bellator), the act was mainly made to give the Fed and State the authority to step in if they see something is 'unfair'. Its an extremely vague acts designed almost solely for this purpose.

But in terms of the Muhammad Ali Act separating the promoter from the title and its accompanying contracts, the entire sport of MMA would have to be reworked and both the UFC and Bellator taken down... MMA is VERY different.

These contracts are standard, in both MMA and in any line of work across the entire world... If you think these contracts are 'shady', then you are simply uninformed if you aren't just looking for something to hate.

 

[skylolow]

Gotta say its quite an eye opener. I can see locking up champs on some level. But tournament winners and runner ups, that is pretty low. I'm assuming some of this is what gets Dana all worked up on Bellator contracts.

I get that no contract is going to be great, that is why there is a contract. But Union isn't really the answer here either. Managers and lawyers need to be very educational to the fighters and fighters themselves need to start understanding some self worth. At some point someone will just have to challenge the contract in court to ever really get it changed.

 

[skylolow]

If you don't know how the Muhammad Ali Act isn't applicable to MMA, since promoter and title are not separate in MMA, then I cant help you...

Outside of the Muhammad Ali act working to separate promoter and title (something which fundamentally cant be done in MMA without removing both the UFC and Bellator), the act was mainly made to give the Fed and State the authority to step in if they see something is 'unfair'. Its an extremely vague acts designed almost solely for this purpose.

But in terms of the Muhammad Ali Act separating the promoter from the title and its accompanying contracts, the entire sport of MMA would have to be reworked and both the UFC and Bellator taken down... MMA is VERY different.

These contracts are standard, in both MMA and in any line of work across the entire world... If you think these contracts are 'shady', then you are simply uninformed if you aren't just looking for something to hate.

I don't think he is saying its applicable to MMA.....He is saying screwy contracts like this is what caused the Ali Act in boxing.

 

[jiujitsuforever]

shady contracts. i think tony johnson signed a contract but couldnt fight for like 2 years due to it being "sticky"

 

[aker2703]

If you don't know how the Muhammad Ali Act isn't applicable to MMA, since promoter and title are not separate in MMA, then I cant help you...

Outside of the Muhammad Ali act working to separate promoter and title (something which fundamentally cant be done in MMA without removing both the UFC and Bellator), the act was mainly made to give the Fed and State the authority to step in if they see something is 'unfair'. Its an extremely vague acts designed almost solely for this purpose.

But in terms of the Muhammad Ali Act separating the promoter from the title and its accompanying contracts, the entire sport of MMA would have to be reworked and both the UFC and Bellator taken down... MMA is VERY different.

These contracts are standard, in both MMA and in any line of work across the entire world... If you think these contracts are 'shady', then you are simply uninformed if you aren't just looking for something to hate.

that was the point of the article, once again it showed you didn't read it. these contracts are not standard as you claim, but the worst in mma.

do you just skim over this quote

The opinion amongst all the managers I spoke to is that the current Bellator contracts represent, from a fighter's perspective, the least favorable contracts of any promotion. As one manager said, "They are the worst contracts in MMA. By far the very fucking worst."

or are you just going to pretend this quote isn't real?

 

[aker2703]

I don't think he is saying its applicable to MMA.....He is saying screwy contracts like this is what caused the Ali Act in boxing.

yes, but it doesn't matter as he is not listening to anything he decides is Attacking Bellator.

dude is kidding himself.

 

[Pride4life]

Another UFC paid poster pointing out the worst of Bellator..
How about cutting the wrong fighters, allowing Steroids, giving undeserved title shots & rant bad any organization that's doing good!!