Reebok deal: what about Nike/Adidas sponsored fighters?

Greedy fuckers. UFC is nothing without fighters but treats them like It`s the other way around. I hope They push It too far and finally fighters will do something about It, start an union or something. Thing is, some of the bigger names would have to be on board and They have nothing to protest about, since They`re getting paid a lot better than others. But I hope They`ll do something for the sake of the sport.

Retarded arguments like: in NBA they dress the same etc.- but Its the uniqueness of fighters that makes this sport more interesting. Would love to see Lorenzo and Dana in Reebok`s jumpsuits at every event.

I really enjoyed UFC for the few years after Pride went out, but they were just feeding off what Pride built during their prime. It`s a shame They are the face of MMA cause They are nothing but money hungry whores and It cant end well for the sport. Really hope Bellator will rise to true competition level and with Cocker on board They have a real shot at accomplishing It.
 
Based God said:
That's not 100% true, only some leagues allow whatever shoes the player wants. The NFL for example is not one of them. They can wear whatever shoe, glove, spandex etc. as long as the logos are covered up.

I'll use RGIII for an example again mainly because he's been a good subject on the matter. Notice in these following game pictures all logos are taped over on his cleats.

nfl_week_one_01.jpg


Robert+Griffin+III.jpg


There's been times he didn't cover logos on his cleats at practices and he was fined by the NFL.
Click to expand...

Im sure both companies are proud of their poster child QB who backs up Colt McCoy now....
 
Based God said:
That's not 100% true, only some leagues allow whatever shoes the player wants. The NFL for example is not one of them. They can wear whatever shoe, glove, spandex etc. as long as the logos are covered up.

I'll use RGIII for an example again mainly because he's been a good subject on the matter. Notice in these following game pictures all logos are taped over on his cleats.

nfl_week_one_01.jpg


Robert+Griffin+III.jpg


There's been times he didn't cover logos on his cleats at practices and he was fined by the NFL.
Click to expand...

That seems like an individual issue he is having with his sponsorship
 
KantoTerror said:
Keep buying the monopoly...mulitple sponsors are better for fighters than 1 that pays the same amount...One big sponsor can drop you like a cheap can of soup and you`re done.
Click to expand...

Except that here Reebok can't drop anyone. They have to sponsor you whether they like you or not. They have to give you your cut of merchandise sales, regardless of your personality or lack thereof.

It's almost as if you hate it because it's different, not because you have a sound argument against it.
 
Mexinaco said:
You can't say this because you don't know how much they'll get pay.
Click to expand...

Of course I can say it. 1 big sponsor is better than 10 small ones.

I don't know that Reebok is definitely better than the random logo model being used right now...but I'm positive you don't know what the random logo model pays out either.

So, if I had to gamble on Reebok vs. 100 local small businesses, I'd risk the Reebok gamble. If you'd rather believe that mostly unknown companies are paying more in sponsors than Reebok, you can take that gamble.
 
panamaican said:
Of course I can say it. 1 big sponsor is better than 10 small ones.

I don't know that Reebok is definitely better than the random logo model being used right now...but I'm positive you don't know what the random logo model pays out either.

So, if I had to gamble on Reebok vs. 100 local small businesses, I'd risk the Reebok gamble. If you'd rather believe that mostly unknown companies are paying more in sponsors than Reebok, you can take that gamble.
Click to expand...
What you don't get is that just because they're are big and have a lot of money it doesn't mean that they're are willing to invest more than other smaller companies in certain fighters.

And yes, it is possible that random unknown companies pay more money to certain fighters than Reebok given the fact that fighters can't negotiate the pay they will get from this deal.
 
Reebok and Adidas is same corporation btw.
 
Mexinaco said:
What you don't get is that just because they're are big and have a lot of money it doesn't mean that they're are willing to invest more than other smaller companies in certain fighters.

And yes, it is possible that random unknown companies pay more money to certain fighters than Reebok given the fact that fighters can't negotiate the pay they will get from this deal.
Click to expand...

So the underlying economic health of the sponsor is irrelevant. Got it. Just because the big company has more money doesn't mean they're willing to invest more. But it does mean they can invest more with fewer restrictions.

So, you think that random unknown companies are willing to invest in every new fighter on the UFC scene? That it's better for an unknown guy to spend his time chasing sponsor money with no negotiating leverage on his side?

You think that your entry level fighter was making top dollar in sponsor money while also being a complete unknown and having his fight only visible on Fight Pass? That guy is better with companies that can't afford the risk than with Reebok.

Like I said, you can take that gamble. I'll gamble with a 6 year guaranteed contract over a maybe they will/maybe they won't model for the fighters.
 
panamaican said:
So the underlying economic health of the sponsor is irrelevant. Got it. Just because the big company has more money doesn't mean they're willing to invest more. But it does mean they can invest more with fewer restrictions.

So, you think that random unknown companies are willing to invest in every new fighter on the UFC scene? That it's better for an unknown guy to spend his time chasing sponsor money with no negotiating leverage on his side?

You think that your entry level fighter was making top dollar in sponsor money while also being a complete unknown and having his fight only visible on Fight Pass? That guy is better with companies that can't afford the risk than with Reebok.

Like I said, you can take that gamble. I'll gamble with a 6 year guaranteed contract over a maybe they will/maybe they won't model for the fighters.
Click to expand...
Yes it matters, but just because one company is not part of an international conglomerate it doesn’t mean it’s not economically healthy. And again just because a company has fewer restrictions to invest it doesn’t mean they will do it, and my point still stands, fighters have 0 right to negotiate the pay they’ll get from this deal, and that’s a big issue.

Finally, while I do think that the unknown fighters will benefit from this is not going to be the same for every fighter on the UFC.
 
Last edited:
GracieMMABarra said:
Adidas owns Reebok (Though I think they're trying to sell it off)

And I'm pretty sure Nike wasn't going to remain in MMA anyways.
Click to expand...

Lol. Finally.

I was wondering how many page these retards were going to continue crying.
 
trblesome1 said:
Im sure both companies are proud of their poster child QB who backs up Colt McCoy now....
Click to expand...

Corporations are psychopathic entities so I don't see how one could attribute any sort of emotions to them, but I'm sure any decent human has sympathy for a respectable guy who works hard his whole life to be successful and is brought down by injuries in his physical prime.
 
insomnico said:
If they have to leave the UFC to continue with their own deals, then the answer is "no".
Also, it is not interesting for brands like NIke and adidas to keep sponsoring the top fighters if on fight week they can't wear their gear, since that's the time when they get the most amount of publicity. Plus, Nike and adidas would never allow their own athletes to wear Reebok shorts to the cage. And on the other hand, Reebok would probably not allow UFC fighters to wear brand less gear during fights.

It's a lose-lose for fighters with long-term clothing contracts.
Click to expand...

I think Adidas owns Reebok. And Nike hasn't been allowed in the Octagon for a while now.

I don't think it's a matter of Reebok not allowing fighters to where other logos, it's a matter of the UFC not allowing it, just like the NFL (not Bose) fined Kaepernick for wearing Beats headphones. Athletes in other sports are able to keep other sponsors (and yes, those sponsors "allow" the athletes to wear other logos on their uniforms, because they have to) for deals that don't involve playing time. However, obviously players in the NFL, MLB, NBA have a lot more exposure off the field than UFC fighters have outside of the Octagon, in terms of commercials, magazines, etc. It'll be interesting to see if any of those sponsors stick around. It will also be interesting to see how this plays out in terms of overall compensation to the fighters.
 
Another nail in UFC coffin. Big name guys will most probably just go to bellator instead losing millions in UFC.
 
Raider24 said:
You don't know this for sure because the tiered fighter pay out along with keeping their sponsors outside of fight week could yield more income than just having a single sponsorship. It all depends. This is a good thing for any of the lower tier fighters though since they won't have to scramble for sponsors and know they will be getting paid by Reebok regardless.
Click to expand...

Why ppl keep repeating this bs?

The reason why lower tier guys are not getting deals is cause of the imposed fee on sponsors by UFC.

Now if UFC were that greedy to impose such a fee n make a lot of fighters lose tens of thousands $, what makes you think they will share the reebok revenue?

Cause liar Dana said so?

Get outta here
 
grimballer said:
Why ppl keep repeating this bs?

The reason why lower tier guys are not getting deals is cause of the imposed fee on sponsors by UFC.

Now if UFC were that greedy to impose such a fee n make a lot of fighters lose tens of thousands $, what makes you think they will share the reebok revenue?

Cause liar Dana said so?

Get outta here
Click to expand...

Are people this stupid? In theory, the 100K fee increased the value of the sponsorship by weeding out all of the trash and establishing a minimum standard.

In the current deal, the UFC is publicly stating that all of the revenue, with the possible exception of expenses, goes to the fighter. You simply cannot lie about things like that. If you do you get sued. Plus, Reebok enforce it. Do you people understand nothing of PR?
 
Maybe in the future will be a team fighting another team, so the uniforms will work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,239,147
Messages
55,607,578
Members
174,851
Latest member
kwaszak

Share this page

Back
Top