- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,001
- Reaction score
- 672
You keep saying the same thing over and over and it's still incorrect. You're making an assumption because you think it's a logical one to make, but it's literally not true that Ngannou being offered a contract is proof that Jones signed. It's also false that it would result in legal issues, and it's false that the law would be different for a multi fight deal vs a single fight deal.who says Jones was signed to fight Ngannou?
He was likely signed to fight for the HW title. And his opponent was dependent on what Ngannou decided to do. Various media excerpts point in this direction.
So, do you think if Ngannou was lured to sign a 3 fight deal and stay with the organization based on false pretenses, that it would just be perfectly fine?
If this happened and Ngannou lost the Jones fight as a result of the UFC being dishonest during negotiations, it would be a big deal.
I was responding to your own legal post. That a contract is not valid until two parties agree.
So, hypothetically, if Ngannou had signed a 3 fight deal, it was later learned that Jones hadn't signed yet and he subsequently decided to stay retired, the fight doesn't happen.
This would effectively make Ngannou's 3 fight contract null and void and if the UFC argued otherwise, Ngannou would have the grounds to pursue legal action in order to be released.
What you're saying would be accurate if it were just a one fight deal, those fall through all the time as you mentioned.
But in this case, the whole basis behind getting Ngannou to resign would be the 8 million dollar Jones fight. It was their biggest bargaining chip to get him to stay with the organization.
It would mean the contract was signed under false pretenses
Obviously this is all just conjecture though because the UFC wouldn't be dumb enough to do any of this.
You should be a little more humble about what you do, and don't know. This obviously isn't your wheelhouse.
