UFC Thread

#2,252
#2,252
BadJerry20 said:
I love documentaries, and that was a really good one. I knew some of their history, but not all of it. A lot of my friends point to that fight as the fight that got their interest.

For me I think the coolest thing is a sport basically being born in our life time, and us getting to watch it grow.
Click to expand...

True that. I loved the point about it being the international sport with the greatest potential. Even small countries who would never have a shot at a World Cup could potentially produce a champion fighter to get behind.

This is the case with boxing, but MMA is more interesting, IMO, and there is a lot wrong with boxing...it's not as accessible (everything worth watching is pay-per-view) and with so many weight classes and governing bodies it's totally diluted it. I love that the UFC bought out Pride and WEC.
 
#2,253
#2,253
n_huffhines said:
True that. I loved the point about it being the international sport with the greatest potential. Even small countries who would never have a shot at a World Cup could potentially produce a champion fighter to get behind.

This is the case with boxing, but MMA is more interesting, IMO, and there is a lot wrong with boxing...it's not as accessible (everything worth watching is pay-per-view) and with so many weight classes and governing bodies it's totally diluted it. I love that the UFC bought out Pride and WEC.
Click to expand...

I was a huge boxing fan growing up, but it's so screwed up now that it may never be fixed. The good thing about MMA is UFC is top dog and everyone knows it, everything else is basically a feeder promotion for UFC. So they won't have some of boxings problems.

2 things that could potential hurt it. IMO 1) Fighters are underpaid, especially the guys at the bottom. I make more money a year than some of those guys, 14,000-20,000 a fight at 3 fights a year is ridiculous. Potential for "agents" to get together and start causing problems. 2) Too many events. I love that we get a lot of fights now, but it's hurting overall quality of ppvs. I kind of miss once every couple of months getting a monster card. Now they throw a couple big names on a card, and not a lot else. I could see fans tiring of paying for one fight they are interested in with a bunch of filler, especially when it's sometimes twice a month.
 
#2,255
#2,255
n_huffhines said:
I agree that they should do more on Fox and less on PPV.

What makes you say the fighters are underpaid?
Click to expand...

They should reserve ppv for stacked cards. Make TV mostly lesser names with big ones randomly sprinkled in. IMO

Cause if you're not top 5-7 in your weight class, you don't get paid a lot. 14,000-20,000 a fight, 3 times a year. 50-60k isn't much considering what UFC makes and the time and sacrifice the guys make. Most of them rely on sponsors and bonuses to make it.
 
#2,256
#2,256
$50-60K is good money, and for a lot of these guys it's more than they can make anywhere else. They're also doing something they love. They get mediocre pay because they are marginal talents and there are guys just as good as them willing to step up and take their spot.

If they are underpaid they should walk, IMO. The fact that they don't walk tells me that they aren't underpaid.
 
#2,258
#2,258
n_huffhines said:
$50-60K is good money, and for a lot of these guys it's more than they can make anywhere else. They're also doing something they love. They get mediocre pay because they are marginal talents and there are guys just as good as them willing to step up and take their spot.

If they are underpaid they should walk, IMO. The fact that they don't walk tells me that they aren't underpaid.
Click to expand...

Your first paragraph explains why they don't walk. 50-60k is chump change compared to what the UFC makes, especially when compared to other sports or entertainment. I sit on my azz and make more than the lower level guys, and their job is 1,000 times tougher than mine. People look at 3 fights for 60k, but these guys work year round, some of them have part time or full time jobs just to make it. Then Factor in training, travel to other places to train, etc. Plus most of these guys are going to be so busted up when they get done, what do they do then?
 
#2,259
#2,259
Btw if they were marginal talents they wouldn't be in the UFC, and if there were guys just as good waiting to take their spot they would be in the UFC not in some other sh!t organization.
 
#2,260
#2,260
Think of it this the UFC had 2.2 million ppv buys for 168 at 55 a pop or 121 million dollars, not counting ticket sales. Travis Browne made base 28k, with a 28 win bonus. The champ Weidman base 200k with a 200k win bonus, for the champ...
 
Last edited:
#2,261
#2,261
It's supply and demand. How hard your job is has little to do with how much you are paid. Why should it be different in MMA?

So do you think the 25th best heavyweight in the UFC is clearly the 25th best fighter in the world and cannot be replaced?

IMO, it takes very specific circumstances for someone to justifiably claim they are underpaid (an extreme example would be taking advantage of a mentally handicapped worker). It's your choice to work. It's a victim's mentality that leads people to think they are underpaid. You choose your own destiny.
 
#2,262
#2,262
If I respond the way I want this thread will spiral to a place that belongs in the politics forum.

My original point is one day fighters may unite to try and drive their pay up which could pose a problem.

Edited to not ruin the thread
 
Last edited:
#2,263
#2,263
Very few fighters have to work a second job. I'd say they are getting a fair shake on their pay.

I also think the fight night bonuses help to produce entertaining fights. With an increased base salary, some fighters will be less inclined to take chances and go for finishes in fights.

At the end of the day, all these guys are making a comfortable living doing something they obviously love to do. We should all be so lucky.

JMHO
 
#2,264
#2,264
n_huffhines said:
$50-60K is good money, and for a lot of these guys it's more than they can make anywhere else. They're also doing something they love. They get mediocre pay because they are marginal talents and there are guys just as good as them willing to step up and take their spot.

If they are underpaid they should walk, IMO. The fact that they don't walk tells me that they aren't underpaid.
Click to expand...

You also got to remember that they have to pay to bring in sparring partners, manager fees, gym fees, and often pay their coaches a percentage of their winnings. I don't think they're underpaid but they have a lot of expenses to pay after every fight. Also, their is the cost of being licensed by the athletic commission, and since they get their pay in one lump some theyre probably taxed heavily by the government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,265
#2,265
shelbyvillevol said:
Very few fighters have to work a second job. I'd say they are getting a fair shake on their pay.

I also think the fight night bonuses help to produce entertaining fights. With an increased base salary, some fighters will be less inclined to take chances and go for finishes in fights.

At the end of the day, all these guys are making a comfortable living doing something they obviously love to do. We should all be so lucky.

JMHO
Click to expand...

I've heard a lot of mid to lower level fighters say they have real jobs. Of course the top guys don't, which probably helps them stay on the top to a degree.

I do agree, the potential for bonuses definitely make guys fight harder. My original point is, if the fighters decide the are underpaid it could potentially cause problems. If people don't share my underpaid thoughts that's cool. But I'm sure we can all agree if they decide they are it could become a problem.
 
Last edited:
#2,266
#2,266
It's a young sport. For the first 50 years of the NFL it was attractive to find other work. I remember reading the #1 pick in the draft one year in the 1930s chose to be a doctor and never played, LOL. As the sport grows the talent at the bottom will improve as the purses get bigger. Natural progression.
 
#2,267
#2,267
I get what you are saying and agree to an extent. But comparing UFCs early years to any other sport isn't fair. The UFC grew faster and continues to grow faster than any other sport. You do confuse me though cause you praise Dana for making money fights and being a brilliant business man, then say fighters are paid fairly and anyone thinking they are underpaid are playing the victim. Btw there are plenty of jobs underpaid that deserve more money, and people in situations that get stuck there because of a lack of opportunities to improve themselves. And I say this as a guy that will openly say I'm overpaid for what I do, and got lucky.
 
#2,268
#2,268
n_huffhines said:
It's a young sport. For the first 50 years of the NFL it was attractive to find other work. I remember reading the #1 pick in the draft one year in the 1930s chose to be a doctor and never played, LOL. As the sport grows the talent at the bottom will improve as the purses get bigger. Natural progression.
Click to expand...

Its not just the bottom, Browne and Glover got 28 and 24 base for their last fights. Both are top 5 guys in their class.
 
#2,269
#2,269
That's not what I meant to say. Saying someone else is underpaid probably means you are compassionate. Saying you yourself are underpaid is the sign of a victim (which you didn't do).

What does any of this have to do with Dana being a smart businessman?

I just don't get what it means when someone says certain jobs deserve more money. I can understand feeling like you are underpaid in the short run, but if you feel underpaid in the long run then that is on you. If someone deserves more money, why don't leave their job and make more? It's because money isn't everything and they like the stability they get, the people they work with, stress free environments, good benefits, interesting work, etc. etc.

When you go to college with people who want to be teachers all you ever hear about is how great the teaching profession is and that you get to touch lives, and be rewarded and recognized, etc. Then you actually start working and the next 30 years are spent complaining about how you deserve more pay. Who on earth would work a job for 30 years where deep down subconsciously they felt like they were getting a raw deal? Are these people completely irrational? No. They actually like their jobs. Otherwise they would leave. They get pay in kind, they get awesome holidays, they get to slack off with students, they get to be social, they have authority, they work where their kids go to school, they get off work around the same time their kids get out of school, and lots of other perks.
 
#2,271
#2,271
n_huffhines said:
That's not what I meant to say. Saying someone else is underpaid probably means you are compassionate. Saying you yourself are underpaid is the sign of a victim (which you didn't do).

What does any of this have to do with Dana being a smart businessman?

I just don't get what it means when someone says certain jobs deserve more money. I can understand feeling like you are underpaid in the short run, but if you feel underpaid in the long run then that is on you. If someone deserves more money, why don't leave their job and make more? It's because money isn't everything and they like the stability they get, the people they work with, stress free environments, good benefits, interesting work, etc. etc.

When you go to college with people who want to be teachers all you ever hear about is how great the teaching profession is and that you get to touch lives, and be rewarded and recognized, etc. Then you actually start working and the next 30 years are spent complaining about how you deserve more pay. Who on earth would work a job for 30 years where deep down subconsciously they felt like they were getting a raw deal? Are these people completely irrational? No. They actually like their jobs. Otherwise they would leave. They get pay in kind, they get awesome holidays, they get to slack off with students, they get to be social, they have authority, they work where their kids go to school, they get off work around the same time their kids get out of school, and lots of other perks.
Click to expand...

You know it's not as simple as go find a job that pays better. As for jobs that deserve more money, firemen, teachers, and police come to mind immediately. Sure they picked their profession because that's what they love, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve more money.
 
#2,273
#2,273
BadJerry20 said:
You know it's not as simple as go find a job that pays better. As for jobs that deserve more money, firemen, teachers, and police come to mind immediately. Sure they picked their profession because that's what they love, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve more money.
Click to expand...

Why do they deserve more money? I still don't understand where the merit is? What about the jobs makes them deserve more?

I can tell you why I don't think they deserve more...it's because we don't have a shortage of people willing to take those jobs at their current pay. People want those jobs and they want them badly. State and city budgets are completely ****ed. That's another reason not to pay them more. I actually like merit pay, so that good cops and good teachers get paid more, but the unions don't like that.

Side note, I'd say a large fraction of policemen and teachers suck at their jobs.
 
#2,274
#2,274
n_huffhines said:
Why do they deserve more money? I still don't understand where the merit is? What about the jobs makes them deserve more?

I can tell you why I don't think they deserve more...it's because we don't have a shortage of people willing to take those jobs at their current pay. People want those jobs and they want them badly. State and city budgets are completely ****ed. That's another reason not to pay them more. I actually like merit pay, so that good cops and good teachers get paid more, but the unions don't like that.

Side note, I'd say a large fraction of policemen and teachers suck at their jobs.
Click to expand...

I would argue the last sentence, is due to the fact of them being underpaid and not giving a ****. I do agree with merit pay 100% in every profession, not just the ones you listed.

We could get into a very heavy discussion here that would likely span 5 pages, as we really argue well. Lol Honestly though I don't want to drive everyone crazy in this thread. Maybe I'll journey into the politics forum and we can further discuss it there someday.

Plus I'm don't want to piss my future brother-in-law off today.

Edit: I change my mind on my first sentence, some of them do just genuinely suck at what they do.
 
Last edited:
#2,275
#2,275
I think they don't give a **** for two main reasons...(1) the unions have eliminated merit pay, so they know no matter how well they do, a promotion is the only way to get more money. There aren't many promotions in teaching to be had, and only few people are cut out to be bosses in the PD, so most don't have that motivation. (2) Only royally ****ing up will get you fired, so they know they can get away with quite a bit.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top