The UFC released an unaired clip of Zuffa co-owner Lorenzo Fertitta (right) talking to John Barr (left) about ESPN's pay to boxers.
This past week, UFC President Dana White promised a video clip that would put ESPN in its place following Sunday's Outside The Lines investigative piece on fighter pay. White made good, releasing a 64-second clip via the organization's YouTube channel that points a finger at the network for their pay to boxers.
In the clip, Zuffa co-owner Lorenzo Fertitta is talking with journalist John Barr and points out that analysts believe ESPN will make $2.8 billion in 2012. He then says he's looked back and for "ESPN fights" (think Friday night boxing events), some fighters made $275 for a four round fight.
"I think six and six is pretty good compared to that," Fertitta said. "There's multiple guys on those ESPN cards who make in the hundreds of dollars. For our fights we put on cable on Spike TV and Versus, we pay 10 times to the fighters what ESPN pays to the fighters."
"Six and six" is a reference to the thousands of dollars that entry level pay UFC fighters receive to show up and then win, respectively.
Since Zuffa signed a deal with Fox, White has been more outspoken about ESPN and their coverage of the UFC, reaching a boiling point this past week with the news the story was going to be released. Similar to how things have deteriorated with former broadcast partner Spike TV in recent months, it seems things are going to get a whole lot worse between Zuffa and ESPN before they get better.
White said more of the unaired parts of Fertitta's ESPN interview will come soon. See the clip after the jump.
0 recs | 177 comments
ESPN isn't the promoter
The promoters for FNF receive a license fee. It’s the promoter’s discretion how to pay the fighters.
I think there’s a lot of problems with the OTL piece, but I would not count this as a meaningful rebuttal. This would be like Versus taking credit/being blamed for the UFC’s decisions to pay the fighters what they do.
Luke Thomas - January 15, 2012
Exactly.
Tim Burke - January 15, 2012
Although now, Viacom invested in Bellator
Making them part of the promotion. Maybe that would have been a better comparison?
KJ Gould - January 15, 2012
Well right
But Versus also isn’t the one running a piece effectively arguing for higher pay to other fighters. If they did, then they could rightfully be called out for being so strongly associated with that happening.
joker24 - January 15, 2012
Except ESPN does not pay their salaries.
Maybe we should all go picket the Spike and versus offices? Hardly.
There’s something to be said about ESPN doing business with unscrupulous promoters, but that’s not the context of this discussion, I think.
Unabomberman - January 15, 2012
But that's pretty much exactly how I took it
Fertitta is just saying that if ESPN is going to complain about the UFC’s fighter pay, why aren’t they running a piece on Friday Night Fights’ (significantly) lower pay? It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why they picked the UFC instead.
I mean it’s a deflection ad hominem thing and isn’t a real argument in a debate sense, but this is effectively a PR battle that ESPN picked not a debate. In that context it’s a legitimate point that ESPN is being hypocritical to some extent.
joker24 - January 15, 2012
Exactly. True, ESPN is not the promoter paying the fighters on FNF, but they are televising it and therefore essentially condoning the pay because they benefit from it.
keyboardwarrior - January 15, 2012
Because ESPN doesn’t control the only means of making a living boxing in the United States
Day Man - January 16, 2012
Neither does the UFC… There’s plenty of orgs out there with decent pay.
Shnak - January 16, 2012
Then you’ve never seen the compensation offerings from those plenty of other orgs you speak of
Day Man - January 16, 2012
Microsoft, Sony & Co. are getting called out for producing parts for their entertainment products at Foxconn, a chinese manufacturing plant that has seen workers commit suicide because of the dire work-conditions. They are not running that plant nor do they set the wages. Still, by supporting this kind of enterprise, people feel they are doing wrong.
Same here, I guess?
KGNLuc - January 16, 2012
The issue is that ESPN is a gigantic, highly diverse organization. The people at the company who elect to sign deals to broadcast boxing fights have little to no relationship with Josh Gross or John Barr and the choices they make about news coverage. That some in the news department of ESPN choose to run this piece has very little to do with a different portion of the company making deals to broadcast boxing matches.
Luke Thomas - January 15, 2012
You're worried about truth
But the media traffics in perception, and DH and the Ferttitas have, with the clip, effectively linked ESPN with low fighter pay of fights on its own network.
Yes, what you said is accurate. But Zuffa’s message here – “ESPN fighters get paid even less!” is short, effective, and just took you two paragraphs to refute.
Who wins that battle of perception? I’d say Zuffa. If you’re explaining, you’re losing.
duck - January 15, 2012
"But the media traffics in perception, and DH and the Ferttitas have, with the clip, effectively linked ESPN with low fighter pay of fights on its own network."
Idiots might buy it and maybe the majority of the audience we speak to are idiots. But the argument falls apart to people capable of abstract thought.
Luke Thomas - January 15, 2012
People capable of abstract thought seldom watch ESPN these days.
BVandDietPepsi - January 15, 2012
They’re watching the modern art channel?
Beau Dure - January 15, 2012
They’re deconstructing Jersey Shore
Pyrgz Krum - January 15, 2012
that reminds me
you should all check out my MMA Event/Jersey Shore recap site:
www.TheMMASituation.com
John Danaher's Hair - January 15, 2012
I'm high as fuck right now, and I practically died laughing.
Also, the fist time I entered this subject, it came out “i’M HIH AS FUCK RIGHT NOW” but then I deleted it out of grammar/cap locks shame.
SanFranpsycho - January 15, 2012
Fortunately those make up a minority in audience revenue generating
Fortunately for the UFC, that is.
KJ Gould - January 15, 2012
Any in-depth person knows that the ESPN link isn't a solid rebuttal.
But the UFC is deliberately putting out quick quoteables that the average, less learned viewer can repeat and remember. That makes ESPN look like the bad guys, which is the intended result.
Most critical thinking MMA fans and pundits know better, but that video isn’t for us.
McKinley B. Noble - January 15, 2012
So then I wonder, what is the point, other than to sooth some bruised egos in Vegas?
Day Man - January 15, 2012
Simple.
Damage control.
McKinley B. Noble - January 15, 2012
Damage control with an audience who already thinks the UFC can do no wrong?
Day Man - January 15, 2012
Reinforces that notion
duck - January 16, 2012
I think you're highly overestimating the audience here
It’s a PR battle, not a debate.
joker24 - January 15, 2012
The people capable of abstract thought don’t matter though do they?
Empty Thoughts - January 15, 2012
As does ESPN's argument
Just because the rebuttal was a non sequitur, that doesn’t make the initial argument valid
jhf884 - January 15, 2012
I'm not saying you're wrong.
I’m saying in the battle of perception, it’s irrelevant.
ESPN is now in the position of explaining why they don’t control the pay of fighters on their own network. Sure, there’s a logical answer, but now they’re fighting on the Zuffa’s turf, explaining their own actions. Never where you want to be in a PR battle.
duck - January 16, 2012
I think ESPN’s message might be reaching more people than Dana’s youtube channel
Day Man - January 15, 2012
I think Dana White's youtube channel preaches to the converted
And is more to act as reassurance or a rallying of troops.
KJ Gould - January 15, 2012
Exactly
Day Man - January 15, 2012
Really?
With such a great economy I know I wake up everyday thinking “I hope Antonio Carvalho is making enough money.” No single person with an IQ and who can breath goes to espn for or cares about their “type of journalism.” The idea that espn has more credibility than the ufc is absurd.
Drops - January 15, 2012
The point I’m making is that ESPN’s reach FAR exceeds that of the UFC Youtube page, especially among those people who haven’t made up their minds on way or the other.
Also ESPN definitely has more credibility than the UFC both in general and in this specific instance. Whether Josh Gross has more credibility than Lorenzo on the matter is another issue.
Day Man - January 16, 2012
If you wanted to give the casual UFC fan response it can be done in a more pithy fashion:
Randomguy81 - January 15, 2012
and there’s Lorenzo in the back smoking a joint with a cup of coffee.
he be so smooth…
Victor Rodriguez - January 15, 2012
That guy might be the best part of the gif
crinow - January 16, 2012
Take ESPN out of the equation, and these guys are fighting on cable television for hundreds of dollars. It’s still an important fact, regardless of where the fights are airing.
Charles Awad - January 15, 2012
There might be some degree of culpability, but it’s not a one-to-one comparison in the manner Fertitta suggests.
Luke Thomas - January 15, 2012
And something the original piece does cover
Saying they get paid better than low end Boxers (without naming promoters or networks), but believes isn’t in the same ball park percentage revenue-wise as the other sports leagues (which are significantly richer, with less in-house costs or barriers for entry)
KJ Gould - January 15, 2012
nooooo
1. As Luke said, ESPN isn’t the promoter.
2. These are guys scheduled for off-TV undercard bouts. The guys who make “hundreds of dollars for a four round fight” are guys who are (at best) scheduled for a swing bout which isn’t sure to make air and are not high level fighters at all (usually those are just local guys brought in for a nicer than usual payday against a prospect). To compare small budget, small card, off-tv boxer pay to the “best of the best” in UFC fighters is such a braindead comparison.
The top 4 guys on ESPN usually make between $5-$15k. The majority of guys on the undercard make around $1,500 despite having relatively no experience.
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
Nobody said it was apples to apples, dude
ESPN certainly didn’t go out of their way to indicate the talent level of fighters making 6-and-6, quick as you are to jump to make that known.
I don’t think it was a hit piece at all, but I also don’t think they have a single fucking idea what they’re talking about. This is as much evidence of that as anything.
Charles Awad - January 15, 2012
Lorenzo is acting like it’s some huge point. It’s a nothing point. It proves nothing at all. It’s, frankly, an idiotic point.
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
An idiotic point
That idiots will get behind, so changing the perception worked.
IRodC - January 15, 2012
for all 6 people that watch the ufc youtube channel
tha dude - January 16, 2012
I'm not debating the validity of the argument
I’m saying this was a very effective PR stance for Zuffa.
duck - January 16, 2012
The whole debate is made up of idiotic points.
Phildo - January 16, 2012
Also, a lot of the 6-and-6 fighters don’t make air, either.
Charles Awad - January 15, 2012
They’re put on Facebook at the very least. That’s not the case with FNF. No matter how much I want to see those undercard fights and see the quality of these guys, I don’t have that option.
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
Balderdash!
But it goes some way to showing the slight hypocritical nature of ESPN’s piece.
To paraphrase my thoughts; “The UFC pay some fighters too little, but we [espn] are involved with a boxing promoter who pays some fighters as little as $275”.
They can hardly take the moral high road.
higgledy-piggledy - January 15, 2012
They weren't intending to
They were trying to get answers out of the UFC, but Dana White refuses to be interviewed, and they keep their books private.
KJ Gould - January 15, 2012
They Interviewed Lorenzo Fertitta
Lorenzo or Dana; does it matter that DW refused to be interview? The message is going to be the same since they are both part owners.
It is hardly surprising a Private business doesn’t disclose its balance sheet.
Intending to take the moral high road? I’m assuming that this is what you mean. It may not have been their intention, but when you point the finger at an alleged ‘injustice’ or fault, it would be credible to know you [espn/FNF] aren’t directly or indirectly involved in the same thing [low pay] they claim to be uncovering.
The UFC takes heat every time one of its fighters tweet some idiotic, homophobic, sexist or unpolitical correct comment on twitter. The general consensus is that the organisation is to lenient on such matters & should punish the fighter.
ESPN may not be the promoter, but if they ‘care’ so much about fighter pay, wouldn’t you think they’d be somewhat concerned as to how the promoter they are working with pays its fighters?
The latter paragraph is really directed to Luke Thomas’s comment at the top of the page..
higgledy-piggledy - January 15, 2012
You completley missed the point
ESPN is a billion dollar industry. They hire promoters for ESPN Friday Nights that pay fighters shit.
It’s no different then if Kmart’s clothing line was made in Chinese Sweatshops. Lorenzo is bringing up the point that ESPN is bringing up a story on fighter pay yet the hire promoters that pay their fighters nothing
potato623 - January 15, 2012
That’s ridiculous.
These guys are not sweatshop workers. They’re nobody fighters getting a better payday than they’d get otherwise to fight on undercards unlikely to make the broadcast.
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
Does it matter if it's broadcasted or not
It’s still a televised card on ESPN!
potato623 - January 15, 2012
I guess if you want to ignore the quality of fighters involved and insist that guys with 2 career fights should be making huge pay…sure.
Of course, then Friday Night Fights would get cancelled because the entire premise of the show is to be a boxing show to showcase fighters and give guys who otherwise wouldn’t get exposure money for a flat fee that never changes.
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
I will ignore it like you ignore fighter being paid a hundred dollars to fight
Junior Dos Santos started out with nothing salary wise. He has made 990,000 dollars in his UFC career. He is the heavyweight champ and his next fight, he will make at least 100,000.
Sean Pierson made 18 grand this year. 26 grand in his UFC career. Plus the UFC gibes him health insurance, exposure to sponsorship, and much more. If he wins a few fights then he will have leverage to renegotiate
potato623 - January 15, 2012
First of all, what was the boxer’s name who made $275 to fight? Because unless I know who it is? I can’t exactly comment on why? But I can say that having seen the FNF payouts on plenty of cards it’s very rare for a guy to make a low amount.
My guess would be that someone pulled out of a fight and they found a local nobody to fill his spot. But when I just hear “a fighter made $xxx” without having a reference point it’s pretty hard to give any sort of judgement.
But yes, there are plenty of guys who shouldn’t make more than $275 to fight in both sports. Pretending that because it was an ESPN broadcast and then blaming ESPN is insane.
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
Sorry
Pretending that because it was an ESPN broadcast everyone should make a ton of money regardless of quality and then blaming ESPN is insane.
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
I don't blame ESPN for fighter pay
I blame them for putting on sleezeball promoters who pay their fighters s###
potato623 - January 16, 2012
FNF is a filler program.
they don’t pay much to broadcast it because nobody watches it.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
I will ignore that the HW champion makes less than the NFL league minimum
And say that anyone who really believes that the UFC isn’t shitting their pants with fear that the public will start to see just how little money they pay fighters is not very smart, a card carrying pro business conservative, or just a pure UFC fan. THere’s a reason the best talent at HW was in Pride, the pay was much higher. Fighters need a union, until then they wont get paid properly.
Kidroll - January 15, 2012
pride had
a cultural acceptance that early pre-zuffa did not have. that’s why the pay was far more
Elstriko - January 15, 2012 via Android app
I should
say that is one of the many reasons pay was more
Elstriko - January 15, 2012 via Android app
NFL is the most valuable sports league in America, the UFC is not, that's why NFL player salaries are higher than UFC fighters.
The NFL generates way more money than the UFC, which is the reason why they can afford such high league minimums. Unlike the UFC, the NFL is funded by the biggest sponsors in the US, the most lucrative network rights fees for American television(from ESPN, FOX, CBS, and NBC), the most lucrative merchandise revenue, and last but not least, the largest fanbase of any sport in the US. The UFC has a far inferior network deal, a decent, but not the most lucrative sponsorships, and a small fanbase in comparison.
The UFC is not even on the same planet in terms of revenue compared to the NFL, much less the NBA or MLB, so why even compare them? You should be comparing the UFC fighter salary to the pay of pro boxers, tennis players, and golfers, because the prominent promotions/leagues in those sports are better comparable.
One more thing, the MMA does not have an effective farming system that equals to that of amateur boxing, and high school and college footbal/basket ball/base ball. That means that the UFC has to take risks on guys who may or may not be any good at all at fighting, the NFL won’t have as bad of a problem since all of their players are at least tried and tested before they are even drafted. Who expects a 6-0 fighter, making their debut, to be making more than 10+10?
amendamatrix - January 15, 2012
The UFC makes nowhere near 7 billion dollars a year
potato623 - January 16, 2012
sponsorship money?
“i’m going to pay you less money because your job MIGHT attract a t-shirt company that will pay you a small fee for wearing their crap out to the ring, but only if they are willing to pay me a very large fee for the right to do so.”
imagine if the NBA told lebron that he isn’t allowed to wear nikes on the court because nike didn’t pay david stern?
i’d like to see a UFC guy come to the ring in plain white trunks and a plain white t-shirt. dana would have a FIT for making UFC look cheap.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
GSP basically did that during the Affliction ban.
Roger Gracie has done the same thing in Strikeforce.
No fit was thrown.
Steve4192 - January 16, 2012
that’s how the real world works. Look at all tip based industries.
I’m not sure what the NBA’s rules are when it comes to sponsors, but the NFL will fine you for wearing stuff from the wrong sponsor, or the wrong hat at the wrong time.
Phildo - January 16, 2012
no they don't
the NFL will only fine you if your uniform isn’t up to snuff. i.e, socks not pulled up, shirt not tucked in. they have no issue with whose shoes you wear.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2549716
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/31/nfl-fines-wes-welker-10000-for-wearing-unauthorized-hat/
http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=3307
Phildo - January 16, 2012
my mistake.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
Then why isn’t OTL doing an expose on FNF fighters and how shitty they get paid?
jrobb20 - January 15, 2012
because 300,000-800,000 people don't pay $50-60 to watch FNF?
tha dude - January 16, 2012
Pound....
You can watch this on ESPN the Ocho.
malo - January 15, 2012 via mobile
You're right
But I’d be mad at you for your use of logic if it weren’t for that sweet beard.
Damon O. - January 15, 2012
The UFC brass are a bunch of children.
jafotinatos - January 15, 2012
They come off that way a lot
Day Man - January 15, 2012
Maybe.
Many MMA fans and press members aren’t much better.
McKinley B. Noble - January 15, 2012
a savy bunch
Robert V-U - January 15, 2012
savvy move
John Danaher's Hair - January 15, 2012
Exactly.
I agree that Lorenzo’s comparison of FNF pay to UFC pay is spurious at best, but as a ploy to deflect blame and portray ESPN as hypocrites it is brilliant. It’s PR 101. It doesn’t matter if the logic behind the argument is flawed, so long as it spins the issue in the direction that Zuffa wants to spin it.
Steve4192 - January 16, 2012
More unaired parts to come? Even this little bit of nothing took forever. Sounds shady as hell.
beeran - January 15, 2012
Can't say I'm surprised about it.
Unabomberman - January 15, 2012
What I'm assuming happened....
was Zuffa sent their own PR guy who filmed the entire video, knowing ESPN would edit down the entire interview. That’s not evil on ESPN’s part, it’s a necessary part of journalism.
So what Dana & Co. get to do now, in the wake of the ESPN piece, is release clips from the interview that weren’t used that put Zuffa in the best light. And of course they will piece them out one at a time. There’s no upside to dumping them all at once. Releasing one every two days or so lets them continue the narrative of “See how ESPN screwed us???” for a week or more.
duck - January 15, 2012
or would you rather a rebuttal be aired before the claim?
higgledy-piggledy - January 15, 2012
Say what?
beeran - January 15, 2012
Judging by the “YEAH LORENZO PWND EPSN SUCKS” comments all over the Interwebs, I’d say it was either a shrewd political move by Lorenzo to do this or a really sad commentary on the UFC fan base.
I think it comes off as unnecessarily defensive, and if I were Zuffa, I’d rather stake my defense on the notion that the lower-tier fighters are welcome to try their luck in Viacom-backed Bellator. But I’m not the target audience.
Beau Dure - January 15, 2012
"I’d say it was either a shrewd political move by Lorenzo to do this or a really sad commentary on the UFC fan base."
It’s both.
#Commence waving of little American flags, and USA chants.#
KJ Gould - January 15, 2012
More the latter than the former.
It’s all just Lorenzo saying words, to me.
Unabomberman - January 15, 2012
Beau Dure - January 15, 2012
Little Flags? I've got SAM THE EAGLE!
MicahtheCynic - January 15, 2012
Again, Paulo Thiago has nothing to do with this.
Tim Burke - January 15, 2012
Again, THAT'S BRIAN STANN!
MicahtheCynic - January 15, 2012
It's both
Which is pretty much what Dana and the Fertittas want, it’s not necessarily the truth but it does make them look better.
IRodC - January 15, 2012
I think Lorenzo doesn't want to give Bellator any publicity
but yes I agree mentioning the fact that bellator owners have more money than Zuffa and pay their fighters even less is something that should definitely be brought up
AfroSamurai - January 15, 2012
If I'm Zuffa's PR team, I'd have in my contract
that Lorenzo and Dana have to pay me $5,000 every time they say the word Bellator.
You NEVER give publicity to a lesser competitor. Ever. Make them look on your level.
duck - January 15, 2012
Exactly
hence why he hasn’t mentioned them yet. However i have heard him do it in the past when speaking of monopolies and i’m sure it’ll get brought up during this case.
AfroSamurai - January 15, 2012
In that context, it would make sense
duck - January 15, 2012
ownage
P86 - January 15, 2012
Why Do People Compare UFC pay to NFL?
MMA is still a growing sport and nowhere near MLB, NHL or NFL. For one MMA is an individual sport and secondly those sports monopolize profits made from their team names which drives huge profits for the leagues and owners.
UFC is still evolving in this respect, compare the UFC to NFL 30 or 40 years ago when it was at a similar size.
kibbled_bits - January 15, 2012
It's better to compare the UFC to individual teams
You mention these huge numbers but do you have evidence to back it up? Some teams manage to LOSE money in the NFL each year and yet they STILL pay practice squad, aka guys who never play in games, a minimum of $5,700 per week. These guys never compete, get paid to train and still get paid well more than low level UFC competitors despite the fact that the UFC is infinitely more profitable than, say, the Jaguars, Bengals, Rams, Lions, Cardinals, Seahawks etc.
Randomguy81 - January 15, 2012
It’s not a good comparison to single teams either though. I mean, there’s revenue sharing across leagues, an overseeing body which works with unionized athletes to establish minimized pay rates for the players on that team..etc
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
Which simply shows the contrast between what a real sport is (the NFL) and what a revenue generator (aka the UFC)is. The Fertittas run the UFC the same way they run their casinos: by using strong arm tactics to keep their employees suppressed through anti-union and anti-regulation management. They try to come across as loving the sport but if they didn’t see the $’s any more they would bail on it quicker than you could say “Unified Rules”.
Randomguy81 - January 15, 2012
No team loses money in the NFL
in the NBA it’s a different story, but the NFL comparison is dead wrong, the revenue sharing ensures profit
Kidroll - January 15, 2012
The only sport people should compare MMA to is Boxing
And maybe pro-wrestling.
discoandherpes - January 15, 2012
Because people are retarded.
Although to be fair, the UFC is close to being represented on the same level of cable/TV presence as the “big four” sports leagues — NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL/Soccer (depending on region) — so the comparison’s going to be made often during the next seven years.
McKinley B. Noble - January 15, 2012
yes and no
UFC has no way near the revenue as the big 4.
We should all keep our comparisons limited to boxing or other combat sports with a similar structure.
Otherwise we are comparing apples to oranges.
higgledy-piggledy - January 15, 2012
Theatrics and editing aside, comparing MMA to Boxing is actually
what makes MMA so much better from both the fighters and fans perspective in the first place. I’m dodging the whole “monopoly” issue, which is perhaps better supported by someone else who’s got in-depth knowledge.
But to criticize the whole fighter incentive system and bring up the crooks in boxing is almost comical. How about this.. Let’s say we create a few “sanctioning” bodies within the UFC and each will have a belt that fighters can represent. GTFO man. As far as ESPN supporting the story, I agree with posts above that mentioning in essence, cleaning your ownhouse first. Let’s not lose sight of the bigger picture here:
UFC represents PROGRESS from the ilk that boxing shoves down it’s fans throats. It is a continuously growing sport and I expect the lower tier fighters to benefit from that growth eventually. But for now, it’s all about how well you perform and how many a$$e$ you put in seats. What better business logic is there?
DayuumHeGotDropped - January 15, 2012
I find it hard to criticize Zuffa for low fighter pay when if it wasn’t for Zuffa, there would be no fighter pay. MMA would not be viable, and there would be no opportunity to move up the ladder and earn the type of money the top guys make. At least Zuffa provides that opportunity, If you are good enough to win in the UFC, you will get paid. If you aren’t, fighting isn’t your career path. There is no viable competitor, but there is no industry without the UFC.
xDieseLx - January 15, 2012
So if you can’t win in the UFC, you shouldn’t fight at all?
BVandDietPepsi - January 15, 2012
If you can't win in the UFC, you shouldn't fight at all in the UFC
UFC aren’t in the business of hand outs to guys who can’t make it. Say a guy makes $18k in a year from the UFC for 3 fights, but loses all 3. That’s not the UFC’s fault, and we shouldn’t take complaints of low pay seriously in that instance.
KJ Gould - January 15, 2012
If you can't win in the UFC, you shouldn't be paid like those who do.
That’s like saying I should get paid the same as someone at my office who does 10x the work.
If I want that raise, extra bonus, or commission money, I have to turn in a performance that reflects my worth to the company.
McKinley B. Noble - January 15, 2012
I was referring to his “career path” statement. You guys over heavily overanalyzing.
BVandDietPepsi - January 15, 2012
They’ve clearly built the sport but are you saying no one else would figure out how to make money off of MMA if not for Zuffa?
Day Man - January 15, 2012
No one else has.
Just look at all the high profile MEGA failures that have happened since the post-TUF boom. EliteXC, IFL, Bodog, Affliction, and the WFA all pissed away millions before giving up. The reality is, MMA is a money pit. It has been proven time and time again.
Steve4192 - January 16, 2012
Were talking the UFC making MMA as in “if the UFC didn’t exist there would be no MMA” – I’m saying that if the UFC didn’t control the market that someone else would have filled their shoes in the market
Day Man - January 16, 2012
I can see why people would think that. Successful businessmen from several different walks of life have tried, some bailed after dipping their foot in the water, some sank after going all in.
Phildo - January 16, 2012
The comparison is so damn flawed...
Not mainy because ESPN is not the promoter. The main reason is that boxing is a tiny part of ESPN. It would be like looking at the total revenue of the Fox family of networks and then compare that to what fighters at the UFC cards on the network gets paid. It´s pointless, since that revenue also goes to all the other TV-shows, sit-coms, sporting events etc. The propper comparison would be looking at how much revenue ESPN brings in with their FNF shows (comercials etc) + what is brought in by the promoter via ticket sales and then the sponsorships and then compare THAT to what the fighters get paid.
Also, the boxing model is very different. Some of the fighters fighting on the undercards of really big fightcards are club fighters at best, guys who, if they fought in MMA, would be lucky to land a spot on the middle of an MFC card.
I´m all for fighters getting paid more and taking a bigger share of the revenue, but we also need to be honest with our comparisons.
Igorstyle - January 15, 2012
I can't wait for more of this stuff
Its also kinda disappointing to see people sticking up for the “journalism” of espn. They are the wwe of journalism.
Drops - January 15, 2012
ESPN is in a weak position
The Response is that ESPN is not the promoter, however the UFC fills role as promoter and the body handling the production.
ESPN at this point has no leg to stand on. Saying they aren’t the promoter is the same as the Kardashians saying they had “no idea where their clothes were being manufactured, they had no way to know their vendor was using sweatshop labor.” It doesn’t excuse them from their due diligence and doing investigation.
After ESPN didn’t come forward with their Bernie Fine tapes, they are not in a position to take the moral high ground.
RJK256 - January 15, 2012
Very good point
I almost forgot about the Bernie Fine tapes.
Drops - January 15, 2012
The Bernie Fine tapes have nothing to do with this. I mean, i agree that was reprehensible. But it’s also got nothing to do with anything here other than to go “don’t take this seriously because they’ve done things that were wrong in the past”
You’re essentially arguing that low quality regional guys shouldn’t get paid because the alternative to paying them a low amount to fill out undercards is to simply not have the fight take place.
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
He’s making an allusion to the lack of credibility that ESPN currently has as a source of quality investigative journalism based on their recent failings. In that vein, the Fine tapes are relevant, but I think we’re all intelligent enough here to take the quality of this particular report at face value. Besides, I have my doubts any of the same people were involved in both.
Chuck Burly - January 15, 2012
Please tell me when espn has had any credibility? They are as credible as tmz. They are an entertainment channel who like to play dress up and pretend they are journalist when its convenient.
Drops - January 15, 2012
They handled the Ohio State controversy and they still try to keep OTL as a credible program. But you’re right, it’s mostly yammering pundits and Tim Tebow these days.
Chuck Burly - January 15, 2012
"They are as credible as tmz"
Your definition of credibility is borderline meaningless, then.
Luke Thomas - January 15, 2012
No its not
There in bed with the sports leagues just like tmz is in bed with the stars. The idea that any real journalism goes on at espn is a laugh. They are a mouthpiece thats prints money. Thats it.
Drops - January 15, 2012
Well said
ESPN is a joke and has been for years, at least in terms of credible sports journalism. In terms of sheer ass-kissery, however, they are the cat’s pajamas!
beeran - January 15, 2012
...
McKinley B. Noble - January 15, 2012
Im very serious that espn and journalism should never be mentioned in the same sentence.
Drops - January 15, 2012
So anyone at all who works for ESPN is not a journalist?
Brent Brookhouse - January 15, 2012
I can't think of a serious one.
Espn is a mouthpiece. It never was about news or journalism. Its an entertainment channel.
Drops - January 15, 2012
A mouthpiece for what?
Look, I’m not saying that everything ESPN does is great (it’s not…and their embrace of the phony argument model for entertainment is horrid).
But Mike Fish writes for ESPN.com and is a two time Pulitzer Prize nominee whose investigative series on Pat Tillman’s death was incredibly important and well done. Fish is a great, great journalist.
LZ Granderson is phenomenal as well.
Those are just two dudes I pulled off the top of my head.
Brent Brookhouse - January 16, 2012
i'm about to date myself,
but the E in ESPN does, in fact, stand for entertainment.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
Crap
I’ll have to change the job description on my tax return.
(I’m a freelancer – lots of work at espnW in 2011.)
Beau Dure - January 16, 2012
They don’t have to have anything to do with it, this is shaping up to be a battle in the media regarding the treatment of athletes and credibility. ESPN has done something far more reprehensible than the UFC has ever done, and it doesn’t matter if it is related or not. It is a bump and grab, the UFC throws this accusation out there on top of ESPN handling their boxers like sweatshop labor, and now the UFC looks like an example of corporate responsibility against the actions of ESPN.
In terms of low quality regional guys, the UFC can make the same argument. Until a fighter has fought high level competition, we don’t know if they are a real talent or hype that has padded their record against regional cans. The UFC is giving new guys a chance to prove themselves and get paid more than they would if they continued on the regional circuit.
As for pay though, and in regard to Ohio State below. ESPN is making huge profits off of the college bowl system and the BCS. These are athletes in a minor league capacity who don;t get paid. Somehow the system protects the players by not paying them, and again ESPN enables this by making the bowl system in college football, as lucrative as it is. ESPN dictates the bowl schedule in order to fill air time. The hypocrisy of ESPN here, stretches pretty far.
RJK256 - January 15, 2012
ESPN even stamps their name on the program "ESPN friday night fights"
Fox doesn’t have FOX MMA, they have UFC on FOX. It’s not that hard for Lorenzo to attack ESPN, since they put their seal of approval on it when they name the boxing program after their own network.
amendamatrix - January 15, 2012
Such deeply flawed logic, but it looks like it has taken hold so I’m not even going to bother arguing anymore.
Brent Brookhouse - January 16, 2012
It's flawed logic that will make all too much sense to the average viewer who doesn't know anything about how fight promotions work.
I bet that super casual boxing fans, the ones who only watch Pac and Mayweather, don’t even know what Top Rank or Golden Boy is, mostly likely, they think HBO is the promoter since there stamp on the events is the most prominent. My dad is a big boxing fan, and actually watches ESPN FNF fairly regularly, but I doubt he could tell me who is the ppromoter of those events are.
Lorenzo’s logic is easily understandable to most of the UFC’s fan base and non-hardcore combat sport fans.
amendamatrix - January 16, 2012
all of those non-hardcore combat sports fans that visit the UFC youtube channel?
tha dude - January 16, 2012
Well, Dana has 1.2M followers, I bet a lot of non-hardcores follow him.
Dana tweets that out, to all his fans, his fans then re-tweet video.
All of the popular MMA websites then post the same video in their news articles, further spreading it.
I think that video is going to get a lot of traffic.
amendamatrix - January 17, 2012
The reaction this is getting is exactly why they did it. They almost made half of a point (but really didn’t) and they got people talking about it. The fact that people even need to state how ridiculous it is to compare Friday Night Fights to the UFC means they were smart to do it.
Especially because they had to know there was no way this was getting into the piece that aired on espn. It’s totally irrelevant, and Lorenzo was moving around in his chair like he had ants in his pants. It’s a distraction from relevant discussion, just like 95% of the things that get brought up whenever this topic comes up.
Phildo - January 15, 2012
There is a sizeable amount of the fanbase that will defend Zuffa no matter what.
And they don’t have to because Zuffa doesn’t need to defend themselves for making as much as possible. Any business would do the same. I know I try to. But it’s funny to see people dismiss the idea that Zuffa isn’t making obscene profits and that the fighters can’t be unhappy with their share of the pie.
John Nash - January 15, 2012
then can be unhappy about it, but whining about it like this isn’t going to change anything. The only way to get more money is to band together and force the UFC’s hand.
Phildo - January 15, 2012
I agree
Which is why those that claim they want a fighters union should be happy to see stories lIke ESPN’s no matter what quibbles they might have with it. If the fighters are ever going to get the impetus to get organized it’s going to be from having the numbers pushed in their faces.
John Nash - January 15, 2012
The stories would be a lot better if it was a balanced, accurate take on the situation (from both sides). Continuing the potshots and propaganda hasn’t done enough to get the issue enough publicity so far, maybe someone should try a new method.
I know that’s hard because zuffa doesn’t want to (or have to) give up the info they have, but approaching it from a neutral or pro-ufc side gives a better chance of them giving up some real info (I think, anyway). The ESPN report wasn’t a total attack piece, but Lorenzo showing up with a camera AND the numbers he dropped in this video lead me to believe he thought he was going into hostile territory.
Phildo - January 15, 2012
Well Luke perhaps you should lead an Occupy movement in front of the UFC offices.
I love how everyone feels the need to slam the UFC at every turn. Everybody loves MMA but hates the UFC. FYI they are the same regardless of whoever else is out there. The UFC probably could be paying them a lot more, but then again thats what Affliction and Strikeforce did and they are doing very well financally today….or are they.
Joselana - January 15, 2012
Um
I think UFC fighter pay is basically fair. What are you talking about?
Luke Thomas - January 15, 2012
dont try and deny it
you're such a ufc haterCory Braiterman - January 15, 2012
Fighter Pay - always gets everybody hot under the collar. Why?
higgledy-piggledy - January 15, 2012
because everybody elses boss gives them a 50/50 split of the profits, so why can’t the UFC?
tha dude - January 16, 2012
who exactly is;
higgledy-piggledy - January 16, 2012
I’d be very happy if I had that boss.
Horselover Fat - January 16, 2012
the sarcasm detector is weak in this one.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
apologies
higgledy-piggledy - January 17, 2012
First, it’s not every body else, it’s the 4 major sports leagues in the US.
Second, those leagues don’t pay out 50% of revenue out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it because they have to. It’s still to expect the UFC to pay that much if they don’t have to.
Phildo - January 16, 2012
that should be it’s silly.
Phildo - January 16, 2012
and you too need to recognize sarcasm.
because if you believe that i think everybody with a job gets 50% of the profit, then my point has not been made.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
Two things that never come up with fighter pay.
1. UFC expanding and trying to open up new markets, and basically creating a sport.
2. The building of the UFC brand so fighters can make money off it when they are old and retired.
Drops - January 15, 2012
Which is why I take these things with a grain of salt.
If MMA were the same size as football, soccer, basketball, and boxing globally and had that longevity and prestige associate with it then I can see there being a very serious problem. But the UFC is pretty much singlehandedly making MMA bigger and bringing to other parts of the world along with the fact that for several years since taking over the Zuffa brass was in red and have JUST RECENTLY started making more of a profit.
doomrider7 - January 15, 2012
1. It gets brought up in almost every thread
2. Like all the money they get for their video game rights?
Day Man - January 16, 2012
nice!
jon fitch agrees with you.
sign over the rights to your likeness, or you’re fired.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
ESPN is a joke
ESPN will be broadcasting a Miami Heat basketball game while their ever-present ticker on the bottom of the screen pumps out rumors about how the star players are not getting along.
ESPN is TMZ-lite sports nowadays.
Ben Bauman - January 15, 2012
The pissing contest between the media and the UFC is beyond childish both sides need to take a look in the mirror
The_Devil_You_Know - January 15, 2012
Maybe those aspiring to be MMA fighters
should realize it’s not a great career to pursue. The chance of making it big is slim to none, like any sport. They can’t pay millions of dollars a year to fighters (except the GSP/Lesnar type cash cows) because this is a young sport.
And ESPN, even if they weren’t directly running the boxing matches, let those guys bash each others’ brains out on their network and only get $275 is effed up.
rockyman500 - January 15, 2012
This is my problem with the entire thing – with the pay scale so low the UFC will never even sniff the top athletes coming up in the U.S. and to a lesser extent world-wide. I am selfish and want to see thelikes of the next Bo Jackson, Jim Brown, or LeBron James chose MMA (and you’re kidding yourselves if you think GSP or Jon Jones are on that level of once in a generation athletes) and that is far less likely to happen with the current set up
Day Man - January 16, 2012
it's never ever ever going to happen.
top of the heap boxers can make $25-30 million/fight, but the best athletes still don’t compete in combat sports. they go to the NBA and NFL and play for less money. it’s been proven over decades of time that the best athletes aren’t coming to combat sports, otherwise ray lewis would be fighting lebron james for the HW title. it’s not always about the money.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
Great. A race to the bottom
miked612 - January 16, 2012
...
Since when is ESPN a boxing promotion? ESPN buys content packaged by boxing promoters. What an undercard boxer gets on Friday Night Fights isn’t ESPN’s decision.
ESPN has a budget to buy content in the $75,000 per show range. They give that to the promoter. Lorenzo made it seem like he was calling ESPN out but what he really did was put heat on small time boxing promoters who do 1500 person venues. They pay guys $275 for a 4 rounder because that’s what they’re worth to them.
Regardless… fighter pay is a non story. Josh Gross had an agenda and used a traffic ticket lawyer as his source. Bottom line, Gross embarrassed himself and made his employer look really bad for running with the story. Thankfully for Gross, MMA is such a fringe sport and means absolutely nothing in Bristol, it won’t affect his job security.
Want to do a story about oversaturation of Zuffa events? Now there’s a story.
FrontRowBrian - January 16, 2012
brian makes a great point
the money that is generated by FNF is nowhere near the money generated by an FX/spike tv card, much less a PPV. and lorenzos point about how much ESPN makes/year is pointless. he needs to find out how much revenue FNF generates for ESPN, not their overall profit for broadcasting 24/7 sports coverage. if that’s his game, then the profits from station casinos should be counted towards the UFC bottom line. the best part though, is releasing this video on their youtube channel. the only people that will see it are the mega-hardcore UFC fans, whereas the ESPN piece will be seen by SPORTS fans, not just the UFC crazies. ie: i’m a huge MMA fan, but i have NEVER watched a vlog by dana or been to the youtube channel. but, i watch ESPN every single day.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
and i’m still confused as to why people care so much about fighter pay. the owner of your company makes WAY more money than you do and not a single fighter in the UFC cares about it. as for the argument that better pay will attract the best athletes, well, that’s a myth. the lighter weight classes have no other choice if they want to compete. it’s combat sports or nothing. in the heavier weight classes, a top flight HW boxer can make $25 million/fight but the best athletes don’t box they go to the NFL and NBA. that’s never going to change.
tha dude - January 16, 2012
The UFC fighters get their medical expenses paid for now as well, I doubt many boxers get that. That’s going to be worth a lot of money if they need surgery/rehab.
Plus you don’t see boxers shorts covered in sponsors like the UFC fighters, and then the locker room bonuses, I would say the base pay doesn’t really give a clear indication to how much their contracts are worth.
Chowens - January 16, 2012
All of this is true
Which make you wonder why Fertitta didn’t stress any of this instead of making an inapt comparison to ESPN.
Beau Dure - January 16, 2012
he wasn’t trying to have a real discussion about fighter pay. Look at how he’s moving around in this part, he knew it would never make air? Why would he even know how much espn makes or how much Friday Night Fights guys get? He thought he was waking into a trap, and treated it like one.
Phildo - January 16, 2012
It might come out when they release the whole un-edited video, think Dana was just dying to stick it to ESPN.
Chowens - January 16, 2012
Video’s out now, and … it really didn’t. Well, Serra made a passing mention to sponsors and bonuses, but that’s about it. And the ESPN piece had already mentioned the bonuses.
Beau Dure - January 17, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bloody Elbow to post a comment.