MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos - View Single Post - Ask the Cage Counsel: Is UFC-Strikeforce a monopoly? Could a fighters' union follow?
View Single Post
post #5 of (permalink) Old 03-16-2011, 04:11 PM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,499
Originally Posted by Sambo de Amigo View Post
Well they will need one , because when SF is gone and Dana has some personal vendetta against you, who is to say he cant axe you without any reason.

Without one i can see fighters being paid alot less on average since fighters like Henderson and Werdum who went to SF before now wont have any option if similar cases happen and just forget negotiating a new deal unless you have GSP stardom because you will be booted asap, and i can see fighters being cut for 1 or 2 losses rather than the usual 3.
Actually a union wouldn't control their ability to be cut. As long as the UFC still uses them as contractors all the union could do is set the price tag for the fighters, how soon you would be able to have them fight again, etc.

One bad thing for young fighters is that Unions are very controlling and very rule centric. They would get paid more, but they would have to pay a portion of their winnings to the union which may mean they make the same or less, but they also would be limited on how often they could fight and who they could fight for. We would never get a chance to see someone like Leben fight 2 fights so close together ever again, or last minute replacements may become a thing of the past, etc.

The best thing that would come out of the union would probably be health benefits, but the UFC does cover for any injuries that occur during a fight. But outside the fight things like training accidents are a personal expense. But who knows, maybe the UFC has a pretty good health plan that fighters are allowed to buy into?
cdtcpl is offline  
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome