MagiK11

This is something that bugged me a few times because I can put myself in the fighters positions, lets say I was a fighter and I turned down a fight, I might not want the UFC telling the media I turned it down.

My reasons for turning down the fight could be personal such as a family matter, it could be a nagging injury and so on.

I just don't feel like Dana White or any other UFC emmployee ohter than the fighter or their management team should be informing the media that they turned down a fight. All those negotiations should remain behind closed doors unless the fighter wants to air it out in the open.

I'm only mentioning this because once again Dana came out and said Kongo turned down the fight with Roy, and it rubs me the wrong way.

What are your thoughts on it?

__________________

cdtcpl

My feelings are mixed. In the past DW has explained why certain fighters couldn't fight, saying they are injured or are taking some time off for specific reasons.

I also understand fighters are looking at this as a career. Eventually you have to turn down a couple fights because beating up new guys doesn't usually get you a championship fight.

But I do agree, DW tends to throw guys under the bus as some sort of vengeance when it should probably remain an a & b conversation.

Liddellianenko

So Dana is an unprofessional amateur, what else is new?

prolyfic

Love the topic.

I think there is nothing wrong with it. it is the equivalent to calling someon on their BS. If you turn down a fight, the only reason should be personal and not related to you not wanting to fight or not thinking the person is on your level. The problem is people turn down fights and don't want to say why or its a stupid reason. So Dana lets the world know. This is always in the back of fighters minds as far as do i really want everyone to know that I didn't want to fight this guy for THIS reason. So I think it keeps people honest. If the reason is personal I honestly think Dana would say it was personal issues and he wouldn't actually say what those personal issues are unless it was injury related. Fighters should have nothing to hide in respect to the fights and the business of fighting. I mean lets face it even their base salary is made public so you know its to be expected that everything else is gonna be center stage as well.

__________________

I-ya,
I against I,
flesh of my flesh,
and mind of my mind,
two of a kind but one won't survive,
my images reflect in the enemies eye,
and his images reflect in mine the same time

MagiK11

I didn't say that. All I am saying is that if I were in the fighters position, I wouldn't want them telling anybody I backed out of a fight. I believe it should be the fighter or their management team who should disclose such info, not the promoter.

I'll agree that when it comes to personal issues Dana is a pretty fair dude. The way he handled Denis Hallman's last fight and paid him his money even though they cut him, was pretty honorable, giving the situation. Also I like the points you brought up in your post, but following that line of thinking it can sometimes fall into gray area. One person might think the reason is a lame personal reason, or that it is a lame professioal reason, while others might justify the reason as being valid. And I must say I'm not super pissed over this issue, but to be fair to all fighters, I just always felt it should be their decision to reveal they declined a fight. I don't think the promoter has a right to mention it.

This example I'm about to give might be a bad one, but I almost see this like an HR issue at my job. I wouldn't want to have a talk with my HR department, which was private, and all of a sudden they go out and CC'ing my whole department through email and divulging part of our convo. It really isn't anyone elses business to know what we spoke about. It should be kept confidential. That's why in my opinion, a fight offer between a promoter and a fighter should be kept confedential, if the fighter refuses to fight, unless the fighter opts to say, "Hey, I backed out for whatever reason."

__________________

_CaptainRon

I can see Dana using this as leverage for a fight, but once a replacement has been booked it's damaging. He gambled with JBJ, attempting to pressure him into a fight with Chael, which didn't pay off. However, there is no telling how many replacement fights have been booked because the fighter is afraid to be perceived as weak.

__________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man."

halifaxdonair

i'm alright with it.

a fighter can change the context of the news by releasing the info first.

MikeHawk

If he didn't tell us, the reporters would just ask "why not this guy instead" and if they turned down the fight he'd have to tell them anyway.

RedRocket44

I'm with you.

In a perfect world this probably wouldn't happen, but Dana is ultimately a promoter, and will use whatever tactics he can to get the fights he wants.

He's also the type of guy that wouldn't think twice about throwing you under the bus if you've pissed him off, and then you turn down a fight.

LL

I'm pretty sure if you go back and watch some of his fights you'll hear Goldie and Rogan mention people have turned down Palhares, they don't name drop like Dana does but it's been pointed out that guys have turned him down.

As for if it's right or wrong, I don't really have an issue with it. For example, Mitrione turned down Cormier, well no shit, do you blame him? I don't. Mitrione is realistic about his skills and he knows Cormier would lay a whoopin' on him, I'm not gonna fault the guy for that.

On the other hand I do question Jones' decision to turn down Chael, I understand he didn't want Chael to get a title shot by talking and I got love for Chael but Jones is a nightmare for him, and on eight days notice Jones would have lit him up, badly. I don't think Jones is afraid of Chael, but it does seem "odd", I just don't understand why he'd turn down such a favorable match up.

__________________