Late last year the UFC announced that it would be changing the way that sponsors are displayed inside the Octagon. Before this policy, a fighter had the opportunity to court any company to advertise on his or her cage banner or his or her shorts as long as they were not directly adverse to the standards of the UFC, directly adverse to official partners of the promoter, and that each sponsor company pays what the UFC nicknamed the "sponsorship tax." However, some fighters struggled to obtain sponsors. One famous case was that of Ultimate Fighter alum Cody Mackenzie who fought in shorts straight off the rack of a Sport's Authority with the tags still on them. Others like retired UFC fighter Mac Danzig refused sponsors when he wore shorts that had the words "Not For Sale" emblazoned on them.
The UFC wants to appeal to a new audience, to continue its expansion, and make itself embody the image of a premier sports league (making its competitors look like minor leagues). In November, the promotion announced that it was going to sign an exclusive deal with Reebok to outfit its fighters essentially creating uniforms. Any money that was made in the deal would be spread throughout the UFC's roster according to their position on the promotion's media rankings. Several athletes have already signed exclusive deals with Reebok. The first to benefit from this deal were woman's bantamweight champion Ronda Rousey and the light heavyweight champion Jon Jones. They were followed soon after by former welterweight champion Johnny Hendricks, lightweight champion Anthony Pettis, featherweight sensation Connor McGregor, and straw weight and fan favorite Paige Van Zant.
Many fighters complained about the unfairness of the uniform policy as they saw their monetary prospects disappearing very quickly. One fighter said that after the announcement six sponsor's suddenly left him. With over 500 fighters currently on the roster it would seem that money would be spread pretty thin. Also it would create a highly competitive system where a certain position on the ranking may mean a huge difference when it comes to the apparel fund available to a particular fighter.
Due to the outstanding amount of criticism the UFC and Reebok announced today that they were retooling the process. Both companies are going to change the rankings system into one that will be tiered according to a fighter's tenure, rewarding fighters who have been in the business longer and who have established names under the promotions' banner. Essentially the tiers will be broken up as follows: 1-5 fights, 6-10 fights, 11-15 fights, 16-20 fights, and more than 21 fights (champions are excluded from this tier system). The uniform policy comes into effect in July of this year.
Whether this will succeed remains to be seen, but it is concern for the ongoing litigation for which the UFC is a party at this time. Feel free to leave any questions or comments down below. Follow me on Google +, and via twitter @mmalegal2016.
Many fighters complained about the unfairness of the uniform policy as they saw their monetary prospects disappearing very quickly. One fighter said that after the announcement six sponsor's suddenly left him. With over 500 fighters currently on the roster it would seem that money would be spread pretty thin. Also it would create a highly competitive system where a certain position on the ranking may mean a huge difference when it comes to the apparel fund available to a particular fighter.
Due to the outstanding amount of criticism the UFC and Reebok announced today that they were retooling the process. Both companies are going to change the rankings system into one that will be tiered according to a fighter's tenure, rewarding fighters who have been in the business longer and who have established names under the promotions' banner. Essentially the tiers will be broken up as follows: 1-5 fights, 6-10 fights, 11-15 fights, 16-20 fights, and more than 21 fights (champions are excluded from this tier system). The uniform policy comes into effect in July of this year.
Whether this will succeed remains to be seen, but it is concern for the ongoing litigation for which the UFC is a party at this time. Feel free to leave any questions or comments down below. Follow me on Google +, and via twitter @mmalegal2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment