Unfortunately, I’m seeing the shooting the messenger trend more and more. People treat Kevin Iole as if he was Dana White himself. Don’t hate on the man just because he has access.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Let me show you what I mean

Your statement “Where did you look up NFL signing bonuses, Dice? Because your info is not correct. It’s not uncommon for an NFL player to receive a signing bonus in installments. I’ve covered the NFL for years. Just because the signing bonus is reported as being up front doesn’t mean the player receives all of it at the time of his signing.”

What info wasn’t correct? Where did I state that they don’t receive bonuses in installments? If you find where I said that I will never post here again. I can find no statement of mine where I state this. Like I said before, it was a question I asked in post 5 and you answered in post 10. Please

My statement regarding signing bonuses was as such: That regardless of injury they are still valid. You go on to state that their are a variety of reasons(violation of code of conduct, failure to meet basic achievement clauses, etc.) that NFL players haven’t been paid their full bonus, however I see little or no relevance to what we are talking about. We aren’t talking about basic achievement clauses, etc., We are talking about whether signing bonuses are voided in the case of injuries and how that relates to the UFCs definition of a signing bonus. (which apparently is much different than that of any other major sports org. in that it does require
“basic acheievement” in that a fighter has to fight in at least one fight, of course whether this is in writing I am highly skeptical)

“. That being said, he did get the $250,000 in addition to his purse and his PPV bonus. And if the second half of the $250,000 he received of the promised $500,000 wasn’t second installment of a signing bonus, then what was it?”

I don’t know, could it be one of these famous locker room bonuses they hand out? Since they admit that they hand out these type of bonuses based solely on their discretion, I guess they can call it whatever they want (signing bonus, achievement bonus, etc)

“I’m sorry if you feel Couture is being mis-treated, but I’m not the one claiming he received a $500,000 signing bonus. Perhaps your angst would be better directed at the UFC?”

I have never stated a word that randy is being mistreated (I think he has his own issues to deal with). My statement has been very clear all along : The UFC claims this was a $500,000 signing bonus but would not have been fully paid out in the case of an injury. which is inconsistent with how signing bonuses usually are defined. I am trying to point out a contradiction in terms of their definition of signing bonus and other definitions.

As far as your perception of the situation (anything you wrote past point 5), well I think its spot on and pretty much in agreement with what I have been saying all along. All I was looking for from you was an acknowledgment that Dana’s statements didn’t seem to coincide with each other. On one side he made it sound like the $500,000 was a signing bonus in the sense that randy would have still received even if he was injured. On the other hand you stated that dana made it seem like the other half of this bonus would have been voided if randy injured himself. I don’t see how this is being selective in any sense of the word.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dice I think you’re wasting time.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

This is the last response I am going to make in regard to this topic because I really feel you are being selective in what you want to here. I also feel like you’re being overly-argumentative (it seems like you’re mad at the UFC and have decided to take it out on the messenger who is simply trying to relay what they informed the media yesterday):

You said: “Sorry but those two statements I copied of yours are different Sam. I don’t think I am the only one who sees how they are different.”

1) So far, you are the only person who requested a clarification on the way I originally worded how the UFC described the signing bonus to the media.

You said: “I just noticed that you slipped something in your post that I never said. You said my information about NFL bonuses wasn’t correct, when in fact it was.”

2) I didn’t “slip” anything in my post. I wrote it in my post to correct a statement of your which I do not agree with. There are been several cases in which NFL players were denied portions of their deferred signing bonus for various reasons (violation of code of conduct, failure to meet basic achievement clauses, etc.). There have been cases where signing bonuses were tied to incentives that were not performance related (i.e. roster bonus). There have even been cases where NFL teams have gone back and tried to recover signing bonuses that were previously paid out (the Colts want to get money back from Corey Simon). So I don’t think it’s a stretch for me to say that your original statement about signing bonuses is correct.

You said: “but you also need to be critical of what both dana and randy say. So I notice everyone is quick to point out that randy was incorrect (wrong, lying, whatever you want to call it) when talking about how much he received in payment for the UFC. But I don’t see many people pointing out the glaring contradiction in dana’s statement regarding signing bonuses.”

3) First off, what I NEED to do is report a story and the facts above anything else (unless I’m writing an OP/ED piece). I reported what the UFC said so that the public can decide. I DID NOT SAY Randy Couture received a $500,000 signing bonus — I said that the UFC IS CLAIMING he received a $500,000 signing bonus. I’m sorry if you feel Couture is being mis-treated, but I’m not the one claiming he received a $500,000 signing bonus. Perhaps your angst would be better directed at the UFC?

Now, once I report the facts I would hope, if it’s okay with you, that I have time to go over information before I make a statement that could be critical. Also, I also hope, with your permission, I can use my own personal discretion when I feel there is a need to be critical — not when you feel I need to be critical. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Is is mandatory that I share yours?

You said: “The very fact that you seem to not understand my point worries me.”

4) I’m sorry that you’re worried. I guess then I can’t help but be worried that you don’t seem to understand that last Thursday Randy Couture held a press conference and claimed he requested a signing bonus and didn’t receive one, when in reality, he received $250,000 at the time of his re-signing with the UFC early last year.

We can argue about the semantics about the other $250,000 until the cows come home, but the bottom line is that Couture did in fact receive a substantial signing bonus when he mis-stated he had not. Based on that, I’m choosing to be critical of Couture in that select instance. I don’t think he lied but I do believe he made a statement that was clearly not accurate. You see the UFC as doing the spin and I see Randy as being the one he is trying to spin the fact that he was paid $250,000 when he re-signed with the UFC last year. We’ll have to agree to disagree.

5) I don’t see how anyone can debate what the initial payment of the $250,000 was. But I’ll indulge you on your argument about the second half of the $250,000. FACT: The UFC describe it as a $500,000 signing bonus. OPINION: Just because the UFC says it is a $500,000 signing bonus, doesn’t mean it is (but I am reporting it how they say it so you can decide rather than taking the liberty of phrasing it how I perceive it).

In regard to my perception of the situation, I think Dana was clear. He said that Randy wanted a $500,000 signing bonus. Instead of telling Randy “no,” they told him they were concerned about giving him that much at his age because of the threat of a career-ending injury. So rather then tell him a flat out no, they told him he’d get the other half after UFC 68. I HAVE NO IDEA what would have happened if he had gotten injured prior to UFC 68 and retired for good. My feeling is that if he couldn’t have fought at UFC 68, he wouldn’t have gotten the other $250,000 unless he fought on another card. That being said, he did get the $250,000 in addition to his purse and his PPV bonus. And if the second half of the $250,000 he received of the promised $500,000 wasn’t second installment of a signing bonus, then what was it?

The UFC did not want to hand Couture $500,000 without having fought a single match for them. So they told him he could get the other half so long as he fought one match for them. It was an easily-attainable performance bonus but a bonus that was categorized by the UFC as the second half of a “signing bonus.” The fact of what the UFC is describing the bonus as being cannot be disputed because that’s what they labeled it in their own words. Now, if you want to argue with them that they are describing it in such a manner, perhaps you should go argue with them in their choice of words, instead of me.

That’s all I have to say. If you still have questions, please re-read this statement a second time.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I just noticed that you slipped something in your post that I never said. You said my information about NFL bonuses wasn’t correct, when in fact it was. You stated that NFL players do indeed receive their signing bonuses in installments, which I never said they didn’t. I don’t know how you concluded that I was saying that NFL players don’t receive their bonuses in installments.(it was a question I asked and you answered in post #10) My statement was talking about whether they still receive the full bonus in case of injury, which a completely different subject than in what form (installments, lump sum) its paid.

I am simply pointing out things that some people seem very apprehensive to admit.
Mainly that Dana is contradicting himself when it came to the conditions of the signing bonus. I guess I am wondering if my explanation is sufficient enough. Do you not see what I am talking about? Do you think I am wrong, and if so how?

What I am gathering is that this must have been some special type of UFC signing bonus, that is unlike any other major sports signing bonus in that in the case of an athlete being injured, then the remaining bonus can be voided.

You are correct that you are the messenger, but you also need to be critical of what both dana and randy say. So I notice everyone is quick to point out that randy was incorrect (wrong, lying, whatever you want to call it) when talking about how much he received in payment for the UFC. But I don’t see many people pointing out the glaring contradiction in dana’s statement regarding signing bonuses. The very fact that you seem to not understand my point worries me.

I am not going to take up anymore of your time.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’m sorry if my explanation is not sufficient but I do not know how to be any more clear than I was.

Dana described the $500,000 as a signing bonus with $250,000 paid at the time of signing and $250,000 to be paid after the first match.

Don’t shoot the messenger.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

As for your statement that it is not uncommon for an NFL player to receive a signing bonus in installments, well I don’t see where you are coming from. I am saying that because I never wrote that they don’t receive it in installments. Reread my post, I said “If a NFL player gets injured and misses 16 out of 16 games, he still receives his signing bonus. I looked it up.” Nowhere do I state that they receive it in a lump sum, so I don’t know where you got that from. When researching it I found that the bonus is often paid in installments, however like I said before, it is guaranteed even in the case of injury. Therefore, if the $500,000 was indeed a true signing bonus, then the UFC would have still had to pay Randy even if he was injured. However you state that this is not the case.

I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt here but I feel like your dancing around the issue I raised.

So let me ask it again, how is it a signing bonus if half of it would have been with held in case of an injury? This is not consistent with how other sports signing bonuses work. Like I said before, an injury in the NBA or NFL does not void the signing bonus or whats remaining on it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

To me, what was written initially and what I wrote as my clarification were intended and read the same. I realize that it did not read the same to you so I posted the clarification. Sorry, but I am unable to be anymore clear than I’ve already have tried to be.

I’m not defending anyone’s position, merely communicating what was said: Randy asked for $500,000 signing bonus. Dana was concerned about the possibility of Randy getting injured in training and never fighting again. So they gave him $250,000 at the time of signing and promised another $250,000 (in addition to his purse) after the first fight.

Regardless of whether someone feels the UFC is using semantics in regard to the $250,000 after the first fight, he still received $250,000 at the signing, which is $250,000 more than he said he received during his press conference last Thursday.

Where did you look up NFL signing bonuses, Dice? Because your info is not correct. It’s not uncommon for an NFL player to receive a signing bonus in installments. I’ve covered the NFL for years. Just because the signing bonus is reported as being up front doesn’t mean the player receives all of it at the time of his signing.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Your article “According to Mulkey, Randy Couture received a $500,000 signing bonus”

So we have established that the entire $500,000 was a signing bonus, not just half of it.

Your article “Dana White explained that it was a true signing bonus in the sense that if Randy, given his age, was injured and couldn’t compete, he’d still get his bonus.”

So if randy was to be injured he would have still received the other half of his signing bonus. Because it was considered guaranteed money, which is what a signing bonus technically is. If a NFL player gets injured and misses 16 out of 16 games, he still receives his signing bonus. I looked it up.

Your post “What Dana said was that they didn’t want to give $500,000 at the time of signing because if Couture got injured before the Sylvia fight, they’d be out half a million. Rather than tell Randy no, they gave him $250,000 at the time of signing and agreed to release the rest after his first fight. They wanted to make sure he fought at least one match for them. What is they paid him half a mil, he busted his knee, and never fought again”

So now sam, your saying that dana said they didn’t want to give him the full 500 grand because if he was injured then they wouldn’t have had to pay him the other half. Do you see the contradiction between your article and your post?

Now instead of just reposting what you said earlier, maybe we could get some clarification on this. Anybody else is open to respond as well.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

They tried to make it seems like Couture is the bad guy. Now they are using scare tactics and saying that if randy tries to fight with another org than they will take hiim to court. It’s fuckin ridiculous.

Like or Dislike: 0  0