Comments on: Would Affliction be the home of Fedor vs. Couture?

By: Sergio G. Hernandez

Sergio G. Hernandez — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:29:47 +0000

Yes, Hex, I chose my name based on a profession.

Thanks for proving me right. Jackass.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: ctownhood

ctownhood — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:19:46 +0000

“An interesting note is that if Affliction gets the bout, the match-up would be fought in the ring. That would seem to favor Emelianenko”

The other thing that favors Fedor is the fact he’s a better fighter.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Nate

Nate — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 07:22:07 +0000

Fedor vs Tim, I cant wait.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Darrel Smith Jr

Darrel Smith Jr — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 04:07:34 +0000

HexRei, I agree, you did not answer the question about his contract.

Randy signed a legally binding contract that required him to fight four times. He had already fought two of them. He would have fought Big Nog, and then someone else, and the contract would probably be over by now, and Randy wouldn’t be in this position.

I loved Randy, but after this BS, I can’t say that about him anymore.

But Hex, please tell what kind of inside information you have on this issue. Are you Randy’s lawyer? Agent?

Way to go verbally assaulting a guy over his name, when you’re name is HexRei. Seriously? Are you 15?

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: HexRei

HexRei — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:32:15 +0000

@#31 Or maybe I just don’t give a shit enough about you personally to explain why you’re wrong. You’ll see soon enough in a couple of months SERGIO (great name BTW, are you a hairdresser?)

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: neijia

neijia — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:49:19 +0000

#15 if Tim somehow pulled off the upset, that essentially would put Fedor at a real 27-1 (not counting the loss due to cut). Somehow that would mean that he is suddenly not the top heavyweight? Why, then, if Randy is 16-8, would we still consider him one of the top heavyweights?

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Sergio G. Hernandez

Sergio G. Hernandez — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:25:35 +0000

Hex, you never answered my question. Your smoke and mirrors answer proves nothing except that you might have no idea what you’re talking about.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: HexRei

HexRei — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:08:56 +0000

1) Not analogous. NFL contracts are a set rate over a year or period of years. UFC contracts are almost all per-fight, and UFC fighters can’t fight nearly as often as NFL players play. Some NFL players never have to play, but if a UFC fighter is injured he may not get paid again until he is healthy to fight again. UFC fighters don’t get paid to show up for practice and root the team on while they heal.

2) Certainly

3) Yes they should.

4) Yes they should.

5) Agreed.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: JohnnyRev

JohnnyRev — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:03:47 +0000

1. UFC contracts are no more overbearing or oppressive than any other major sports league. The NFL for example is far moreprohibitive than the current UFC ones.

2. It makes no sense for a company who spends so much money on there product to allow a contracted fighter advertise for a competitor or non sponsor.

3. Fighters should have a union that stipulates discrepancies and sets fundamental rules of all contracts.

4. Fighters should negotiate signing bonuses into all contracts.

5. Fights in a ring suck, period. So this is certainly not the place I would want this fight to happen.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Ken

Ken — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:28:20 +0000

sergio

“A crumpled up piece of paper falls on the floor next to Randy’s desk. He opens a note that reads: Do you wanna fight for me? Circle one: Yes No Maybe”

classic ^

“Randy looks over and sees a giggling Atencio, making an air heart with his fingers.”

who the hell is Atencio?

Like or Dislike: 0 0