twitter google

Eddie Alvarez possibly shelved until September 2014 due to court case

Eddie Alvarez possibly shelved until September 2014 due to court case

It’s been more than six months since lightweight Eddie Alvarez last saw action in a cage. Rather, the 29-year old’s recent battles have been fought inside a courtroom due to a nasty dose of litigation over his contractual freedom involving former employer Bellator. And, unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that will be changing at any point in the near future barring a settlement between the opposing sides.

The suit between Bellator and Alvarez was addressed earlier this week when documents were filed determining a pre-trial conference would not be on the court’s agenda until September…of next year! Based on the time required for jury selection and hearings, it is likely Alvarez would be left in limbo until early 2015.

Alvarez’s Bellator contract expired last year with the exception of a “right to match” clause. The 24-3 fighter was then offered a deal by the UFC including certain stipulations Bellator could not technically meet. However, the financial terms listed were copied, leading the promotion to believe Alvarez was obligated to re-sign and ultimately driving them to oppose their former champion’s ability to ink Zuffa’s proposal.

6 COMMENTS
  • Richard Stabone says:

    Well, this sucks. But it seemed from the get-go this was going be a drawn out affair if both sides dug their heels in… but holy crap, late 2014??

    If Eddie had it to do over again, pretty safe to assume he wouldn’t have signed a contract that included a match clause. But what’s done is done, and now it’s time for him to cut his losses and seriously consider making things work with Bellator. He can’t just continue to sit on the sidelines, burning thru 2+ years of the prime of his career. That would be insane, and no potential PPV bonus is worth that tradeoff.

    Besides, how much PPV bonus could he really bank on? Maybe his UFC debut–if the UFC followed thru with its stated “intent” to grant him an immediate title shot–would provide PPV bonus opportunity. But if he lost that fight (to Bendo or Aldo or Pettis or whomever is holding the belt at that point), then what? Is he gonna get PPV revenue when he’s fighting Jim Miller or Josh Thomson his next time out? Highly unlikely. The PPV cut is a carrot the UFC can dangle but it’s very far from a sure thing, and from the UFC’s standpoint it was probably more of a negotiating chip they figured would help pry him away from Bellator.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • AlphaOmega says:

    Wow this sucks massively for Eddie. I agree with Richard, maybe he should just be like you know what screw it I’ll fight for Bellator. He’s already sold off all of his property almost, he said, to keep paying bills without fighting, can he really do that for a yr and 3 more months?

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • waitetr says:

    I think Eddie is at a point of no return. Even if he goes to Bellator I’m sure the contract would have to be re-written since I read in an interview with Bjorn that eddie was offered some TV deals which I suspect was the Fight Master series they are running now.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • AlphaOmega says:

    I think he was offered a potential tv fight time, and possible future PPVs that they are wanting to do, I think Fight Master was already in the works. But it will be a renegotiation, and probably a smaller contract then he had, but at this point it’s a paycheck which he isn’t getting now.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • waitetr says:

    But doesn’t his matching period have an expiration date? I thought I heard about some Bellator fighters willing to sit out 18months to let the matching period expire. Don’t know if that’s true or if it doesn’t apply in this situation since Bellator did “match”.

    If it does expire I’d say he might be free to fight before the trial but may continue and seek damages for lost money.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  • AlphaOmega says:

    It should by law, but I think since it’s now tied up in court dealings, that’s all moot, because it basically extends the life of it, or makes expiration dates null and void until the court cases are done.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

LEAVE A COMMENT!

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow 5OZ