Rampage NOT fighting at UFC 186

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

relativity

Active Member
Apr 7, 2015
26
32
Oh, too bad. This was completely unpredictable on UFC's part. They had no way of knowing for the past month this fight may not happen. In fact, this is completely Bellator's fault for not directly notifying UFC's customers more than a month ago that Rampage was still under contract. I'm completely disgusted with Bellator's bully behavior and taking total advantage of Zuffa's battle fatigued legal team.

I blame Bellator first, Rampage second, and UFC last. Dana White is the victim here and I will support him by buying this PPV.

edit: this post was a joke
 

Wild

Zi Nazi
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
85,004
123,331
Oh, too bad. This was completely unpredictable on UFC's part. They had no way of knowing for the past month this fight may not happen. In fact, this is completely Bellator's fault for not directly notifying UFC's customers more than a month ago that Rampage was still under contract. I'm completely disgusted with Bellator's bully behavior and taking total advantage of Zuffa's battle fatigued legal team.

I blame Bellator first, Rampage second, and UFC last. Dana White is the victim here and I will support him by buying this PPV.
This thread may change your mind :) Zuffa statement on Rampage injunction... get /facepalm ready | The MMA Community Forum
 

megatherium

el rey del mambo
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
8,798
11,164
The UFC don't offer refunds if there is a title fight on the card, so are the Bell Centre eating the costs? I find that unlikely and I don't really find BJPenn.com very reputable.
Thus far, UFC has only offered refunds in states that have rules in place that force them to.

I don't expect this policy to change anytime soon, and Montreal (or anywhere in Canada) is known to be fertile ground for UFC bait and switch grifting.

Certain major fight commissions' bylaws do provide for a refund in the case of a change to the main or the co-main event, but not in Canada.
 

ChaosOverkill

Conor is ushering in the Chomochiq fashion era.
First 100
Jan 16, 2015
6,230
4,845
Oh, too bad. This was completely unpredictable on UFC's part. They had no way of knowing for the past month this fight may not happen. In fact, this is completely Bellator's fault for not directly notifying UFC's customers more than a month ago that Rampage was still under contract. I'm completely disgusted with Bellator's bully behavior and taking total advantage of Zuffa's battle fatigued legal team.

I blame Bellator first, Rampage second, and UFC last. Dana White is the victim here and I will support him by buying this PPV.

edit: this post was a joke

Based on their statement, they "Took Rampage's word for it, that they were in breach of his contract" do whatever math you feel is needed from that.

ZUFFA entered into a situation they knew was going to take time to sort out, and put him on a card knowing full well an injunction was going to come down. Unless of course Zuffa has the worst lawyers in the entire world, which you know, I'm sure is possible.
 

La Paix

Fuck this place
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
38,273
64,597
The UFC don't offer refunds if there is a title fight on the card, so are the Bell Centre eating the costs? I find that unlikely and I don't really find BJPenn.com very reputable.
I got a refund for my tickets when the first DC vs Jones fell apart. Pretty sure it was the UFC giving it but I also oayed the extra $25 for some sort of insurance iirc.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,355
32,126
I got a refund for my tickets when the first DC vs Jones fell apart. Pretty sure it was the UFC giving it but I also oayed the extra $25 for some sort of insurance iirc.
Did they get a title fight to replace that fight? I've been told they don't do refunds when they can replace a lost title fight with another, or if there was two title fights to begin with and the card only lost one.
 

D241

Banned
Jan 14, 2015
4,384
4,741
In Dallas Tx when Strikeforce game to town, Strikeforce was Zuffa owned at this point and Gina Carano got pulled from the card. No refund talks nor did they replace her fight, it simply was removed and fans who had paid were just dealt with like..."meh".
 

D241

Banned
Jan 14, 2015
4,384
4,741
Based on their statement, they "Took Rampage's word for it, that they were in breach of his contract" do whatever math you feel is needed from that.

ZUFFA entered into a situation they knew was going to take time to sort out, and put him on a card knowing full well an injunction was going to come down. Unless of course Zuffa has the worst lawyers in the entire world, which you know, I'm sure is possible.
I talked to my brother on the phone last night and one of the mma discussions we had was on this subject. I know sometimes he has a different view and wanted his take on it. I told him that a 'theory' was that Zuffa purposely tried to sign him based on the monopoly lawsuit so that Zuffa could purposely lose Rampage back to Bellator and use it as an example of, "see, we're not a monopoly, we tried to get one of our old stars back but the promotion he's under took us to court and won".

When I told my brother, my brother's response was that he finds it very hard to believe that a big organization like Zuffa who has been in the game longer than anyone, wouldn't go over every detail of his contract with a fine tooth comb to make sure everything is on the up and up before signing him. He said it was very out of character of UFC to not do their research and pointed out that UFC hires some of the best lawyers.

I tend to believe UFC completely knew Bellator had rights to Rampage's contract, and UFC has no loyalty owed to Rampage to drag him through this. I think UFC saw this as a good opportunity to give them ground on their monopoly lawsuit.


Thoughts?
 

ChaosOverkill

Conor is ushering in the Chomochiq fashion era.
First 100
Jan 16, 2015
6,230
4,845
I talked to my brother on the phone last night and one of the mma discussions we had was on this subject. I know sometimes he has a different view and wanted his take on it. I told him that a 'theory' was that Zuffa purposely tried to sign him based on the monopoly lawsuit so that Zuffa could purposely lose Rampage back to Bellator and use it as an example of, "see, we're not a monopoly, we tried to get one of our old stars back but the promotion he's under took us to court and won".

When I told my brother, my brother's response was that he finds it very hard to believe that a big organization like Zuffa who has been in the game longer than anyone, wouldn't go over every detail of his contract with a fine tooth comb to make sure everything is on the up and up before signing him. He said it was very out of character of UFC to not do their research and pointed out that UFC hires some of the best lawyers.

I tend to believe UFC completely knew Bellator had rights to Rampage's contract, and UFC has no loyalty owed to Rampage to drag him through this. I think UFC saw this as a good opportunity to give them ground on their monopoly lawsuit.


Thoughts?

Yep that's pretty much the view going on about this, we probably won't know the truth unless we're told about them using it in their lawsuit defence, because as we know, the reporters are not likely to ask or Kim Jong Clean will blow his stack.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,355
32,126
I'd just like to point out that Rampage and the UFC have not lost the lawsuit, yet. There was merely an injunction against Rampage competing for the UFC until the lawsuit is completed. To get that injunction that had to show that Rampage competing for the UFC, posed a substantial threat of irreparable damages, that the balance of harm weighs in their favour and that they have a likelihood of winning the case. Rampage may very well still end up with the UFC.
 

D241

Banned
Jan 14, 2015
4,384
4,741
I'm betting Rampage has to either fulfill his Bellator contract or have it bought out before he fights in UFC Zeph. What do you think?
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,355
32,126
I'm betting Rampage has to either fulfill his Bellator contract or have it bought out before he fights in UFC Zeph. What do you think?
Well, losing the injunction isn't a good sign. The smart money would be with you, I'd think.
 

Ministry of Silly Walks

came in like a wrecking ball
First 100
Amateur Fighter
Jan 15, 2015
4,566
5,134
this won't help the ufc. the lawsuit is dealing from around 2006, through now. this is something that king of the cage could do with their contracts. this is something any minor league promotion could do.
 

ChaosOverkill

Conor is ushering in the Chomochiq fashion era.
First 100
Jan 16, 2015
6,230
4,845
I'd just like to point out that Rampage and the UFC have not lost the lawsuit, yet. There was merely an injunction against Rampage competing for the UFC until the lawsuit is completed. To get that injunction that had to show that Rampage competing for the UFC, posed a substantial threat of irreparable damages, that the balance of harm weighs in their favour and that they have a likelihood of winning the case. Rampage may very well still end up with the UFC.
The main counter to this is the statement, "The UFC organization was surprised about the ruling because Mr. Jackson represented to UFC on multiple occasions that he was free to negotiate and contract with UFC", nothing about this whole thing seems cut and dry as an action to re-lock up someone that can hurt them (which is debatable at this point with how whiny and disgruntled Rampage is) this to me, is either totally about the lawsuit (which has valid counter arguments) OR a third strategy, playing Rampage into a position where he doesn't want to fight for Bellator and CAN'T fight for the UFC and ends up essentially in limbo like Wanderlei in the reverse position (but for a non PED testing reason) where the UFC would probably rather he be based on his attitude and difficulty to deal with him, neutralized completely for good.

They seem to be suggesting they did no due diligence over and above Rampage telling them he was a free agent which for Zuffa is patently absurd to consider possible. To me that is a facetious statement with an ulterior motive where they knew this injunction was coming. They either want this legal battle for what it ends up providing in arguments elsewhere for them or they want to make Rampage retire from limbo status and his age/lacking remaining motivation IMO. At the very most they expected to get this Maldonado fight out of him and then the legal limbo would begin for him.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,355
32,126
The main counter to this is the statement, "The UFC organization was surprised about the ruling because Mr. Jackson represented to UFC on multiple occasions that he was free to negotiate and contract with UFC", nothing about this whole thing seems cut and dry as an action to re-lock up someone that can hurt them (which is debatable at this point with how whiny and disgruntled Rampage is) this to me, is either totally about the lawsuit (which has valid counter arguments) OR a third strategy, playing Rampage into a position where he doesn't want to fight for Bellator and CAN'T fight for the UFC and ends up essentially in limbo like Wanderlei in the reverse position (but for a non PED testing reason) where the UFC would probably rather he be based on his attitude and difficulty to deal with him, neutralized completely for good.

They seem to be suggesting they did no due diligence over and above Rampage telling them he was a free agent which for Zuffa is patently absurd to consider possible. To me that is a facetious statement with an ulterior motive where they knew this injunction was coming. They either want this legal battle for what it ends up providing in arguments elsewhere for them or they want to make Rampage retire from limbo status and his age/lacking remaining motivation IMO. At the very most they expected to get this Maldonado fight out of him and then the legal limbo would begin for him.
You are speaking of motives as to why the UFC contracted Rampage. I was merely pointing out the lawsuit isn't lost quite yet.
 

ChaosOverkill

Conor is ushering in the Chomochiq fashion era.
First 100
Jan 16, 2015
6,230
4,845
You are speaking of motives as to why the UFC contracted Rampage. I was merely pointing out the lawsuit isn't lost quite yet.
Yeah the language sort of confused me but I in regards to your last line in the statement I'm just not sure they even want that to happen.
 

dacofty

Yea..Ok..Whatever
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
9,485
9,454
I talked to my brother on the phone last night and one of the mma discussions we had was on this subject. I know sometimes he has a different view and wanted his take on it. I told him that a 'theory' was that Zuffa purposely tried to sign him based on the monopoly lawsuit so that Zuffa could purposely lose Rampage back to Bellator and use it as an example of, "see, we're not a monopoly, we tried to get one of our old stars back but the promotion he's under took us to court and won".

When I told my brother, my brother's response was that he finds it very hard to believe that a big organization like Zuffa who has been in the game longer than anyone, wouldn't go over every detail of his contract with a fine tooth comb to make sure everything is on the up and up before signing him. He said it was very out of character of UFC to not do their research and pointed out that UFC hires some of the best lawyers.

I tend to believe UFC completely knew Bellator had rights to Rampage's contract, and UFC has no loyalty owed to Rampage to drag him through this. I think UFC saw this as a good opportunity to give them ground on their monopoly lawsuit.


Thoughts?
I agree, the UFC knows full well what was gonna happen, they are as non straight as they come. I wouldnt doubt if your theory is right on the money.