Daniel Cormier doubts Jon Jones earns $30M for Tom Aspinall fight

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

Wild

Zi Nazi
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
94,117
136,504
1736367075977.png

Daniel Cormier believes Jon Jones might have to settle for a little bit less than he’s expecting to be paid for a much-anticipated grudge match with Tom Aspinall.

Jones and Aspinall have been locked into fight rumors for over a year now, with Jones holding the UFC’s undisputed heavyweight title and Aspinall reigning as interim champion. This tricky situation developed in November 2023, when Aspinall was booked to fight Sergei Pavlovich for the interim belt at UFC 295 after an injury caused the postponement of Jones vs. Stipe Miocic, which eventually took place at UFC 309.

Plenty of public negotiations have occurred between the two, with Jones stating flatly that he wants “f*ck you money” to face Aspinall, who Jones has consistently dismissed as a worthy challenger despite the British star’s 8-1 UFC record. Commentator Joe Rogan recently mentioned on his podcast that he heard Jones is asking for $30 million to fight Aspinall, a rumor that Cormier addressed on a recent podcast.

Cormier pointed to the announced $16 million Madison Square Garden gate of UFC 309 as justification for Jones’ demand, even if he thinks the actual payday could fall short of that mark.

“Now when you start looking at it like that, you start going, I don’t know if his ask is as crazy as people are saying,” Cormier said on his YouTube. “You can do 16 mil at the gate, you can do whatever you do on pay-per-view, you’ve got sponsorships for the fight night, those aren’t yours, you are bringing them on, but there are sponsors on fight night, now that ask is not so crazy.

“Rogan thinks the UFC will pay the $30 million to get Jon Jones in there with Tom Aspinall. I’m not sure he gets to 30, but if you ask for 30 and you get 20 or you get 15, that’s a win for Jon Jones on his way out. Especially living in Albuquerque, where everything is so dang cheap, he’s not living in California.”

Daniel Cormier doubts Jon Jones earns $30M for Tom Aspinall fight, but calls Jones’ strategy ‘very smart’ - MMA Fighting
 
Papi Chingon

Papi Chingon

Domesticated Hombre
Oct 19, 2015
29,418
36,557
So it is either true and UFC is doing damage control so other fights don't start making demands, or it was all bullshit to begin with. Based on the UFC never seeming to give in in the past, I'm going with it was a rumor based on true demands from Jones, but seeing that he only has a fight or two left in his career (his words) and he's under contract, what is his actual value to the UFC? not much. maybe the fight validates Aspinall but he doesn't need it.
Jones can either take the fight and get $10m or whatever he's paid, or get stripped and never be able to fight for money again (since he's under contract). Jones doesn't seem to have any leverage whatsoever.
 
Rambo John J

Rambo John J

Baker Team
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
78,159
77,349
The "Interim Champ" will have to defend his belt another half dozen times while the "Champ" finds another opponent he feels confident he can defeat.
 
jason73

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
76,475
140,547
so they pay him 30 mil for what? to beat their best heavyweight and retire? that doesnt sound like a good deal for the UFC . the champ retires and your number 1 guy is defeated leaving the heavyweight division in shambles .outside of jon and tom the division is a mess.

1736471787652.png
 
ender852

ender852

TMMAC Addict
Jan 31, 2015
13,033
11,964
Papi Chingon said:
So it is either true and UFC is doing damage control so other fights don't start making demands, or it was all bullshit to begin with. Based on the UFC never seeming to give in in the past, I'm going with it was a rumor based on true demands from Jones, but seeing that he only has a fight or two left in his career (his words) and he's under contract, what is his actual value to the UFC? not much. maybe the fight validates Aspinall but he doesn't need it.
Jones can either take the fight and get $10m or whatever he's paid, or get stripped and never be able to fight for money again (since he's under contract). Jones doesn't seem to have any leverage whatsoever.
Click to expand...
I think part of that lawsuit settlement said the contract is void after 2 years if the fighter never accepts a fight offered. The ufc is contractually obligated to offer fights, but the guy doesn't have to accept any offers they don't choose to.
 
ender852

ender852

TMMAC Addict
Jan 31, 2015
13,033
11,964
ender852 said:
I think part of that lawsuit settlement said the contract is void after 2 years if the fighter never accepts a fight offered. The ufc is contractually obligated to offer fights, but the guy doesn't have to accept any offers they don't choose to.
Click to expand...
Shit, it actually seems worse now...

"Return of controversial tolling provisions


One of the complaints in both antitrust lawsuits is the use of tolling provisions by the UFC to extend their contracts. If the promotion offers a fighter a bout and they are unable or unwilling to take it, the UFC has the ability to extend the agreement an additional six months or the amount of time required to find another opponent. Before 2017, there was no limit to the number of extensions the UFC can add this way. Contracts could therefore be in perpetuity if the fighter decided he was no longer willing to compete for the promotion.

In 2017, the UFC changed this provisions so that the maximum amount of time the UFC could extend a contract for a fighter that was unable or unwilling to compete was 18 months.

In the most recent contracts Bloody Elbow has obtained, this 18 month extension limit has been removed. The UFC has also added multiple reasons as for why opponents might not be available.

“In the event that Fighter is offered a Bout against an opponent designated by ZUFFA but does not accept that Bout because the Fighter is unable, unwilling or refuses to compete for any reason whatsoever (a “Declination”), for each such Declination, Zuffa may, at its election, extend the Term for the length of time sufficient to find a new opponent to accept the Bout or for six (6) months, whichever is longer. Such extension is necessary to provide Fighter with a suitable replacement Bout, as ZUFFA and Fighter recognize attendant difficulties including, but not limited to, that there is a limited pool of suitable opponents, suitable opponents may have pre-existing Bout obligations, and sufficient lead time must exist to adequately promote the replacement Bout.”
Click to expand...
Due to the return of this controversial clause, now the only limit to how long a contract could be extended is the five year “sunset” provision.

Longer ‘Sunset’ clause


Another welcome change stemming from the antitrust lawsuit was the “sunset” period added to UFC contracts. Francis Ngannou was able to become a free agent thanks to this clause terminating his contract after five years.

Unfortunately for other fighters moving forward, this section has since been tweaked.

Contracts Bloody Elbow have obtained now show that the sunset period starts after the fighter’s first bout, instead of the clock starting the day the deal was signed. They’ve also added a clause stating that suspensions no longer count on this duration.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Agreement will not be extended pursuant to this Section IV beyond the date which is five (5) years after Fighter’s first Bout under this Agreement, provided that any period of time in which Fighter is unable or unwilling to compete because he/she has been suspended or revoked by an Athletic Commission or anti-doping agency shall not be counted towards such five (5) year maximum term length.
Click to expand...
Compared to the previous set up, this new language could easily mean that the five-year period essentially ends up months or years longer, especially if Athletic Commission medical suspensions are included.

Is this legal?


How exactly would the UFC — a company being sued for abusing its market power by forcing one-sided contract terms — be allowed to now force contract terms that prevent them from being sued for abusing their market power?

Well, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld that this was legal in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis back in 2018 in a 5-4 ruling. This makes it unlikely that these new additions to UFC contracts can be challenged without new legislation."

Major changes to UFC contracts add more restrictions, waiver to prevent class action lawsuits

There have been significant changes in UFC contracts.
heynottheface.substack.com
 
Peruvian Necktiez

Peruvian Necktiez

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2017
418
434
Lamont Cranston said:
I can't stand DC.

He's such a phony and full of himself imo.
Click to expand...
its funny because he has some show nobody listens to where he calls himself The Good Guy ....

Bro is fake and a terrible commentator, he has been called for never doing his homework

The other day he corrected one of his partners and the dude straight up told him, on air: Yes DC but I would never correct my co-host on air

He does that all the time, but God forbid if anyone would correct his dumbarse, they would make DC an enemy for life because that is the kind of human that he is :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom