Over the past 24 hours, many words have been written about the UFC’s new “athlete outfitting policy.” Many words will be written in the future, as athletes, managers and the UFC figure out how to tread this rocky new ground.
I don’t know what the UFC’s move to a standard uniform means for the athletes who compete under its banner. When I first began reporting on the uniform story in February, I was conflicted. I remain so today.
On one hand, it makes the sport look more professional, and that is a good thing. I have every confidence that Reebok will design clean, inspired clothes for UFC fighters to wear in and out of the Octagon. The design nerd in me thinks that is a much better option than what we have currently, which is a mishmash of logos and brands splayed across the cage and television screen.
Instead of looking like NASCAR, the UFC will look more like the NFL, NBA or English Premier League.
But we don’t want everybody to look the same. Fans already have a difficult time differentiating between the hundreds of fighters appearing on many UFC cards around the world. Putting them in the same clothing makes that task even more difficult.
But again, I have faith that Reebok’s design team will come up with plenty of options for UFC fighters to choose from. So we’ll set aside that worry for now and focus on the one alarming thing from Tuesday’s press conference in New York City: sponsor pay being determined by media rankings.
Here’s how it will work: Fighters will be paid in a tiered system based on their position in the official UFC rankings on the day they weigh in before their fight. UFC champions will make the largest amount. Fighters ranked 1-5 will receive the next largest amount, followed by 6-10, 11-15 and unranked fighters.
That’s all fine and good. A tiered system makes the most sense when trying to figure out how to divide up the money. Champions should earn the most, and preliminary/unranked fighters should earn the least.
The problem lies in how the rankings are created. For a journalist who wants to do the right thing, there are several major conflicts with participating in the official rankings.
The first is that we, as media, should not have any sort of influence over how much a fighter is paid. In giving the media that much control, you’re opening up the entire system to corruption. And while the idea of an MMA manager bribing a media member to change his or her vote may sound ridiculous on the surface, the idea that it could happen is a problem.
I don’t know a large majority of the media members who make up the UFC’s ranking panel. I’ve never heard of them. I know the guys who do this full time. I see them at events, and I know they maintain high standards when it comes to ethics. But I can’t say the same for the folks who vote in the rankings. I don’t know if they are susceptible to a sweet-talking manager. I don’t know if they’d be willing to bump a certain fighter up the rankings in exchange for an exclusive interview.
The second problem is that any rankings system overseen and controlled by the UFC cannot be seen as independent and without fault.
I used to take part in the rankings. I didn’t feel like there was a conflict of interest because Dana White repeatedly noted that the rankings didn’t mean anything. They were for television viewers. They helped add context to broadcasts.
But on May 7, without warning, the UFC removed Nate Diaz from its rankings. He was no longer available to be ranked on my ballot. The UFC said the reason was that Diaz refused to accept fights. In reality, it felt like a negotiating power play by the UFC. I immediately submitted my resignation from the rankings panel. I was fine participating in the program when it didn’t really mean anything outside of a television broadcast. But when it started becoming a tool used during negotiations, I had to step aside.
Now, the rankings mean even more. We don’t know the monetary levels for each tier of Reebok money, but we do know that fighters ranked 6-10 will make more than fighters ranked 11-15. When Diaz was removed from the ballots, he was ranked sixth; today, he is ranked 12th. Diaz dropped six places solely due to the UFC’s decision to drop him from the rankings, and those six places will cost Diaz money.
You can see the problems. They are glaring, and there are no easy solutions. My colleague Jonathan Snowden proposed having a smaller independent media group establish the rankings, without oversight from the UFC. That might work, but I think you’ll find it difficult to get credible media members to participate, because most of us believe we should have no direct effect on the amount of money fighters make.
Another solution is having matchmakers Joe Silva and Sean Shelby create the rankings. Both men already have an idea of how they rank each division, even if they do not write it down. Publishing their rankings makes a lot of sense. But as with every other option, it will only work if they are allowed to do the rankings without oversight or input from White or anyone else.
There is also the option of opening up voting to fans. Both hardcore and casual fans have a good idea of what they like to see. It is not a perfect system, but it is better than the current proposal.
There are no easy answers to this problem. But one thing is certain: Allowing the current media rankings panel to essentially determine how much each UFC fighter earns from this Reebok deal is a terrible idea. It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be fixed long before the Reebok deal goes into effect next July. And if it isn’t fixed, the UFC will find itself with a lot of angry fighters to deal with.
Read more MMA news on BleacherReport.com