[Col Reb]

This comes from a post on Sherdog. It's very interesting, breaking down the data for UFC fighter pay vs Affliction fighter pay. The UFC fighters get peanuts compared to HBO boxing. I would love to see a graph that has the HBO boxer data on the chart for comparison.

http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f2/ufc-cant-...inside-1286327/

[rusty_trombone]

This comes from a post on Sherdog. It's very interesting, breaking down the data for UFC fighter pay vs Affliction fighter pay. The UFC fighters get peanuts compared to HBO boxing. I would love to see a graph that has the HBO boxer data on the chart for comparison.

http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f2/ufc-cant-...inside-1286327/

yeah, it's a known fact the mma fighters work for peanuts.

[Guest_Fitz_*]

What's the problem? Are UFC fighter paid too low, or are boxers paid too high? I personally think it's a bit of both, though the problem with boxing is that there is no good median. I think some boxers are paid way too much and it's why boxing is the way it is.
They have way too much say on some things and it's why certain fights don't happen and questionable fights do. For me, I think boxing should have some kind of average base, and then depending on marketability or something, they get paid percentages on bonuses and such.
UFC fights are probably underpaid a little, but at least they have control there and some kind of standard, which makes it much easier to not only have good fights happening, they seem to have good cards at all. Because they don't throw all their money at the main event and cheap out on the rest of the card.

[Spyder]

What's the problem? Are UFC fighter paid too low, or are boxers paid too high? I personally think it's a bit of both, though the problem with boxing is that there is no good median. I think some boxers are paid way too much and it's why boxing is the way it is.
They have way too much say on some things and it's why certain fights don't happen and questionable fights do. For me, I think boxing should have some kind of average base, and then depending on marketability or something, they get paid percentages on bonuses and such.
UFC fights are probably underpaid a little, but at least they have control there and some kind of standard, which makes it much easier to not only have good fights happening, they seem to have good cards at all. Because they don't throw all their money at the main event and cheap out on the rest of the card.

I think this statement pretty much sums up the difference between being American, and being a foreigner.

[Col Reb]

Their control is a double-edged sword. Having Dana in total control does make it easy for fights and drives down competitive wages, but it can also lead to fights being impossible to make (e.g. Fedor vs UFC guys). On the other hand, boxing has its own issues by being watered down with so many sanctioning bodies and promoters; but it does make for better boxer wages through the free market. While it makes some matches more difficult to make, at least there is a standard set of operating procedures unlike MMA (cage vs ring, etc.) and there is a general level of cooperation between the different promoters. I would love to hear Mark Taffert or James Toney's opinion on the wages issue.

This post has been edited by Col Reb: Jul 25 2010, 12:19 AM

[Guest_Fitz_*]

I think this statement pretty much sums up the difference between being American, and being a foreigner.

How so? I honestly don't know, but explain what you mean.

[Run and Gun Game...]

in boxing you have 1 big fight on a card, In MMa you have 3 to 4

[Spyder]

How so? I honestly don't know, but explain what you mean.

In Free Market Capitalism, the market can operate free of Government oversight...other than the protection from obvious contract infringements. In that process, which is the process that boxing operates under, each company(the boxer) has the freedom to make as much money as possible. That's a very American point of view.

The one that you suggest is the antithesis of that, in which the government oversees each companies' earnings and places limits and restrictions on those. Kinda what the current regime in Washington is attempting, and a reason that people are upset. I think that history tells us which system is better for the market-place, and leads to a healthier economy.

In the context of the fight game...reduce the amount that boxers get paid, and suddenly getting punched in the face does not seem like a wise career choice.

[JLUVBABY]

the boxer has been spoiled to no return... they are grossly overpaid for a lot of non effort... and the fighters that should be getting the 20 plus millin dont even make a million a fight.. go figure...

[Guest_Fitz_*]

In Free Market Capitalism, the market can operate free of Government oversight...other than the protection from obvious contract infringements. In that process, which is the process that boxing operates under, each company(the boxer) has the freedom to make as much money as possible. That's a very American point of view.

The one that you suggest is the antithesis of that, in which the government oversees each companies' earnings and places limits and restrictions on those. Kinda what the current regime in Washington is attempting, and a reason that people are upset. I think that history tells us which system is better for the market-place, and leads to a healthier economy.

In the context of the fight game...reduce the amount that boxers get paid, and suddenly getting punched in the face does not seem like a wise career choice.

Fair enough. That's fine, though as a fan. I think it compromises the quality of the sport.