More Options:  Print This Post  Email This Post  RSS Feeds Share:

Charles Jay

Some people have already beaten the whole Randy Couture-Zuffa-HDNet thing to death, and so I can tell you that I’m not going to spend weeks and weeks on it. In a broader sense, I would think that Couture’s “declaration of independence” from the UFC says something about the way the organization sees its relationship with fighters and the industry. If the heavyweight champ is grossly unhappy; enough to pick up and leave, giving up a belt in the process, what kind of message does that send to dozens and dozens of fighters who are on the lower rungs who would love to occupy his position some day? If they’re smart, it might give them a little pause, and provide some teeth to that old saying, “Forewarned is forearmed.”

That having been said, and without the benefit of having looked at the contract between Couture and the UFC, I would offer the following observations based on what I am aware of:

1) If Couture committed to a four-fight contract and fought only twice pursuant to performing on that contract, he cannot just terminate the contract and declare himself a free agent. He would still appear to owe the organization two fights, and only then could he make a case for having fulfilled it.

2) If Couture actually “retires” then he is retired. You obviously can’t force anyone to get into the Octagon. But short of that, he’s obligated. If he decides that he is going to resume his fighting career, he can not just say “Okay - the time period ran out, so now I can leave.” No - I have been through this same situation in boxing before. If the time expires on a promotional contract, and the promoter has failed to make good faith offers on the number of fights that were promised, then the contract is over if the fighter wants it to be. That is not the case here. If the fighter doesn’t want to fight and informs the promoter about it, the contract can literally be suspended right there, to be resumed if and when the fighter makes a decision to compete again. You see, otherwise a fighter could sign a promotional deal, perhaps even get some consideration out of it, then continually feign injury or turn down reasonable offers or come up with any excuse not to fight and let the contract expire. When a fighter can not possibly fight (due to injury or an imposed suspension) or declares himself otherwise unavailable, as Couture seems to have done, the promoters should have the right to protect themselves.

3) As far as non-compete clauses under the employment contract, if Couture actively engages in any promotional activities on behalf of a competitor of the UFC, he would be violating the non-compete. Violations do not necessarily include placing fighters under his tutelage or management on an IFL card, unless his association with them was being utilized for promotional purposes. If his likeness is being used in any way to promote the show, that is naturally a violation. And here it seems to be the case. Non-compete clauses are not uncommon at all, when the name or image or likeness of the person who is so bound by them is something of real value.

4) I don’t think there is anything out of line about Couture signing a deal with HDNet (Mark Cuban) in anticipation of his UFC obligations expiring (the date of which is still to be determined, I guess). This is something that is very common as well, although it gets a little dicey when going from one competitor to another (but such is life). However, I can’t see where Cuban could really do anything with him until that time, since anything Couture would be doing would have to involve either fighting under the HDNet banner or performing some service for HDNet, whether it be on the air or in some promotional capacity.

5) I know that Couture is looking for an “out.” There is nothing I know of that gives him this “out,” but of course I do not know the extent of his deals. For example, if the UFC positioned itself as a “representative” of or “agent” for Couture, in the way of taking a piece of his purses in some way or negotiating for, then taking a piece of, any ancillary deals Couture may benefit from, they may be in a position where they are functioning as both a “manager” and “promoter” of Couture, at least as it is interpreted by most of the regulations of state athletic commissions, who would then have cause for concern. After all, a promoter can not have a financial interest, directly or indirectly, in a fighter.

6) Maybe we’re not at the point where common sense takes over, but has anybody investigated the possibility of a buyout? By that of course I mean Couture buying the UFC out. Compensate them for some of the revenue they feel they may have lost by those two “missing” fights in the form of a settlement. Or better yet, they can do something that is done in boxing ALL THE TIME - if Couture and Cuban are sincerely looking to make a fight with Fedor Emilianenko, why don’t they make a financial offer to the UFC to waive their promotional rights for that bout - after all, if the UFC isn’t particularly interested in making this fight, as Couture claims, then they shouldn’t mind stepping aside in exchange for a fee, to avoid looking like they are truly trying to get in the way of an opportunity for Couture. Now, these things might not work, I admit. But if the UFC rejects REASONABLE overtures from Couture and/or Cuban in this regard, it can be leveraged in any subsequent court case, not to mention in the court of public opinion.

C’mon - time is running out. Couture is 44 years old already. Is his management asleep at the wheel?