Eddie Alvarez's motion denied, will not fight at UFC 159

MMAPlayground.com » Community » MMA News Share Forum » Eddie Alvarez's motion denied, will not fight at UFC 159
FastKnockout
1/25/13 8:31:08PM
Eddie Alvarez won't be fighting at UFC 159. A federal judge today denied a motion to release the fighter from his Bellator contract to sign with UFC parent Zuffa.

Link
Twenty20Dollars
1/25/13 8:56:55PM
As I expected it to go and how it should have gone.

Was Alvarez going to fight Henderson for the title at UFC 159, b/c he was offered an immediate title shot.

"This isn't a kid who's their world champion. This kid doesn't have their title. His contract's up. We'll see what happens." - From Dana White to mmajunkie

Then why are you offering him an immediate title shot?

Bellator not in the wrong here. They matched what they had to match from the UFC. Don't have to match projections.
Budgellism
1/25/13 9:12:17PM
Booooo
jae_1833
1/25/13 9:14:26PM
Damn! I just picked him up for my side game!!
prozacnation1978
1/25/13 10:00:23PM
Scratch co main now.
Hope Ufc comes up with plan b which just may be
Rockhold vs belfort
Have miller vs Maynard
Weidman vs souza
LuckyCharms
1/25/13 10:19:42PM
The funniest comment I've seen on junkie comment section in a while.

Hungry4444: OBJECTION

Mr.Dwsn: SUSTAINED

Hungry4444: Okay ( ._.)

sbulldavid
1/25/13 10:43:49PM
Give him the money up front and quit awarding projections
Twenty20Dollars
1/25/13 11:25:28PM
UFC should have gotten a little more creative knowing that Bellator can match their offer.

Like offer a higher priced short term deal, like two fights, to see if Bellator matches the price.

If Bellator doesn't, then UFC gets him for two fights under that deal of more guaranteed money. Then you resign Eddie to a longer deal with less guaranteed money and more projected money like the offer he has now.

Or if Bellator matches it, he has to do the two fights and then he's free to go. Unless somehow Bellator can keep matching his contract, which I don't think they can because it would be a new contract without that matching clause.
shaneTpain
1/26/13 12:05:57AM
tcunningham
1/26/13 12:06:28AM
WHAT THE HELL?!!!!
Poor_Franklin
1/26/13 6:27:11AM

Posted by Budgellism

Booooo



whether right or wrong, we're all missing out on some great matchups

Double Booooo
sparky
1/26/13 12:32:14PM

Posted by Poor_Franklin


Posted by Budgellism

Booooo



whether right or wrong, we're all missing out on some great matchups

Double Booooo





Just sad that Bellator would do this to a guy who helped them in their rise to popularity
Twenty20Dollars
1/26/13 1:46:33PM
Bellator had the right to match the contract, so it's not like they did something sneaky to prevent him from going to the UFC.

You can't just let one of your main stars go if you have the option to keep him.

UFC apparently gave more money to Lombard because they didn't match his offer from the UFC.
FlashyG
1/26/13 2:37:03PM

Posted by Twenty20Dollars

Bellator had the right to match the contract, so it's not like they did something sneaky to prevent him from going to the UFC.

You can't just let one of your main stars go if you have the option to keep him.

UFC apparently gave more money to Lombard because they didn't match his offer from the UFC.



Bellator is basically holding Alvarez hostage in order to pick a fight with the UFC. Should Alvarez win in court it will essentially mean that Bellator can't match any offer the UFC makes, meaning any fighter the UFC wants is theirs when their Bellator contract expires.

On the other hand, if there is no time limit to Bellator's contract does that mean they can keep matching any offers Alvarez gets and lock him up in Bellator for the rest of his career?

Besides even if Bellator wins in court that doesn't mean Alvarez will fight for them...in fact after a drawn out legal battle its less likely he ever steps inside a bellator cage again. He'll just not sign the UFC deal meaning that he's still a FA with Bellator reserving the right to match any offer he gets.

Dana was right...this is becoming a mess
ThaAxeMurderer7
1/26/13 3:07:47PM

Posted by sparky


Posted by Poor_Franklin


Posted by Budgellism

Booooo



whether right or wrong, we're all missing out on some great matchups

Double Booooo





Just sad that Bellator would do this to a guy who helped them in their rise to popularity



Sure, but Bellator also had a big hand in helping Eddie rise to popularity. The PR guys with Bellator worked tirelessly pitching Eddie to various news outlets and Bjorn has gone on record several times while Eddie was Champion promoting him and stating that he was the best LW in the world.

This isn't a poor ol' Eddie Alvarez situation. Where was the UFC after Eddie fought "Hellboy" years ago? Bellator stepped up and gave him a great offer and he took it.
Twenty20Dollars
1/26/13 3:36:03PM

Posted by FlashyG

Bellator is basically holding Alvarez hostage in order to pick a fight with the UFC. Should Alvarez win in court it will essentially mean that Bellator can't match any offer the UFC makes, meaning any fighter the UFC wants is theirs when their Bellator contract expires.

On the other hand, if there is no time limit to Bellator's contract does that mean they can keep matching any offers Alvarez gets and lock him up in Bellator for the rest of his career?

Besides even if Bellator wins in court that doesn't mean Alvarez will fight for them...in fact after a drawn out legal battle its less likely he ever steps inside a bellator cage again. He'll just not sign the UFC deal meaning that he's still a FA with Bellator reserving the right to match any offer he gets.

Dana was right...this is becoming a mess



I wonder if UFC can keep offering him contracts. My thinking is it was a one time thing. UFC offers and Bellator had to match and they did.

I'm sure there's a bunch of stuff we still don't know about it.

I know if I was running Bellator and had the option to keep one of my best fighters, I would.
FlashyG
1/26/13 4:15:19PM
I don't see why the UFC couldn't offer another deal, Alvarez didn't sign the first one since Bellator matched it, so he's still technically a Free Agent.
Poor_Franklin
1/26/13 4:50:02PM
i recommend checking Eddie's twitter. Here's a couple gems:


I cant wait til everything comes to the surface, You and myself are being Lied to, I promise you guys



Bellators Attorney looked right in the Judges Face and told a bold Face Lie, I couldnt beleive the balls on this dude.
Twenty20Dollars
1/26/13 5:10:42PM
Also from Eddie's twitter.

"contract was signed on the 10th promising Me ppv , on the 11th he tells u guys "there is no definitive plans on doing PPv"

I know Bellator had thought about PPV, but I think it would be a big flop for them. They struggle to pull ratings on cable.
Bustamante-Aoki
1/26/13 5:46:55PM
According to Bjorn and MMAjunkie, the contracts are identical.

The UFC contract does not guarantee Eddie a title shot.

So the question of the PPV bonus may not come into play. The contracts could play out in different ways.

If Eddie goes to the UFC and gets a title-match and PPV bonus then he's better off in the UFC. If he goes to the UFC and loses then he would've been better off in Bellator.

If he beats Chandler then he's better off in Bellator, unless he gets a title shot with PPV bonus in the UFC instead... No one can say where he's better off without speculating how he will do in both organizations. His chances of success are however better off in Bellator most would agree. Zuffa filled their contract with speculation which made things messy.

Zuffa put potential earnings into a contract. How can the judge know if Eddie will get a title-shot or not? The UFC could've guaranteed him one and the whole thing would've been over but instead they offered him a potential one... How many UFC fighters have been told their next in line for a title shot, and never recieved that title shot... a lot of fighters. Dana said things would get messy because Zuffa designed a contract that would make the trial messy. It's filled with Speculative potential money offers. Which in reality could amount to nothing or a lot but no one knows which one that is.

If you believe that Dana won't give Eddie a title-shot or he won't earn one than he's better off in Bellator. If you think Eddie will come in and kick ass and get a title-shot then he's better off in Bellator.

Zuffa argue that they have more exposure, but Bellator can argue that despite that they have a new platform, in Spike (which helped make the UFC) which will increase their's and Eddie's exposure. Bellator will promote Eddie more, but to less people (potentially more in the future), and UFC would promote Eddie less but with more exposure.

I feel sorry for the judge. Even as an MMA fan it's tough to say. I think he's better off in Bellator financially speaking.

And how is Eddie affording a team of 6 lawyers and why would he go to all that expense when 3 would be more than enough? Is Zuffa probably paying for his legal team? I wouldn't put it past them.

They offered Eddie over twice what they pay Bendo... Seems supsicious to me. Eddie isn't even the Bellator champ, why does the UFC want him so badly? I think they just want to hurt Bellator's chances of success now that they're on Spike. That's why they just went after Hecotr recently. Thats why they made a crazy contract. They knew Bellator could match the $75k to show, $75k to win, with $250,000 signing bonus part. They threw in the PPV potential to tie things up in court. That's why Dana said things were going to get ugly. Eddie has came to the UFC twice before this looking for an offer and gone elsewhere because he was lowballed by them. Why all of a sudden now, after losing to Chandler do they want Eddie so badly? Because they're threatened by Bellator being on Spike and want to hurt their chances of success, why else?

Bustamante-Aoki
1/26/13 11:35:55PM
http://mmapayout.com/category/promoters/zuffa/ufc/

Here's a good link. From my experience MMA payout have always proven to be a trustworthy and reliable source in the past.

UFC didn't guarantee Eddie a PPV so that part of the offer from the UFC should be inadmissable in court.