EA Sports UFC News Post

UFC and Reebok: What This Deal Means

08:11 PM - December 2, 2014 by Steve_OS

It's an interesting arrangement that came about today, as the UFC and Reebok announced a massive partnership that looks to homogenize the sponsorship aspects of MMA into one unified front. By establishing a uniform, so to speak, for all of the fighters, the UFC is effectively standardizing the way fighters will look for weigh-ins, press conferences and actual fights. This brings all of the fighters under one banner, as they will all be paid money based on their rankings but also for how well their individual uniform sells. They will be allowed some level of coloring and customization, which explains the varying royalties for unique fighters.

Read More - The UFC and Reebok: What This Deal Means

Game: EA Sports UFCReader Score: 6/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS4 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 7 - View All

EA Sports UFC Videos

Member Comments

# 1 mosdef328 @ 12/02/14 10:51 PM

Great write up and an interesting read. I agree that it may remove a lot of "character" from the sport. I think this is going to be one of those wait and see's I really hope every fight isn't like a generic red vs. blue, that would be terrible.

# 2 CHAPEdawg45 @ 12/03/14 01:03 AM

This seems like a fighters union might be coming along the way.

# 3 cpf3000 @ 12/04/14 12:34 AM

Jon Jones lost his sponsorship contract with Nike several months back after the pushing incident with Daniel Cormier. Other fighters do have solo sponsorships though, notably the XBOX gear the Demetrious "Mighty Mouse" Johnson, the Flyweight champion, wears.

# 4 airjordan2k4 @ 12/04/14 11:39 AM

Nike dropped Jones, Silva, and I think even JDS a while ago and got out of MMA/UFC business. Although Jones said it was because of the brawl that had nothing to do with it. UFC wanted Nike to pay UFC's sponsor tax and they wouldn't so fighters weren't allowed to have on the Nike logo during fights. Look at Silva and Jones' last fights, no Nike.

# 5 airjordan2k4 @ 12/04/14 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHAPEdawg45


	This seems like a fighters union might be coming along the way.

Not 100% sure but can they form a union? None of the fighters are UFC employees. They're all considered independent contractors. I thought that was done to save companies from taxes and to fight off unions.

# 6 aholbert32 @ 12/04/14 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by airjordan2k4


	Nike dropped Jones, Silva, and I think even JDS a while ago and got out of MMA/UFC business. Although Jones said it was because of the brawl that had nothing to do with it. UFC wanted Nike to pay UFC's sponsor tax and they wouldn't so fighters weren't allowed to have on the Nike logo during fights. Look at Silva and Jones' last fights, no Nike.

Silva and JDS are still signed to Nike. Nike refuses to pay the tax so they cant wear Nike gear in the Octagon but they are still signed to Nike. Jones was dropped after the brawl. During his last fight against Glover, the UFC merchandise booth was actually selling Jones/Nike t-shirts (I bought one) but he couldnt wear it in the Octagon because of Nike's refusal to pay the tax.

My point is just because someone isnt wearing a brand in the cage doesnt mean he is dropped. GSP has been signed to Under Armour for years but has never worn it for the same reason.

# 7 aholbert32 @ 12/04/14 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by airjordan2k4


	Not 100% sure but can they form a union? None of the fighters are UFC employees. They're all considered independent contractors. I thought that was done to save companies from taxes and to fight off unions.

You dont have to be an employee to form a union. IC status has more to do with taxes than preventing unions from taking place.

# 8 airjordan2k4 @ 12/04/14 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	Silva and JDS are still signed to Nike. Nike refuses to pay the tax so they cant wear Nike gear in the Octagon but they are still signed to Nike. Jones was dropped after the brawl. During his last fight against Glover, the UFC merchandise booth was actually selling Jones/Nike t-shirts (I bought one) but he couldnt wear it in the Octagon because of Nike's refusal to pay the tax. My point is just because someone isnt wearing a brand in the cage doesnt mean he is dropped. GSP has been signed to Under Armour for years but has never worn it for the same reason.

Silva, not sure about JDS, aren't signed with Nike. Nike dropped Silva and he said he was talking to Adidas. http://www.mmamania.com/2014/10/27/7078873/ufc-anderson-silva-flirting-with-adidas-sponsorship-after-parting-ways-nike-mma

# 9 aholbert32 @ 12/04/14 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by airjordan2k4


	Silva, not sure about JDS, aren't signed with Nike. Nike dropped Silva and he said he was talking to Adidas. http://www.mmamania.com/2014/10/27/7...-ways-nike-mma

Didnt see this before. Thanks.

# 10 HM1988 @ 12/04/14 01:14 PM

Believe this or not, that's your choice but I used to work at Nike and still know people that work there and Nike is done with UFC at the moment. Jon Jones, Anderson Silva, and Dos Santos are all done with Nike. The Jones brawl was used as a reason to terminate Jones' contract but thats not the reason he was let go. Like airjordan said it had a lot to do with the sponsor tax. As much as I like UFC, its a niche sport and Nike sees it that way. If the fighters aren't allowed to wear the Nike logo in the cage they get nothing from sponsoring them. For instance, if the NBA banned Nikes from being worn, they wouldn't drop LeBron, Kobe, etc. because they have a huge following. They go out in public and crowds follow them, take pictures of them and put it online, paparazzi follows them so pics are on tmz, etc. so their clothes are still getting exposure. You don't get the same from a UFC fighter. Jones is gone, Silva is gone, and JDS is or will be gone whenever his contract expires. And other fighters will only make a % of what they're getting from current sponsors now. Take Mighty Mouse. Xbox isn't gonna offer him as much money if any at all cause they'll hardly get any exposure.

# 11 aholbert32 @ 12/04/14 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HM1988


	Believe this or not, that's your choice but I used to work at Nike and still know people that work there and Nike is done with UFC at the moment. Jon Jones, Anderson Silva, and Dos Santos are all done with Nike. The Jones brawl was used as a reason to terminate Jones' contract but thats not the reason he was let go. Like airjordan said it had a lot to do with the sponsor tax. As much as I like UFC, its a niche sport and Nike sees it that way. If the fighters aren't allowed to wear the Nike logo in the cage they get nothing from sponsoring them. For instance, if the NBA banned Nikes from being worn, they wouldn't drop LeBron, Kobe, etc. because they have a huge following. They go out in public and crowds follow them, take pictures of them and put it online, paparazzi follows them so pics are on tmz, etc. so their clothes are still getting exposure. You don't get the same from a UFC fighter. Jones is gone, Silva is gone, and JDS is or will be gone whenever his contract expires. And other fighters will only make a % of what they're getting from current sponsors now. Take Mighty Mouse. Xbox isn't gonna offer him as much money if any at all cause they'll hardly get any exposure.

I remember reading a while back that Xbox didnt start paying MM until recently. He liked the brand and was willing to support them for free when he was coming up.

The uniforms arent starting until July so I think its likely there will be some changes. Things like giving each fighter one or two sections on their shorts to promote other brands.

# 12 HM1988 @ 12/04/14 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	I remember reading a while back that Xbox didnt start paying MM until recently. He liked the brand and was willing to support them for free when he was coming up. The uniforms arent starting until July so I think its likely there will be some changes. Things like giving each fighter one or two sections on their shorts to promote other brands.

You're right. Certain things need to be changed but no one is gonna complain. They complain and they'll get cut.

My main issue or worry about uniforms is what happens to fighters when sponsors start paying them less or not sponsoring them at all? Or you have a fighter that's injured? I remember Dominick Cruz and others talking about when they were injured they basically lived off of money from sponsors who helped them out and gave them payment advances. And then what happens when top guys are removed from the rankings for whatever reason like Cruz, Diaz, etc.

# 13 aholbert32 @ 12/04/14 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HM1988


	You're right. Certain things need to be changed but no one is gonna complain. They complain and they'll get cut. My main issue or worry about uniforms is what happens to fighters when sponsors start paying them less or not sponsoring them at all? Or you have a fighter that's injured? I remember Dominick Cruz and others talking about when they were injured they basically lived off of money from sponsors who helped them out and gave them payment advances. And then what happens when top guys are removed from the rankings for whatever reason like Cruz, Diaz, etc.

The question for me is sponsoring more about promoting the brand or selling t-shirts? Take a company like "Bad Boy" for example. When they sponsor Chris Weidman do they sell a ton of Chris Weidman walk out shirts or is whats beneficial the fact that Weidman is affiliated with Bad Boy and their brand is all over his shirts and shorts and promoting the brand.

If its the former, those companies will never get that money anymore and will drop their UFC fighters. If its the latter and the UFC allows fighters to use 1 or 2 sponsors of their own, I could see many sponsors choosing to stay.

On another note, its rumored that Reebok is spending a million a month on sponsorships and it will be split among the fighters that fight during that month. On average, there are four cards a month and at least 11 fights (22 fighters) on each card. Thats $11,363 per fighter. Which isnt bad until you realize that fighters are paid on tiers depending on where they are ranked. So lower ranked fighters will likely see less than that.

One other point that I saw on twitter is the UFC may have screwed themselves when it comes to matching contracts with Bellator. For example, if Bellator includes a clause in a FA UFC fighter's contract that says "Fighter may personally select his sponsors and place sponsors logos on gear", the UFC wont be able to match that under the current uniform policy. Unless it wants to give select fighters the option of not following the policy.

# 14 HM1988 @ 12/04/14 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	The question for me is sponsoring more about promoting the brand or selling t-shirts? Take a company like "Bad Boy" for example. When they sponsor Chris Weidman do they sell a ton of Chris Weidman walk out shirts or is whats beneficial the fact that Weidman is affiliated with Bad Boy and their brand is all over his shirts and shorts and promoting the brand. If its the former, those companies will never get that money anymore and will drop their UFC fighters. If its the latter and the UFC allows fighters to use 1 or 2 sponsors of their own, I could see many sponsors choosing to stay. On another note, its rumored that Reebok is spending a million a month on sponsorships and it will be split among the fighters that fight during that month. On average, there are four cards a month and at least 11 fights (22 fighters) on each card. Thats $11,363 per fighter. Which isnt bad until you realize that fighters are paid on tiers depending on where they are ranked. So lower ranked fighters will likely see less than that. One other point that I saw on twitter is the UFC may have screwed themselves when it comes to matching contracts with Bellator. For example, if Bellator includes a clause in a FA UFC fighter's contract that says "Fighter may personally select his sponsors and place sponsors logos on gear", the UFC wont be able to match that under the current uniform policy. Unless it wants to give select fighters the option of not following the policy.

The uniform/matching clause scenario is a good point. They might have just screwed themselves over.

I kinda have a hard time believing that Reebok is going to spend $1million a month on sponsorships. Right now Reebok is a sinking ship and losing money. Things have gotten so bad with Reebok that just a few months ago Adidas was looking for someone to buy Reebok from them. The last I read was that a Hong-Kong based company was preparing to bid $2.2B for Reebok, which would mean Adidas would be taking a $1.3B loss. The loss of their NFL deal really hurt Reebok and they're gonna lose the NHL deal. Adidas wants the NHL to switch over to them, just like they did with the NBA, and when the deal is over in 2016 Bauer plans on making a huge bid. Right now #1 is Nike, #2 Under Armour (not saying that just cause they're my employer), #3 Adidas (Reebok really dragged them down).

Bottom line is, Reebok was UFC's 3rd or 4th option for the uniform because they know the company is struggling. Nike wasn't interested, not sure about Adidas, and UFC was working towards a deal with UA but things fell apart.

# 15 allBthere @ 12/08/14 03:04 PM

I'm not a huge fan of the board shorts and never have been. IF I was fighting I'd 90% be wearing Muay Thai trunks or go with the Silva/GSP route. but I would 100% not be wanting to wear the board shorts. Jones' are a little better because of the slit and material, but there are a lot of dudes wearing long board shorts with little to no slit that look like thick material and would suck for kicking and moving on the ground in some scenarios.

I wonder if this deal will be like EA UFC and have all the 'styles' covered or if they will mandate the most popular style and make it board shorts.

# 16 blackngoldfan @ 12/10/14 04:38 AM

This decision will just lead to more commercial advertisement for specific fighters when they are on the card. Cain Velazquez and Ronda Rousey must have a sweet deal with MetroPCS. That freakin' commercial comes on between every round and they haven't fought in ages.

More Links

UFC and Reebok: What This Deal Means