Blindsided Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 It shouldn't be allowed for a manager to release a fighter that's under contract. I saw an event tonight who's 6-0 champ that's top 500 p4p that got released. It makes zero sense and potentially screws the org out of a high ranking fighter. If you sign the contract you should have to honor it or negotiate a release. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paradigm Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 It shouldn't be allowed for a manager to release a fighter that's under contract. I saw an event tonight who's 6-0 champ that's top 500 p4p that got released. It makes zero sense and potentially screws the org out of a high ranking fighter. If you sign the contract you should have to honor it or negotiate a release. agreed...that case makes no sense especially. you have a link handy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 It shouldn't be allowed for a manager to release a fighter that's under contract. I saw an event tonight who's 6-0 champ that's top 500 p4p that got released. It makes zero sense and potentially screws the org out of a high ranking fighter. If you sign the contract you should have to honor it or negotiate a release. Agreed. It is a bit silly to have a "contract" that in these circumstances is only actually binding on one party. If they get released by a manager the fighter should be placed on "auto-pilot" unless signed as a FA. While on Auto they should be accepting fight offers automatically. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 Damn right, not only as an org owner but as a manger! I have a fighter that SUCKS!!!! There is no emoticon to show just how much this guy sucks! It would have to have Bree Olsen all over it if there were! I have not cut him cos he has a five fight contract! This is a great Idea!!! Added: If you hate the fighter that much then hang his contract out and sack him then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 great idea. this would REALLY give me an excuse to overcharge org owners! if you want to sign my fighter for more than two fights then you better start shucking out the money baby!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 Damn right, not only as an org owner but as a manger! I have a fighter that SUCKS!!!! There is no emoticon to show just how much this guy sucks! It would have to have Bree Olsen all over it if there were! I have not cut him cos he has a five fight contract! This is a great Idea!!! Added: If you hate the fighter that much then hang his contract out and sack him then I hadn't considered that angle but it should help out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blindsided Posted June 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 http://mmatycoon.com/orgeventpublic.php?EvID=705029 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 http://mmatycoon.com/orgeventpublic.php?EvID=705029 Wacky... Manager lose VIP or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 You sign the fighter to a contract, not the manager. So I disagree with this. It just gives more power to the owners and castrates the managers. If a guy straight up sucks, shitty learner, no chin, whatever, I'm going to get rid of him. However, the situation above is really strange... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 You sign the fighter to a contract, not the manager. So I disagree with this. It just gives more power to the owners and castrates the managers. If a guy straight up sucks, shitty learner, no chin, whatever, I'm going to get rid of him. However, the situation above is really strange... Which is why I said that the manager should be able to release but the fighter should be on auto-pilot. Screws no one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 Which is why I said that the manager should be able to release but the fighter should be on auto-pilot. Screws no one. Which is why I didn't disagree with you...I disagreed with the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 Which is why I didn't disagree with you...I disagreed with the OP. Indeed. but the overall idea has merit with that one minor change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Face Kicker Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 You sign the fighter to a contract, not the manager. So I disagree with this. It just gives more power to the owners and castrates the managers. If a guy straight up sucks, shitty learner, no chin, whatever, I'm going to get rid of him. However, the situation above is really strange... how about not signing a long contract until you know if the fighter is a dud? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougSupreme Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 how about not signing a long contract until you know if the fighter is a dud? huh? Logic? Whatchoo talkin 'bout, Willis? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 how about not signing a long contract until you know if the fighter is a dud? Easy for us to say, we don't have financial worries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 Indeed. but the overall idea has merit with that one minor change. Yep, I was going to suggest the auto-pilot thing myself but you beat me to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blindsided Posted June 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 Managers should not be able to cut a champion of an org under any circumstances. I don't understand what everyone's problem is with this? I don't think it's detrimental to any manager to keep a fighter around for another fight or two regardless of how bad they are. If you don't know about the fighter don't sign a long term contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2011 Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 Managers should not be able to cut a champion of an org under any circumstances. I don't understand what everyone's problem is with this? I don't think it's detrimental to any manager to keep a fighter around for another fight or two regardless of how bad they are. If you don't know about the fighter don't sign a long term contract. A champion is one thing. If your guy is the champ, you shouldn't be able to sack him(I think there should be a champions clause in contracts too but let's save that for another thread). But let's just say I'm Joe n00b and I don't know any better. I have no money, and depending what city I start in, my fighter might be able to afford two weeks training in a decent gym. That is really not enough time to determine what kind of learning speed my guy has(I'm sure this sentence will be corrected by the experts, and I say show screen caps or it didn't happen). Now, I'm two weeks into training, and broke. Some nice owner comes along and offers me a contract with a decent signing bonus. Of course I'll jump on it, because my ass is broke. After a fight or two, I have read the Wiki, learned a few things about the game, and I'm starting to realize my guy isn't quite up to snuff in the learning department, or I made a shitty build. The learning experience ends there. There is absolutely no point in me holding on to this fighter. He sucks. I really like greywar's suggestion, the auto-pilot thing. The owners don't give a shit as long as their cards are filled, and to say otherwise is just a blatant lie. Saying "If you don't know about the fighter then don't sign a long term contract." Well, if you don't know the manager, don't offer a long term contract. I don't mean know them on a personal level. But see how active they are, make sure they aren't going to disappear in a week, etc. Again, your situation was screwed up and probably a rarity, but I see no sense in castrating managers any more than they already have been because you had a crappy experience. EDIT: Let's keep this civil please. I can already feel the heat from the flames, let's try not to turn into raging douche canoes here and keep it healthy. I've seen some valid from the other side too, I'm just trying to make a case from the other side of the fence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blindsided Posted June 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 People don't really understand how I'm not being hurt by this at all. I didn't fight the guy, I'm not the org owner, I'm not the manager of the fighter. I saw that the guy cut the 6-0 defending champion for absolutely not reason. Which I think is complete horseshit. A champion's clause would probably be a better idea. I just think it would be decent if the fighter's manager could at least ASK for a release before cutting the guy and see what the org owner wants to do with the fighter. Or if the owner had an option to let the guy get cut and hope he gets picked up as a FA. It hardly "castrates" the manager. Especially in a case like this, where the org owner will take a massive hit to his org hype if the guy is not picked up due to him having to strip him of the title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2011 Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 Managers should not be able to cut a champion of an org under any circumstances. I don't understand what everyone's problem is with this? I don't think it's detrimental to any manager to keep a fighter around for another fight or two regardless of how bad they are. If you don't know about the fighter don't sign a long term contract. The reason I don't want to restrict the manager and instead use the autopilot is that forcing the manager to retain a guy as long as they are under contract ends up being yet another tool for people get into monkey-shit fights about when an owner and a champ end up beefing. The org owner doe the old "offer a fight to reset inactivity" bait and switch and the manager can't release the guy to get away from the org. Auto-pilot allows the manager to cut the fighter and move on while the org keeps the fighter fighting. Win-win. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 The reason I don't want to restrict the manager and instead use the autopilot is that forcing the manager to retain a guy as long as they are under contract ends up being yet another tool for people get into monkey-shit fights about when an owner and a champ end up beefing. The org owner doe the old "offer a fight to reset inactivity" bait and switch and the manager can't release the guy to get away from the org. Auto-pilot allows the manager to cut the fighter and move on while the org keeps the fighter fighting. Win-win. it's a win for everyone except for the fighter. i'd argue that it's a loss for the org owner as well actually. if the fighter goes on auto-pilot then it's gonna be easy pickings for the next manager to face him. all he's got to do is read his prior fight and he'll know exaclty what he's gonna do. so that turns out bad for the org owner in the end as well. because let's say the fighter has 3 fights left on his contract. is he gonna be worth his paycheck after he loses 3 straight fights?...then from a FA perspective. why not just let somebody pick him up? if he's a halfway decent fighter to begin with then he WILL get picked up and you'll not be out anything as an org owner. if he ISNT a decent fighter and WONT get picked up in FA then you're not really out anything on that front either. so i dont see where there's much point to any of this. but that's just my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 it's a win for everyone except for the fighter. i'd argue that it's a loss for the org owner as well actually. if the fighter goes on auto-pilot then it's gonna be easy pickings for the next manager to face him. all he's got to do is read his prior fight and he'll know exaclty what he's gonna do. so that turns out bad for the org owner in the end as well. because let's say the fighter has 3 fights left on his contract. is he gonna be worth his paycheck after he loses 3 straight fights?...then from a FA perspective. why not just let somebody pick him up? if he's a halfway decent fighter to begin with then he WILL get picked up and you'll not be out anything as an org owner. if he ISNT a decent fighter and WONT get picked up in FA then you're not really out anything on that front either. so i dont see where there's much point to any of this. but that's just my opinion So add 100% SHiG for auto pilot. I don't think preserving his record for a "potential" future owner post FA-hood should trump the interests of 2 real humans actively engaged with the fighter at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 So add 100% SHiG for auto pilot. I don't think preserving his record for a "potential" future owner post FA-hood should trump the interests of 2 real humans actively engaged with the fighter at the time. wont that just be punishing whatever innocent manager that gets selected to face one of these mindless auto-pilot fighters. how's he going to scout his next fight? how's that going to be fun for him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacky67 Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 i don't get why it shouldn't be allowed most of the org owner give contracts 5-6 months , do you think we have to wait 6 months before releasing any fighter ??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambo Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 I think it's fine the way it is. worst case scenario you should have to accept a fight before you release him. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts