Sean Strickland is taking a stand. Will anyone join him? |
📷: Getty/UFC
Editor’s note: The views and opinions expressed below are those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of
Sherdog.com, its affiliates and sponsors or its parent company,
Evolve Media.
* * *
For the last week or so, Sean
Strickland has been the talk of the mixed martial arts world.
That’s hardly unusual, but the topic has caught some people off
guard. It isn’t about beating up “tough guys” who walk into his gym
off the street. It isn’t about “snowflakes” who are “part of the
problem.” This time, he’s talking about fighter pay and vowing not
to fight again until his contract dispute is resolved. Perhaps that
isn’t surprising, either. But his criticism of
Ultimate Fighting Championship fighter pay in general — not
just his own compensation — has some of his typical detractors
reluctantly agreeing with him.
Why UFC fighter-pay reform requires more than Sean Strickland’s
contract dispute
While I’m sure Strickland has friends and training partners he’d
like to see get a pay bump, I suspect his broader criticism,
including the UFC’s tendency to keep recognizable fighters around
past their prime, is also about getting the public behind him.
After all, plenty of fans already believe UFC fighters are
underpaid. Comparing their compensation with salaries in major team
sports gives him an argument that’s easy to sell. Unlike salaried
players, UFC fighters generally earn their contracted fight purses
only when they compete.
Take baseball. The average MLB salary was about $5.34 million at
the start of the 2026 season. Spread across a 162-game schedule,
that works out to roughly $33,000 per team game, whether the player
takes the field that day or not. That calculation isn’t a perfect
comparison with a fighter’s purse: It doesn’t account for
differences in schedules, revenue or compensation structures. But
it helps explain why Strickland didn’t have to look far for an
issue that would get fans behind him.
As much as I hate to be the bearer of bad news, I don’t think
Strickland’s stance will make a difference for fighters as a whole.
I suppose he could get a bump for himself. But a roster-wide
change? There’s a better chance of my fat old ass becoming a UFC
champion.
We’ve seen this before. Remember when the antitrust litigation
against the UFC revealed how much of its revenue went to fighters?
Historical figures disclosed in the case put their share at roughly
15% to 22% in several years. By comparison, NFL players’ negotiated
share is approximately 48%, though the accounting differs between
sports. You might think those disclosures would have fighters up in
arms, demanding more. The litigation produced a $375 million
settlement covering more than 1,000 current and former fighters who
competed during the relevant period. That matters. But it did not
produce a collective bargaining agreement for the active roster,
and I didn’t see a sustained push from current fighters to demand
one.
What about the Mixed Martial Arts Athletes Association, launched in
2016 with Georges St.
Pierre and former Bellator executive Bjorn Rebney involved? One
of the sport’s most popular fighters had joined an effort backed by
someone who understood the business of running a promotion. The
goals included a 50% revenue share and a collective bargaining
agreement. Other prominent fighters involved included Donald
Cerrone, T.J.
Dillashaw, Tim Kennedy
and Cain
Velasquez. What ultimately came of it? No collective bargaining
agreement. That effort had a group of prominent fighters behind it,
not just one fighter like Strickland.
Some fighters have received bigger bonuses since the Paramount deal
took effect. After more than a decade with standard $50,000
postfight awards, the UFC increased its Performance of the Night
and Fight of the Night bonuses to $100,000 this year. Fighters who
finish their opponents but do not receive one of those awards get a
$25,000 bonus. That doesn’t establish the kind of negotiated
revenue sharing found in other major sports. But those increases
can make a difference in fighters’ lives — and I suspect they
reduce the urgency some feel to organize.
I don’t see fighters securing a comparable revenue share without
making a unified demand. That would require an effective collective
organization and major sacrifices from those involved. It would
also require more solidarity than we’ve seen so far, something that
may be harder to build in an individual sport. Fighters train
together, and bonds often form after they compete against one
another, but that isn’t the same as sharing a locker room and an
employer’s schedule throughout a season. History offers no simple
timeline. Baseball players formed their modern association in the
1950s and hired Marvin Miller in 1966, beginning its transformation
into an effective labor union. NBA players established their
association in 1954, eight years after the league’s roots in the
Basketball Association of America, but meaningful recognition took
another decade.
I know a lot of people think Strickland is an idiot. After all, he
says some idiotic things. But I think this is a brilliant strategy
on his part. He appears to understand how unlikely fighters are to
band together right now. Too many seem happy simply to be paid to
fight and carry the title of UFC fighter. I suspect the UFC
understands that, too. Public criticism may irritate the promotion,
but Strickland isn’t raising an unfamiliar complaint. Meanwhile, he
can win support by presenting himself as someone who “isn’t in it
just for himself.” If enough fans rally behind him, perhaps he can
use that pressure to renegotiate, even though Dana White says he
signed a new contract in May.
I hope I’m wrong. I really hope I’m wrong. But I suspect
enough UFC fighters are satisfied with incremental pay increases to
keep a collective effort from gaining traction. So while Strickland
is talking a big game for everyone, I think he’s primarily looking
out for No. 1. Given how many others appear to be doing the same,
it’s hard to fault him.Read More
