Dana White, Ronda Rousey and "Stupid" Conflicts
Ed. note: Garrett Gonlazes of FightGame Blog pointed out that White was probably referring to Holly Holm's management, not Ronda Rousey. The column has been amended to reflect the mistake.
After looking at Dana White’s recent Twitter replies, one has to wonder whether all is well between UFC’s President and it’s biggest media darling, Ronda Rousey.
Several weeks ago, White stated in an interview that he and the rest of UFC’s management should “lose our promoters license” if UFC Women’s Champion Holly Holm’s next fight was anything but an immediate rematch with Rousey.
This week on Twitter, Bleacher Report’s Jeremy Botter broke the news that Holly Holm’s first title defense would be against Meisha Tate.
White didn’t ignore questions about the disconnect between his previous statements and Botter’s report. When asked on Twitter why Holm vs. Tate was happening before Holm vs. Rousey II, White replied, “you can’t fix stupid”.
“Stupid” is the type of name that starts fights, but it’s unclear if White was intending to poke UFC’s most recognizable star. He didn’t specify who the “stupid” party was.
Given the context, however, it’s no great leap to believe that White was referring to Rousey’s choice to let Holm fight Tate.
Rousey is taking time off from fighting in an attempt to launch a movie career. White hasn’t been shy in the past about denigrating fighters who prioritize non-UFC projects, as he did when Quentin Jackson landed a prominent role in “The A-Team” remake. That alone may have been enough for White to apply the “stupid” label.
The risk/reward balance of Rousey’s choice gives White’s words some credence. Rousey’s purse could’ve approached eight figures if she would’ve fought for the championship in March. If Holm loses to Tate, then Rousey gets stuck in a non-title fight against Holm this summer. A non-title fight will almost certainly pay Rousey far less.
Lost fight purses can be made up by starring roles in Hollywood, but this ain’t that. Rousey is taking acting fees well below the level of true movie stars.
Rousey may view her upcoming movie shoots as an investment in her post-fighting career, but that attitude may be naive. Hollywood decision-makers certainly see her as a celebrity, but few see her as a future movie star.
The current issue of the “New Yorker” reveals the doubts that many movie producers, directors and executives have towards Rousey.
In it, negotiations for a Rousey vehicle called “Mile 22” are documented. Adam Fogelson, studio head at STX, gets the film’s director, Peter Berg, to have the screenplay re-written to de-emphasize Rousey’s role. Fogelson was only willing to make the movie if a secondary mentor role is beefed up so that the project can revolve around an established male star. (Will Smith the hoped-for name; Mark Wahlberg is settled on.) Just like that, Ronda goes from a star in the making to a sideshow curiosity.
Perhaps White is skeptical of Rousey’s chances to make a career out of acting or perhaps he’s just lashing out because his big money rematch is at risk. Or perhaps their problems are bigger than that.
The public may not know precisely how White feels about Rousey, but there are clues. He looked heartbroken when she lost to Holm. He has stayed away from commenting on Rousey’s personal life, even as her relationship with Travis Browne generated discussion in some sectors of the media. And, of course, there are the Tweets.
One tweetimplying that Rousey’s focus on movies is “stupid” may not be enough to indicate a Rousey/White rift, but it’s more than that. Rousey has been absent from the highlight clips White posts every day. He avoids responding to almost all inquiring about her, and when he does the tone is less than positive. In addition to the “stupid” comment, White responded with a curt, “no” when asked recently if he’d read Rousey’s book. He could’ve ignored the question, given a political “looking forward to it” or even left the possibility open with a “not yet”. He chose “no” and that was that.
UFC’s relationship with Ronda Rousey may be naturally unstable because 2015 was so different than the years preceding it.
The company has long viewed themselves as similar to NASCAR; the name brand that sells a popular sport. Prior to last year, UFC had a point. Main event fighters would leave UFC and fail to stimulate serious interest among pay-per-view buyers. UFC would sign experienced fighters and turn them into viable main-eventers. But no matter who fought on pay-per-view or what the stakes were, interest in big UFC events had a relatively narrow gap between floor and ceiling.
The pendulum swung in 2015. Interest in UFC pay-per-view swung to dramatic highs and lows depending on who fought on top. Rousey happened to be responsible for some of those highs.
If Rousey sees herself as the star and White sees the UFC name as the star, then that could be trouble. Both Rousey and White have reputations as willful; perhaps stubborn, people. There is no limit to the damage that can be done when stubborn people are at odds.
After looking at Dana White’s recent Twitter replies, one has to wonder whether all is well between UFC’s President and it’s biggest media darling, Ronda Rousey.
Several weeks ago, White stated in an interview that he and the rest of UFC’s management should “lose our promoters license” if UFC Women’s Champion Holly Holm’s next fight was anything but an immediate rematch with Rousey.
This week on Twitter, Bleacher Report’s Jeremy Botter broke the news that Holly Holm’s first title defense would be against Meisha Tate.
White didn’t ignore questions about the disconnect between his previous statements and Botter’s report. When asked on Twitter why Holm vs. Tate was happening before Holm vs. Rousey II, White replied, “you can’t fix stupid”.
“Stupid” is the type of name that starts fights, but it’s unclear if White was intending to poke UFC’s most recognizable star. He didn’t specify who the “stupid” party was.
Rousey is taking time off from fighting in an attempt to launch a movie career. White hasn’t been shy in the past about denigrating fighters who prioritize non-UFC projects, as he did when Quentin Jackson landed a prominent role in “The A-Team” remake. That alone may have been enough for White to apply the “stupid” label.
The risk/reward balance of Rousey’s choice gives White’s words some credence. Rousey’s purse could’ve approached eight figures if she would’ve fought for the championship in March. If Holm loses to Tate, then Rousey gets stuck in a non-title fight against Holm this summer. A non-title fight will almost certainly pay Rousey far less.
Lost fight purses can be made up by starring roles in Hollywood, but this ain’t that. Rousey is taking acting fees well below the level of true movie stars.
Rousey may view her upcoming movie shoots as an investment in her post-fighting career, but that attitude may be naive. Hollywood decision-makers certainly see her as a celebrity, but few see her as a future movie star.
The current issue of the “New Yorker” reveals the doubts that many movie producers, directors and executives have towards Rousey.
In it, negotiations for a Rousey vehicle called “Mile 22” are documented. Adam Fogelson, studio head at STX, gets the film’s director, Peter Berg, to have the screenplay re-written to de-emphasize Rousey’s role. Fogelson was only willing to make the movie if a secondary mentor role is beefed up so that the project can revolve around an established male star. (Will Smith the hoped-for name; Mark Wahlberg is settled on.) Just like that, Ronda goes from a star in the making to a sideshow curiosity.
Perhaps White is skeptical of Rousey’s chances to make a career out of acting or perhaps he’s just lashing out because his big money rematch is at risk. Or perhaps their problems are bigger than that.
The public may not know precisely how White feels about Rousey, but there are clues. He looked heartbroken when she lost to Holm. He has stayed away from commenting on Rousey’s personal life, even as her relationship with Travis Browne generated discussion in some sectors of the media. And, of course, there are the Tweets.
One tweet
UFC’s relationship with Ronda Rousey may be naturally unstable because 2015 was so different than the years preceding it.
The company has long viewed themselves as similar to NASCAR; the name brand that sells a popular sport. Prior to last year, UFC had a point. Main event fighters would leave UFC and fail to stimulate serious interest among pay-per-view buyers. UFC would sign experienced fighters and turn them into viable main-eventers. But no matter who fought on pay-per-view or what the stakes were, interest in big UFC events had a relatively narrow gap between floor and ceiling.
The pendulum swung in 2015. Interest in UFC pay-per-view swung to dramatic highs and lows depending on who fought on top. Rousey happened to be responsible for some of those highs.
If Rousey sees herself as the star and White sees the UFC name as the star, then that could be trouble. Both Rousey and White have reputations as willful; perhaps stubborn, people. There is no limit to the damage that can be done when stubborn people are at odds.
Comments
Post a Comment