Dayne Fox Fri, October 16, 2026 at 6:44 AM UTC · 5 min read About Our Ads Advertisement Advertisement Advertisement Sean Strickland is taking a stand. Will anyone join him? |📷: Getty/UFC Editor's note: The views and opinions expressed below are thoseof the author and do not necessarily reflect the views ofSherdog.com, its affiliates and sponsors or its parent company,Evolve Media. * * * For the last week or so, SeanStrickland has been the talk of the mixed martial arts world.That's hardly unusual, but the topic has caught some people offguard. It isn't about beating up "tough guys" who walk into his gymoff the street. It isn't about "snowflakes" who are "part of theproblem." This time, he's talking about fighter pay and vowing notto fight again until his contract dispute is resolved. Perhaps thatisn't surprising, either. But his criticism of Ultimate Fighting Championship fighter pay in general — notjust his own compensation — has some of his typical detractorsreluctantly agreeing with him.
While I'm sure Strickland has friends and training partners he'dlike to see get a pay bump, I suspect his broader criticism,including the UFC's tendency to keep recognizable fighters aroundpast their prime, is also about getting the public behind him.After all, plenty of fans already believe UFC fighters areunderpaid. Comparing their compensation with salaries in major teamsports gives him an argument that's easy to sell. Unlike salariedplayers, UFC fighters generally earn their contracted fight pursesonly when they compete. Take baseball. The average MLB salary was about $5.34 million atthe start of the 2026 season. Spread across a 162-game schedule,that works out to roughly $33,000 per team game, whether the playertakes the field that day or not. That calculation isn't a perfectcomparison with a fighter's purse: It doesn't account fordifferences in schedules, revenue or compensation structures. Butit helps explain why Strickland didn't have to look far for anissue that would get fans behind him. As much as I hate to be the bearer of bad news, I don't thinkStrickland's stance will make a difference for fighters as a whole.I suppose he could get a bump for himself. But a roster-widechange? There's a better chance of my fat old ass becoming a UFCchampion. We've seen this before. Remember when the antitrust litigationagainst the UFC revealed how much of its revenue went to fighters?Historical figures disclosed in the case put their share at roughly15% to 22% in several years. By comparison, NFL players' negotiatedshare is approximately 48%, though the accounting differs betweensports. You might think those disclosures would have fighters up inarms, demanding more. The litigation produced a $375 millionsettlement covering more than 1,000 current and former fighters whocompeted during the relevant period. That matters. But it did notproduce a collective bargaining agreement for the active roster,and I didn't see a sustained push from current fighters to demandone. What about the Mixed Martial Arts Athletes Association, launched in2016 with Georges St.Pierre and former Bellator executive Bjorn Rebney involved? Oneof the sport's most popular fighters had joined an effort backed bysomeone who understood the business of running a promotion. Thegoals included a 50% revenue share and a collective bargainingagreement. Other prominent fighters involved included DonaldCerrone , T.J.Dillashaw , Tim Kennedy and CainVelasquez . What ultimately came of it? No collective bargainingagreement. 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 dealtook effect. After more than a decade with standard $50,000postfight awards, the UFC increased its Performance of the Nightand Fight of the Night bonuses to $100,000 this year. Fighters whofinish their opponents but do not receive one of those awards get a$25,000 bonus. That doesn't establish the kind of negotiatedrevenue sharing found in other major sports. But those increasescan make a difference in fighters' lives — and I suspect theyreduce the urgency some feel to organize. I don't see fighters securing a comparable revenue share withoutmaking a unified demand. That would require an effective collectiveorganization and major sacrifices from those involved. It wouldalso require more solidarity than we've seen so far, something thatmay be harder to build in an individual sport. Fighters traintogether, and bonds often form after they compete against oneanother, but that isn't the same as sharing a locker room and anemployer's schedule throughout a season. History offers no simpletimeline. Baseball players formed their modern association in the1950s and hired Marvin Miller in 1966, beginning its transformationinto an effective labor union. NBA players established theirassociation in 1954, eight years after the league's roots in theBasketball Association of America, but meaningful recognition tookanother decade. I know a lot of people think Strickland is an idiot. After all, hesays some idiotic things. But I think this is a brilliant strategyon his part. He appears to understand how unlikely fighters are toband together right now. Too many seem happy simply to be paid tofight and carry the title of UFC fighter. I suspect the UFCunderstands that, too. Public criticism may irritate the promotion,but Strickland isn't raising an unfamiliar complaint. Meanwhile, hecan win support by presenting himself as someone who "isn't in itjust for himself." If enough fans rally behind him, perhaps he canuse that pressure to renegotiate, even though Dana White says hesigned a new contract in May. I hope I'm wrong. I really hope I'm wrong. But I suspectenough UFC fighters are satisfied with incremental pay increases tokeep a collective effort from gaining traction. So while Stricklandis talking a big game for everyone, I think he's primarily lookingout for No. 1. Given how many others appear to be doing the same,it's hard to fault him.
Source: Sports
0 Comments