Unrepentant White discusses Duran dismissal

July 26, 2015

Dana White talked about the Stitch Duran release Saturday night on FS1 after UFC on Fox 16.  Instead of an explanation as to the dismissal, White was on the offensive with remarks about Duran in the classic strategy of changing the topic.

FS1’s Karyn Bryant interviewed White post-event and fed White the question about Duran so that he could clear the air.  Instead of an explanation of the dismissal, White chose to address the post-release comments by Duran in the video clip:

You can find the video here.

White indicated the name of cutman Don House as an individual he considered “close.”  So, like references, if any media decide to interview House, one would ensure that he would give a glowing account of working for the company.

Payout Perspective:

It’s a classic move to change the subject on a topic rather than address the actual issue.  It happens in politics all of the time.  Instead of focusing on the issue, the dismissal of Stitch Duran, White’s response related to Duran’s post-release response about the fact that he was not directly contacted by White about his release.  Duran gave an interview to Bloody Elbow commenting on the fact that cutmen were not included in the Reebok sponsorship deal and that they were losing sponsor earnings as a result.  Duran was released shortly after the interview.  White’s comments were the first public response after the firing.  Instead of an explanation on the release or acknowledging the UFC faux pas, White switched gears by commenting on whether or not he was friends with Duran.  That was not the issue.  The issue was why Duran was terminated.  Yet, White can now say he’s addressed the situation and that is final.

11 Responses to “Unrepentant White discusses Duran dismissal”

  1. tops E on July 26th, 2015 7:31 PM

    The end is near for dw hahahahaha

  2. Logical on July 26th, 2015 8:05 PM

    And the Dana White clown show continues… he is like a mix of Don King, Vince McMahon & Bob Arum.

  3. saldathief on July 26th, 2015 8:05 PM

    Dana is a clown, fool, delusional bully with little man syndrome!!!!! Nothing more nothing less!!

  4. tops E on July 26th, 2015 10:00 PM

    Duran hit a nerve with d balls statement….thats why dw responded…now all fighters should know and do the same hahahahaha

  5. mmaguru on July 27th, 2015 4:29 AM

    I watched the interview yesterday and came to the same conclusion. Eventually Dana will have to answer the questions once real journalist are given the opportunity. The Karyn Bryant interview was unprofessional journalism.

  6. Pink Pig on July 27th, 2015 6:53 AM

    Whaf a PINK PIG!

    OINK!!!!

  7. Jason Cruz on July 27th, 2015 6:54 AM

    @mmaguru – I would think that White not address the question anymore and even if some other non-MMA journalist were to ask him about it he’d likely state he’s addressed the situation and “we’re moving forward.”

  8. BrainSmasher on July 27th, 2015 8:06 AM

    I don’t understand what you want him to address. He fired him, we know why he fired him, he said he isn’t sorry he fired him by not bringing him back, he addressed why he didn’t fire him personally. What more you want?

    Dana had every right to fire him. Stitch knew he would get fired or atleast he was risking his job. You don’t bash your employer and try to rally employees and the public(customers) against the people who sign your check and think you will keep your job very long. He didn’t like losing his sponsors so now he doesn’t have to worry about it. It’s that simple!

    Remember, Stitch was payed so well by the UFC he was willingly working for them exclusively. That only happens if they pay him way more than any other promotion he could work for. He also took advantage of sponsorships that was intended for fighters and made a lot of cash while the UFC looked the other way. While other employees like ring girls, cut men, refs, judges, ringside doctor, Bruce buffer all stayed professional and didn’t use sponsors. Rather than being great full he got that money while it lasted. He become entitled to the money to the point the UFC could no longer run their business without stepping on his toes.

  9. mmaguru on July 27th, 2015 4:39 PM

    @BrainSmasher,
    I agree that it was the UFC’s prerogative to fire Stitch, however, whether Dana White likes it or not, the public (his clientele) were not happy with what had occurred and many are not in agreement with the sponsorship loss that the cutmen are losing out on. So, yes, just like in any other sport or any business for that matter, the public wants to know and have a right to ask and if this was any other sport, such as Baseball, Hockey or whatever, this type of nonsense journalism would never fly.

  10. Hard Right on July 27th, 2015 6:21 PM

    I’m sorry, but this article is a load of hooey.

    Bryant asked Dana what was the status of Duran, would there be any chance of him coming back.

    Dana replied that Stitch wouldn’t be coming back, answering in no uncertain terms the question asked. Then the proceeded to deny being friends and the rest of that.

    That the author thinks Dana should have addressed some unasked questions or expounded fully is more indicative of the author’s bias than it is a legitimate beef.

    I’m not saying this as a Dana or UFC fan, as I think they were harsh and a little tyrannical, but the writer of this piece is simply muckraking.

    Not even remotely good journalism.

  11. BrainSmasher on July 28th, 2015 3:36 AM

    Guru, no other cutmman had sponsors like stitch. Most of them have none or one. Stitch had his own shirt design and many sponsors. He was not standing up for cutmen. He was standing up for himself who was getting much more than any other employee by abusing his position in the company.

    Also I woukd judge public opinion by a vocal mobility on the Internet. We both know there is a huge anti UFC and Dana White contingency that frequent the MMA social media. We see this witch hunt after every single business decision the UFC makes. From fighters being released to who gets a title shot. The same people angry over Stitch are the same people who complained about the Reebok deal. They are tying the two issues together which they are different issues. Also the Reebok deal has nothing to do with fans at all. They are simply being payed as pawns by fighters who have poor business skills.

Got something to say?

You must be logged in to post a comment.