The UFC Missed Their Chance to Dump Conor McGregor
Mark Shapiro, Hunter Campbell, Tracy Long, and Ike Epstein decided to take the hard way instead
Now that Conor McGregor has been found liable in court for sexual assault and battery against Nikita Hand, the UFC front office has no more excuses to stay silent.
Have you noticed how quiet Team UFC has been since the civil judgment was handed down?
Endeavor bizarrely made a determination at their UFC 309 Madison Square Garden event that it was perfectly safe for their employees and fighters to repeatedly mention the name Conor McGregor and not-so-favorable to mention the name of Francis Ngannou.
This determination was made by UFC during the week of Conor McGregor’s gnarly civil trial in which the world got first-hand testimony from medical professionals about the physical abuse Nikita Hand allegedly received at the hands of Conor McGregor.
The whole world, especially in Europe, knew what was going on — but Americans didn’t? Were some of Ari Emanuel’s American Endeavor media clients and business partners less-than-motivated to discuss this case?
That’s the only plausible calculation one can take away from UFC’s deafening silence on the matter. Ari Emanuel, Mark Shapiro, Hunter Campbell, Ike Epstein, and Tracy Long have rendered their judgment — either implicitly or explicitly — that Conor McGregor is still safe for UFC to associate with after a jury of his peers deemed him to be liable as a violent sex pest.
UFC missed their golden opportunity
Endeavor has had multiple opportunities to fire Conor McGregor. They’ve declined every time.
The company has had chance after chance to take the high ground, especially in this delicate political climate, and make the right play. Regardless of any sort of perception of virtue signaling or actually doing the right thing, UFC has been gifted a chance to finally break ties with Conor McGregor. It’s right there on a silver platter. And they’re refusing to make an easy decision.
It’s not as if Ari Emanuel won’t be asked by his European vacation buddies about Conor McGregor, sooner rather than later.
What is the possible upside for UFC staying in the Conor McGregor business in 2025?
This is a fighter who’s been a spent force in the Octagon for years. Conor has worn out his welcome with the majority of fight fans. What does UFC think they are accomplishing by staying silent with Conor? The testosterone promotion, led by Mark Shapiro, is displaying an enormous level of cowardice.
Is there a strategy at work here? Or is this a simple case of delusion and denial in the C-Suite?
What’s the reaction been from Team UFC to the civil judgment against Conor McGregor for sexual assault and battery?
There has been no official company statement regarding the judgment rendered in Ireland.
There has been no unofficial or official statement from Dana White or Joe Rogan regarding the outcome of the Conor McGregor trial.
There has been no determination — reported in the news media or directly from Endeavor HQ — from Ari Emanuel or Mark Shapiro to release Conor McGregor from his UFC contract. This, at a time when Endeavor is headed into critical media rights negotiations with partners like ESPN & Netflix in 2025.
Nothing. Absolutely no reaction whatsoever. Which leaves us asking the obvious questions:
Under what circumstance would it take for UFC to even release an official statement, either condemning or defending Conor McGregor’s behavior?
Under what circumstance would it take UFC to release Conor McGregor?
Why does the UFC office believe that Conor McGregor is a reliable or valuable asset to them or someone else in 2025?
The UFC’s Code of Conduct Policy
Conor McGregor is in a unique contractual situation with the UFC. Since he has been under contract for over a decade, his tenure has been under two different owners. There have been multiple variations of the UFC Code of Conduct. Regardless of what year Mr. McGregor’s contract falls under — or if his contract has been updated with modified terms — it is clear that Mr. McGregor’s civil judgment for sexual assault falls under the scope of any of UFC’s different variations of their Code of Conduct.
For example, in 2017 the UFC’s Code of Conduct looked something like this:
Fighter shall conduct himself in accordance with commonly accepted standards of decency, social conventions and morals, and Fighter will not commit any act or become involved in any situation or occurrence or make any statement which will reflect negatively upon or bring disrepute, contempt, scandal, ridicule, or disdain to MMA, Fighter, the Identity of Fighter or any of Fighter's Affiliates, ZUFFA or any of its officers, managers, members, employees, or agents.
This contractual provision reflects the UFC’s broad requirement that its contracted fighters act in a legal, ethical, and responsible manner and avoid conduct detrimental to the integrity of the sport of MMA and the UFC organization.
Besides criminal activity, UFC’s Code of Conduct covers the following:
While criminal activity by a UFC fighter is clearly detrimental to the reputation of the UFC and therefore subjects the fighter to contractual penalties or contractual termination (including early termination), other conduct can also result in disciplinary action.
Contractual penalties or contractual termination (including early termination) may be imposed for misconduct, which includes without limitation, the following examples:
Criminal offenses including, but not limited to, those involving: the use or threat of violence; domestic violence and other forms of partner abuse; theft and other property crimes; sex offenses; obstruction or resisting arrest; disorderly conduct; fraud; racketeering; and money laundering;
Criminal offenses relating to performance-enhancing and prohibited substances, or substance abuse;
Conduct, including but not limited to assault, stalking, bullying or domestic violence, that imposes inherent danger to the safety or well being of another person;
Violent, threatening or harassing behavior;
Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the UFC and its partners.
Well, it sure appears like Conor McGregor’s civil judgment in his sexual battery case hit the jackpot in violating multiple parts of UFC’s Code of Conduct.
Mr. McGregor admitted in court that he uses cocaine. For whatever reason, his fight with Michael Chandler fell through in mid-2024 for a major UFC event in Las Vegas. Tens of millions of dollars were on the line.
It was revealed, after adjudication of the court case, that Nikita Hand and her partner suffered a home invasion at their place of residence by a gang.
Take a look at some of the media headlines following the civil judgment:
Daily Mail (UK): Conor McGregor DELETES furious tirade against his rape victim Nikita Hand after she won civil sexual assault case against UFC star
Irish Examiner: First-time calls to rape crisis helpline surged after verdict against Conor McGregor
New York Times: Conor McGregor found liable for 2018 assault of woman in Dublin
The Irish News: Crowd marches in solidarity with ‘incredibly brave’ Nikita Hand
The BBC has their own radio program discussing this trial. LBC has a video explaining why Conor McGregor isn’t facing prison time despite losing in civil court.
I find it hard to believe that such a high-profile civil judgment isn’t detrimental to the UFC brand moving forward.
Back to the UFC’s Code of Conduct Policy…
The office has the right to conduct any investigation and mete out any sort of punishment, whether it be a suspension or termination of contract.
In the case of potential fighter misconduct relating to violent conduct or domestic violence, the fighter may be referred to a third party for a required evaluation.
Fighters who engage in misconduct, including domestic violence, may be required to undergo clinical evaluation. Based on the results of such evaluation, participation in an education program, counseling or other treatment as recommended by a health professional may be required. While evaluation and treatment are not considered adverse measures, failure to comply with an evaluation and treatment process may constitute a separate basis for contractual penalties.
We’ve heard absolutely nothing from UFC.
Zero. Zilch. Nada.
The front office isn’t even publicly masquerading compassion by suggesting that Conor McGregor is undergoing UFC-commissioned counseling. Not a word from either Mark Shapiro or UFC’s legal eagle Tracy Long on the matter.
The provisions we’ve cited are from 2017. How does UFC’s more recent Code of Conduct Policy differ today versus back then?
The 2018 CCP offers this provision:
Upon discovery of potential athlete misconduct, which may include allegations, arrest, or other formal or informal charges of misconduct, UFC will direct an investigation, which may include interviews and information-gathering from medical experts, law enforcement officers and other relevant professionals. As appropriate, the affected athlete and/or his/her designee will also have the opportunity to provide information on the conduct at issue.
Determination of the appropriate sanction to be imposed on an athlete will be based on the nature of the misconduct and other relevant factors, such as previous violations of the UFC Promotional Guidelines. Misconduct occurring prior to an athlete’s provision of service to UFC may also be considered. Zuffa may sanction an athlete for misconduct involving significant harm or sexual misconduct occurring prior to the athlete’s contractual relationship with Zuffa if such misconduct is revealed while the athlete is under contract with Zuffa.
Meaning, UFC contractually is obligated to conduct an internal investigation? Why won’t UFC publicly acknowledge such an investigation? Why won’t UFC acknowledge contractual punishment against Conor McGregor?
Is it because there is no investigation? Is it because there is no punishment?
UFC’s contract states that the company may require a fighter to undergo an evaluation before the company clears them for future bouts. Is UFC going to require Conor to undergo an evaluation before competing again?
One last interesting provision from the current UFC Code of Conduct:
An athlete who becomes aware or has knowledge of any incident that constitutes athlete misconduct must immediately notify UFC by contacting the UFC Legal Department (via the contact information in the Contact Information section below). Failure to report an incident will constitute conduct detrimental to the integrity of UFC and will be subject to sanctions under this UFC Athlete Conduct Policy.
Did Conor McGregor or his associates notify Tracy Long or anyone affiliated with the UFC Legal Department of the Nikita Hand encounter at any time before a civil or criminal investigation was conducted?
The bottom line for Mark Shapiro, Ike Epstein, and Hunter Campbell is that they need to get ahead of this story right now. It’s a whole lot easier for Endeavor to give their side of the story and do damage control before the heavies on Wall Street start asking questions and conduct their own investigations.
You don’t think that potential rivals to TKO are taking note of what is going on and are ready to conduct their own probes, perhaps in an attempt to short their stock?
You don’t think that there are law firms utilizing private investigators to recruit individuals to lodge allegations of sexual harassment and violence against UFC fighters?
You would think that a political mercenary and government contractor pretending to be a fight shop would understand this concept better than you or I would.
This UFC front office is absolutely playing with fire for no good reason. None. The juice isn’t worth the squeeze.
Which reminds us of Endeavor’s recent behavior in dealing with another high-profile individual accused of being a sex pest.
TKO’s treatment of Conor McGregor vs. Vince McMahon
The only commonality between TKO’s treatment of Conor McGregor and Vince McMahon is Mark Shapiro’s tendency to try to play nice while gliding along until an eventual exit stage right occurs.
That makes a lot more sense with Vince McMahon since he still owns a bunch of TKO stock shares and could dump them at any time. The worshipping of TKO stock remains above all things for Endeavor. It’s why Mark recently discussed having breakfast with Mr. McMahon.
But Conor McGregor? What’s his edge over the Endeavor house?
Vince McMahon always wanted to be seen as legitimate as Hollywood, so he went into a marriage with Ari Emanuel somehow thinking he could outsmart him. What a dumb decision that was. Ari excised Vince out as soon as possible, even fending off a Vince return.
Endeavor had no problem removing Vince McMahon. Yes, he had more leverage than Conor McGregor but he also presented greater legal liability than Conor McGregor does.
Why would Endeavor fight harder for Conor McGregor than Vince McMahon?
Why is Endeavor being so silent on Conor McGregor’s legal troubles?
Is this a total admission that Endeavor’s UFC has so little star-power left on their roster that they fear losing this guy to pop one last big PPV?
Is UFC in that bad of shape while lying to the public about how strong the brand is that they need this guy to save their bacon?
Watching UFC trot out a bunch of fighters coming off of two, three, or four year layoffs to “steal a house” is incredibly surreal. Not as surreal as asking a bunch of warehouse fighters to go work a main card at a venue like Madison Square Garden and expect them to not wilt under the spotlight, but still very curious nonetheless.
Mark Shapiro likes to play things very close to the vest, especially handling potentially ticking time bombs. It might work with Vince McMahon but that strategy is not as useful with Conor McGregor.
If UFC wants to use Conor McGregor again, the company is going to have to defend him at some point.
My advice to the UFC management team is, “You’re going to have to defend yourself and your brand, too. So, man up. What are you running from?”
Is Endeavor hoping that Conor McGregor takes himself out for good, either through another civil or criminal action, so that it’s “safer” to dispose of him then?
Play defense and ice out Conor further so that he doesn’t work for someone else and pop a house for them? That’s Dave Meltzer’s working theory of the case:
Is Endeavor afraid of Conor McGregor’s various political and business affiliations?
Or…
UFC believes Conor has a Mike Tyson redemption arc?
There was an eerie feeling watching the Conor McGregor civil sexual battery trial ongoing while Mike Tyson was headlining a major Netflix spectacle against Jake Paul.
Mike Tyson, in 2024, convinced an American population to bet on his fight on record levels that could only be compared to action for the Super Bowl.
John Nash believes Endeavor thinks Conor has a little bit of a Mike Tyson marketing arc to him:
I think John is trying to be as cynical as he can so as to best guess what Endeavor’s internal calculation is. While I don’t agree with his conclusion, I don’t scoff at the persuasive argument he is presenting.
What I scoff of is Endeavor’s interesting mix of hubris, arrogance, and paranoia.
Does the UFC office think Conor McGregor is still worth a $15 million dollar gate in 2025 and worth a few hundred thousand PPV buys?
Consider me a bear and not a bull on this kind of a trade.
Let’s address the two main arguments: UFC’s current demographics and the Mike Tyson story.
Yes, Ari Emanuel has gone all in on Donald Trump.
Yes, Endeavor made an incredible calculation that based on their political data — perhaps from Elon Musk, himself — that the male 18-to-29 demographic worldwide is so strong for Donald Trump that whatever fans UFC loses can be easily replaced by The Bro Vote who hang around for the next two or four years and can be quickly discarded by another demographic after that.
UFC is currently obsessed with the 18-to-29 Bro Vote. They want as many of those viewers as possible. It also adds a level of intrigue as to why they are about to make an aggressive push in the Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and grappling scene. They want to grab as many of those Bros as possible and get them to watch UFC.
But At What Cost?
Is UFC willing to risk losing female customers in order to become a permanent sausage fest? You should want to attract female customers. Even a wrestling curmudgeon like Bill Watts understood that!
Does Conor McGregor truly appeal to the 18-to-29 year old Bro Vote in 2025?
UFC has a schizophrenic promotional relationship when it comes to Conor. They’re willing to pump him up whenever possible and then casually bury him by releasing audio and video of Khabib Nurmagomedov clowning him. Not in 2024, but years ago.
Does the UFC front office think that Conor McGregor will be taken as a serious-enough threat as a fighter in 2025 to sell a PPV?
This isn’t the Mike Tyson story
When Mike Tyson went to prison after a rape conviction, there were a whole lot of fight fans who still believed that he was in his prime or at least near it. The idea that Tyson would walk out of prison as a scarier, hardened man made Tyson 2.0 all the more compelling given his life story.
During Tyson’s absence, we had the TVKO era with George Foreman, Riddick Bowe, Evander Holyfield, and Lennox Lewis.
Tyson was never the same fighter but he was so scary and crazy that people were buying his fights because they didn’t know what to expect.
Conor McGregor isn’t scary inside the cage like Mike Tyson. Is he even able to focus long enough for a training camp, given his admitted substance usage issues raised in the Nikita Hand court case?
Conor McGregor isn’t Mike Tyson. He’s not relatable to the average human being. There’s no indication of any sort of intellectual or cultural heft. Conor is Conor.
The UFC might think that’s good enough to get away with marketing Conor McGregor in 2025. He’s likely a lot more trouble than he’s worth.
It’s time to start asking Mark Shapiro and Tracy Long some important questions on the record.
Zach Arnold is a lead opinion writer for The MMA Draw on Substack. His archives can be read at FightOpinion.com.
It's the fig leaf of a civil judgement. A criminal conviction would force them to act, if tepid and indecisively.
The absence of a criminal conviction allows them to ignore it publicly for most or all of the reasons laid bare in this spot-on analysis.
Haha nope. Will he ever make it back to the cage? Double nope. Lol