In the world of mixed martial arts, surprises are not uncommon. But the recent developments surrounding Dustin Poirier’s potential clash with Benoit Saint Dennis took fans on a rollercoaster of emotions.
The UFC’s revelation of a showdown between the No.3 ranked Dustin Poirier and the No.11 contender Benoit Saint Dennis stirred excitement among fans.
Poirier is a seasoned combatant on the cusp of a Hall of Fame induction. This left many wondering why he opted for a match against the relatively less experienced Frenchman with only six UFC bouts under his belt.
Shortly after the announcement, Poirier dropped a bombshell on social media. He declared that the match was was never officially signed. Poirier then said shortly thereafter that there had just been a “misunderstanding” and that everything seemed to have been settled.
Johnny Eblen is a teammate of Dustin Poirier and Bellator middleweight champion. He recently shared exclusive insights with SHAK MMA regarding the incident.
According to Eblen, the UFC failed to meet Poirier’s terms. This is despite the American expressing initial agreement with the proposed matchup.
He said: “I know Dustin pretty well, and I actually spoke with him about it today. They just didn’t come to terms, man. The things that Dustin laid out for them that they need to provide for this fight they were not willing to do it.”
Eblen highlighted the peculiar situation where no contract was signed, yet the UFC enthusiastically announced the matchup. He found it baffling that such a significant matchup occurred without even a verbal agreement on Poirier’s part.
He continued: “I just think it’s kind of horse s*** because I know how much money the UFC makes and they could make that fight happen but they’re choosing not to because they’re being stingy in a way. The fact that no contract was signed and they were willing to f****** announce it is f****** beyond me, man. That’s never happened to me. Not even a verbal agreement, Dustin said.”
“Dustin said, ‘Yeah, that sounds good, but like, we gotta get this deal worked out.’ That’s not a verbal agreement. A verbal agreement’s like, ‘Hey, if you do this, this, and this, I’m in,’ and they’re like, ‘Okay, we’ll do this, this, and this.’ Okay, cool, I’ll fight him.”
Eblen elaborated on the distinction between a verbal agreement and the lack thereof in this case. He emphasized that a verbal agreement involves clear terms and conditions before moving forward, a step that was evidently absent in this instance.
He said: “Then you do the contract and you sign the contract. There wasn’t even a verbal agreement on his end. It’s kind of crazy to me that they were willing to even promote it to this degree and then let it backfire like this.”