Bisping and Cormier slam NSAC purse-withholding rule tied to UFC 329

UFC 329 is drawing attention beyond the Octagon, after analyst Michael Bisping criticized a Nevada State Athletic Commission purse-withholding rule and framed it as a serious problem for fighters. In a report published Tuesday, Bisping echoed longtime UFC commentator Daniel Cormier’s reaction to the same policy, describing it in blunt terms and saying he “hate[s] this rule.”

The criticism centers on how payments are handled for events held under the NSAC’s jurisdiction. According to the Yahoo Sports report, the controversy is specifically connected to the UFC 329 “stars” whose purses are being withheld under the commission’s process, turning what is usually a behind-the-scenes administrative step into a public flashpoint.

Bisping’s comments matter in part because he is not only a former champion and broadcast analyst, but also a frequent voice in discussions about fighter pay and the fairness of how money is administered in major promotions. When high-profile former fighters and analysts focus on commission procedures, it often pressures leagues and regulators to explain the purpose of those rules and whether they remain fit for purpose.

Cormier, as described in the same report, has also taken a hard line on the issue. The parallel comments underscore that the dispute is not coming from a fringe perspective, but from two widely recognized MMA figures who have long been part of UFC’s media ecosystem and who typically focus their critique on rules they view as harmful to competitors.

Commission oversight is a foundational feature of Nevada combat sports, and the authority to regulate payouts is part of that framework. Still, in this case the public reaction suggests many fans and fighters view the purse withholding as something that should not be treated as routine, particularly when it affects the fighters most associated with an event’s drawing power.

For UFC 329, the immediate storyline is the moral and practical question of why purses are withheld and what timelines apply before fighters receive the money owed. In the next few days, the key development to watch will be whether the UFC or NSAC offers a direct explanation of the policy mechanics in response to the criticism, and whether fighters or teams seek clearer guidance on how long payouts can be delayed.