What would give you the most happiness if it happened in boxing?

2.15 million people disagree with this claim..ALSO!! :dunno:

 

I don't give "those abc fuckers" any passes. Hell, lI haven't mentioned the alphabets at all in any of my articles in at least the past two months.

I'm not in favor of a national commission for a few reasons.
- We have yet to witness the one crew that can actually clean up the sport
- One sanctioning body is actually less work for the promoters, as far as bribes, influence and all sorts of other shit.
- The loophole around a national commission is promoters taking their fighters abroad, which more and more appears to be the more lucrative option for any NON-superstar fighter in the states.
- The ABC was supposed to segue into forming one commission. Nearly a decade later, it still doesn't have any teeth.

 

True, but look at how much legwork it took to sell this fight. It would've made its chips anyway, but everyone seems to agree that the 24/7 series and record amount of advertisement spent on this fight is what pushed sales to record numbers.

 

Exactly...

When you place the series after "The Sopranos" and "Entourage" which are HBO's flagship shows...you're bound to pick up an audience.

Let's see how well boxing does on Fox if they ran commercials and a 24/7 type show immediately after "American Idol" each week.

HBo spent $15 to $20 million promoting the fight.

 

I picked the last option! Seing Mayeather get brutally ko'd!:clap:

 

I was more in favor of an international commission, much like the one that governs over cycling. I think the abc's would still be valuable but more as say "conferences" . The WBO would handle Europe, WBA would handle North America, IBF could handle South America, and so on. Promoters could start to be fazed out. Actual tournaments could be set up to determine who gets title shots. The title shots could create huge ppv cards.

I know you are rolling your eyes Jake , but something has to change. Even if it starts with a silly post on a message board:tease: :cheer:

P.S. I have noticed you don't mention them in your piecesopcorn:

 

Every champion has to fight four times a year against top 15 rated challengers (no mandatories), three times if he has a unification bout. The problem is the fighters activity. They don´t fight often enough.

 

1. 15 rounders.
2. Points taken for holding
3. Fighters fighting more often
4. 1 title per division
5. Smaller gloves.

In that order

 

Eliminating promoters/exclusive contracts that prevent you from fighting the best in/around your division would be a huge step.

El Terribbleeeee - I agree w/ your suggestion as well. Fighters do need to stay more active. But in a way it goes along with the aforementioned - if they're signing contracts w/ promoters only guaranteeing them 2 TV fights a year, then they're fucking themselves well before the ink dries. They need to demand that shit before signing their life away.

 

It's like dreaming for world peace. Nice in theory, but it's not happening. Other sports tend to need the centralized commission in order to function. Boxing doesn't.

"But look at the UFC!" The UFC model of business is destined to implode. Why would anyone think that they can go on fucking fighters financially while the UFC becomes mega-rich? They can't and they won't.

The middlemen, i.e. promoters and commissions, serve a valid and necessary purpose in boxing. And competition keeps and makes them honest, at least to the extent that they aren't going anywhere.

And look at the UFC's model...even if you love it, what happens when the best fighter in the world doesn't play their game? What if he wants to be his own manager and promoter and make a bigger piece of the pie? Will the fans turn against him or will they like the fact that he is looking out for himself? Or will they ignore him? Well, interestingly enough, we have this situation going on right now thanks to Fedor. We'll see how it turns out, but I think we all know how it COULD turn out...fans will side with the fighter. And if this happens to be a new UFC competitor someday who steals the top 3 fighters of each weight class...well, there's the end of your paradise.

 

And if they don't want to then what do you do?

 

I don't believe any contracts limit the number of times a fighter can fight, only set a minimum. Promoters are in it to make money so if a fighter is actually or seemingly getting screwed, there is probably going to be a reason, although I suppose it could be a bullshit reason. A lot of this is why a manager is so important...his job is to look out for the fighter's interests, not the promoter's.

 

Nothing. Happiness not, practicability. :tease:

Just pointing out an obvious mistake in the system. Four belts are a problem, 17 weight divisions are a problem, but what it really comes down to is the fighters/promoters not being committed to fighting the best in three or six months (for real superfights) intervals. It would also eliminate the weight draining issue. If Nicolay Valuev can fight four times a year, all these other so-called fighters should be ashamed of themselves.

 

It's not that it sets a limit, but gives the promoter an out when said fighter bitches he's not active enough. That's the problems w/ contracts - minimum's are set, but promoters use them as absolutes

 

I didn't realize the "Mayweather getting knocked out" choice would be so popular, I put that up there as a gag. :dunno:

 

dsimon writes:

Yes, well Alfred Binnet did not realize that the low ceiling for an I.Q. test could dip below 60 "mental retardation" and his sample suffered, not being statistically accurate in its distribution of scores.

I am willing to bet that choosing Mayweather being KO'ed might fall within that sample that so eluded Binnet.

 

I get what you are saying, and or the most part we agree. But I still believe boxing needs a "commissioner". He/She could be elected by the ABC's. But he would be there to act in the best interests of the sport, rather than promoters/fighters/abc's. When a champion like Joe Calzaghe fights for almost two decades without fighting the other champions around him, a commissioner should be able to step in and demand the fight in the best interest of the sport. If the fighter refuses, he faces consequences. ie, stripped of his title, suspension, etc.

We need to force the best to fight the best.

 

Of the choices, I voted for network exposure. It's easier to create household names, and the open light would push change much more than just the diehard/journalist cries about too many belts, unpredictable judging, etc. In other words, the network choice is the one that would more likely lead to the other positives happening, rather than vice versa.

 

okay jake and other have open my eyes..a national commisional would not work cause of the loopholes..and an International commision is just NOT HAPPENING...

So i change my pick to....


More exposure on national tv....

 

Alright...let's say I agree in principle. Accomplishing this is going to be damn tough.

It would take (at a minimum):
1. A person liked and/or respected enough by all abc's to get them to agree.
2. Elected? Perhaps initially, but I'd guess this is more like a baseball commissioner so there would be lifetime or very substantial tenure.
3. Best interests of the sport. Very difficult without a hammerlock on the sport and it's a very difficult sport to get a hammerlock on. At a minimum, you have to keep boxers, abc's, state & regional commissions, promoters, and fans satisfied. So much of the sport is a zero sum game where helping one side hurts at least one other.
4. Forcing a champion to fight a particular other fighter or fighters? First off you cite Calzaghe and he's probably not the best example since he's not to blame for being avoided by the other champs during his reign, but let's say he is...you would have to have a ranking system that the abc's agreed to abide by to force their mandatories...or at least their 'super' mandatories if you want to make it rare. hmmm.
5. The remedy you offer (stripping the champ) is one of the most criticized actions of sanctioning bodies. So it's hard to justify it on a 'best interest of boxing', at least in the eyes of many.
6. I'm sure I've missed plenty.

Well...if you want to address any or all of these points...I'll play along....but it's a steep, long obstacle course, imo.

I will say this, though. I have tried to imagine what it would take to get rid of the abc's and the UFC's model is relatively close. Not close enough to work, but similar. I'll see if I can find the old thread.

 

Getting boxing back on network tv...

I would qualify this by saying 'Getting quality boxing back on network tv." Tarver Muriqi isn't going to do jack shit to make you or lower level fans happy.

I've always read that boxing made money for the networks. Like always...like in the 80's when it was on all the time...like in the 90's when it was on a little...and in the 00's when it's been on almost not at all...so, that means the highest hurdle is cleared.

So how do we get quality boxing on tv? Well, one way that has been done before (afaik it's a Don King innovation) was when King placed a world title fight on free tv the afternoon of one of his ppv shows. He even opened up the arena to walk-in fans so they didn't have to pay. Now I don't know how well this worked, but it always seemed like a great idea to me.

And we've got a pretty good environment for it. King and Arum, as the old timers, could see this as building their legacies, even if they don't make a lot of money doing it. Oscar could do it as a way to sell his company and his promotion as being better for the fans. They are the only 3 promoters, to my knowledge, that have the stables to pull it off.

Another possibility...and perhaps more important and cheaper...is campaigning the networks to show more amateur boxing. While it's too late for the usa nationals, the world championships are coming up in the fall in Chicago. It would be great to get them televised. Perhaps NBC could put the earlier rounds on their minor channels like they did for the oly's, but the championship rounds would make for excellent tv with the right commentators.