Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

TopGun
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 1532
Joined: 24 Jun 2012, 05:27

Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by TopGun »

Come on tell us what is going on Billy? You always give us a straight up answer.
daviddee
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1574
Joined: 01 Feb 2012, 14:32

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by daviddee »

He's not fought since Mitchell he needs a few fights first.. There desperate for the fight as Burns can't fully prepare without a few fights first
dekker1972
Super Middleweight
Posts: 22
Joined: 29 Nov 2012, 11:39

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by dekker1972 »

The Dark Destroyer wrote:For fucks sake, he's literally just left his promoter and a fight yesterday. Did you or anyone else expect it to be on by today?

What is going on with this board?
have you seen the richard shaefer thread?

this is simply asking billy for a response to the allegations made there regarding Nelson's apparent rejection of a potential broner match,,
TopGun
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 1532
Joined: 24 Jun 2012, 05:27

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by TopGun »

For a thread that you aren't too keen on Dark Destroyer can't stop putting comments on it. Big Winger
JimJim2009
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3131
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 09:48

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by JimJim2009 »

daviddee wrote:He's not fought since Mitchell he needs a few fights first.. There desperate for the fight as Burns can't fully prepare without a few fights first
I accept its not been an ideal few months for Ricky and that a warm up fight would help, however there should be a certain amount of acceptance that if you're going to hold a version of the world title, and call yourself world champ, and talk about big unification bouts, then you basically act like a world champ in the true sense of the words instead of wanting warm up bouts. There's no law that says Ricky can't hire some world class, formidible sparring partners to aid his preparation.

I just get a bit sick and tired of so called world champs who are happy to face easy opponents and take the credit and adulation that comes with those victories, yet if there's a dangerous opponent on the horizon they want warm ups etc. For fooks sake you are meant to be a world champion :shame:
TopGun
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 1532
Joined: 24 Jun 2012, 05:27

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by TopGun »

Look at the bottom of your screen on this site now, it is currently showing Billy Nelson online and reading this thread....come on Billy. Start typing!
billy nelson
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1966
Joined: 12 Apr 2010, 12:49

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by billy nelson »

JimJim2009 wrote:
daviddee wrote:He's not fought since Mitchell he needs a few fights first.. There desperate for the fight as Burns can't fully prepare without a few fights first
I accept its not been an ideal few months for Ricky and that a warm up fight would help, however there should be a certain amount of acceptance that if you're going to hold a version of the world title, and call yourself world champ, and talk about big unification bouts, then you basically act like a world champ in the true sense of the words instead of wanting warm up bouts. There's no law that says Ricky can't hire some world class, formidible sparring partners to aid his preparation.

I just get a bit sick and tired of so called world champs who are happy to face easy opponents and take the credit and adulation that comes with those victories, yet if there's a dangerous opponent on the horizon they want warm ups etc. For fooks sake you are meant to be a world champion :shame:
Shut up you fornicating idiot, unfortunately Ricky's last two fights have been pulled coz of injury and sickness in which way can you blame Ricky?
Ricky has and will prove he's class in the ring,you Jim Jim have clearly never stepped in a gym in your life ffs :shame:
Bob & Weave
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 149
Joined: 15 Nov 2009, 16:53

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by Bob & Weave »

I can't see how Matchroom having a monopoly would be such a bad thing, at least they would be able to make the domestic fights we all want to see...

Matchroom are in the promotions game for the long haul. It would severely be short sighted to serve up a load of weak cards.

Dana white seems to be doing ok with the UFC, always competitive fights and he has no real competition...

*edit, just realised I posted this in the wrong thread...
JimJim2009
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3131
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 09:48

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by JimJim2009 »

:shame:[/quote]Shut up you effing idiot, unfortunately Ricky's last two fights have been pulled coz of injury and sickness in which way can you blame Ricky?
Ricky has and will prove he's class in the ring,you Jim Jim have clearly never stepped in a gym in your life ffs :shame:[/quote]

not blaming ricky at all billy, i am just a boxing fan with an expectation that fighters calling themselves world champ will act like one. how many excuses do you guys need to keep running from broner - first it was that ricky couldn't make super featherweight, then it was that there was not enough time for him to prepare (for the feb date), and now your excuse is that his last two fights have fallen through so he needs more time to prepare.

at some point in time, ricky is going to get back into the ring and fight somebody, presumably you would prefer a less tough opponent than broner. presumably, you'd be happy with that. your comments above show you're not happy about letting ricky get in the ring with broner at this point in time but against a lesser opponent, it would be okay. which paints a picture of a so called world champ wanting easy fights instead of facing the tough unbeaten fellow champ who wants to fight in a unification. thats also known as ducking a tough opponent.

i must be old fashioned billy, i know its a business but i thought all the preparation etc was done on the way up, so that when a fighter becomes a world champ he is ready to take on all comers. that is the fundamental concept behind having a world champ, ie, the best in the world, ready to take on all-comers. I know the concept has been heavily diluted in boxing and it looks like team burns are happy to dilute it even more if the message you're sending out is, we are not ready to face broner, we want easier fights.
danconnollyeire
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 3576
Joined: 24 May 2012, 10:31

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by danconnollyeire »

billy nelson wrote:
JimJim2009 wrote:
daviddee wrote:He's not fought since Mitchell he needs a few fights first.. There desperate for the fight as Burns can't fully prepare without a few fights first
I accept its not been an ideal few months for Ricky and that a warm up fight would help, however there should be a certain amount of acceptance that if you're going to hold a version of the world title, and call yourself world champ, and talk about big unification bouts, then you basically act like a world champ in the true sense of the words instead of wanting warm up bouts. There's no law that says Ricky can't hire some world class, formidible sparring partners to aid his preparation.

I just get a bit sick and tired of so called world champs who are happy to face easy opponents and take the credit and adulation that comes with those victories, yet if there's a dangerous opponent on the horizon they want warm ups etc. For fooks sake you are meant to be a world champion :shame:
Shut up you effing idiot, unfortunately Ricky's last two fights have been pulled coz of injury and sickness in which way can you blame Ricky?
Ricky has and will prove he's class in the ring,you Jim Jim have clearly never stepped in a gym in your life ffs :shame:
Billy it baffles me why you get irrate with people on a forum all the time. Respect to backing your man but if my fighter was World Champ I'd laugh and say 'where's your title'? If you're a high profile name your bound to have people critising you. Even if Jesus Christ was around today people would be slagging him off on the internet... that's the world we live in

Plus - if people pay subscritions/tickets etc they are allowed an opinion. If I critised my team Arsenal and Wenger called me a fvcking idiot, I'd be pretty p1ssed.

PS I like Ricky. Technically he's an excellent fighter. Personally I don't see him being Broner but I'd be happy if he did! :TU:
danconnollyeire
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 3576
Joined: 24 May 2012, 10:31

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by danconnollyeire »

To be fair I hear what JimJim is saying and doesn't just apply to Ricky, more general. Why swear at someone. He's not a Ricky hater it's not the way to build a fanbase Bill
JimJim2009
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3131
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 09:48

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by JimJim2009 »

danconnollyeire wrote:To be fair I hear what JimJim is saying and doesn't just apply to Ricky, more general. Why swear at someone. He's not a Ricky hater it's not the way to build a fanbase Bill

Its been a similar thing with Povetkin and Wladimir Klitschko. You look at Povetkin and think, how the hell can he claim to be a world heavyweight champ when the whole world knows he's withdrawn from fights with Wlad, for whatever reason. I think its over three years and counting since he was Wlad's mandatory contender, and when the fight was made, he withdrew. Now, in 2013, they're talking about it again and still (both sides, apparently this time) fxxking about. As a boxing fan you despair. Povetkin and Burns, if neither are ready to face the best, then vacate your titles, step down to contender level, and take what fights you think you need in order to be able to compete at the top level - but for the love of the sport stop trying to have it all ways, thats what gets my back up !

For the record Billy I've nothing but respect for your achievements, you have done a brilliant job with Ricky and your loyalty and passion is commendable. But just as you're entitled to defend yourself and your fighter, fans are also entitled to express their views and everyone knows that the concept of being a world champ has diminished over the past twenty years. If we are going to have a position where reigning world champs need warm ups before taking on tough opponents its another nail in the coffin of the sport.
bripez
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4877
Joined: 11 Feb 2010, 18:07

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by bripez »

billy nelson wrote: unfortunately Ricky's last two fights have been pulled coz of injury and sickness in which way can you blame Ricky?
Fair enough, but by the same token you cannot blame his promoter ?
orbtastic
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 12549
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 11:22

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by orbtastic »

JimJim2009 wrote:
danconnollyeire wrote:To be fair I hear what JimJim is saying and doesn't just apply to Ricky, more general. Why swear at someone. He's not a Ricky hater it's not the way to build a fanbase Bill

Its been a similar thing with Povetkin and Wladimir Klitschko. You look at Povetkin and think, how the hell can he claim to be a world heavyweight champ when the whole world knows he's withdrawn from fights with Wlad, for whatever reason. I think its over three years and counting since he was Wlad's mandatory contender, and when the fight was made, he withdrew. Now, in 2013, they're talking about it again and still (both sides, apparently this time) fxxking about. As a boxing fan you despair. Povetkin and Burns, if neither are ready to face the best, then vacate your titles, step down to contender level, and take what fights you think you need in order to be able to compete at the top level - but for the love of the sport stop trying to have it all ways, thats what gets my back up !

For the record Billy I've nothing but respect for your achievements, you have done a brilliant job with Ricky and your loyalty and passion is commendable. But just as you're entitled to defend yourself and your fighter, fans are also entitled to express their views and everyone knows that the concept of being a world champ has diminished over the past twenty years. If we are going to have a position where reigning world champs need warm ups before taking on tough opponents its another nail in the coffin of the sport.
The Povetkin issue is mostly down to Atlas' prevaricating for so long and the contradictory "oh he's not ready yet" "we want Wlad" routine of vacillating between the two.
ThereByTheGrace
Cruiserweight
Posts: 4016
Joined: 04 Sep 2010, 05:22

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by ThereByTheGrace »

Burns is not, and never will be an "Elite" fighter. For as long as he's fighting in his comfort zone at Braehead/Secc if they know the fighter his fan-boys up here will pay to watch.

Answer the question Billy please- why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

First time it was the weight, second time it was preparation time and well the third time is dependent on your next answer (My guess is you don't want to go to America).

Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice shame on me.

Fool me three times? :roll: Let's hope not!
zero
Cruiserweight
Posts: 439
Joined: 16 Aug 2011, 16:30

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by zero »

ThereByTheGrace wrote:Burns is not, and never will be an "Elite" fighter. For as long as he's fighting in his comfort zone at Braehead/Secc if they know the fighter his fan-boys up here will pay to watch.

Answer the question Billy please- why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

First time it was the weight, second time it was preparation time and well the third time is dependent on your next answer (My guess is you don't want to go to America).

Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice shame on me.

Fool me three times? :roll: Let's hope not!
I don’t think Burns claims to be “Elite”

You don’t like Burns because he has defended his trinket at home…listen to yourself, how many fighters fight at home???

Why should Ricky Burns bend over for Broner? I am sure Burns is quite happy with his career.

Broner will move up and he should. He is very talented and will soon outgrow 135 ability wise, 140 is very hot at the moment with some great fights.
TheCobra
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3450
Joined: 01 Jan 2009, 15:11

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by TheCobra »

Billy Nelson is too aggressive on here and I don't think it does him or Burns any favours really. The grandstanding he does for Burns would be all well and good if it was done with the odd bit of humour, but I get the impression Billy is deadly serious about all of this and basically needs to calm down a bit.
orbtastic
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 12549
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 11:22

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by orbtastic »

I wonder how many people would be sweetness and light if someone came on here day after day criticising them for being crap at their job despite pulling off successively better results?
TheCobra
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3450
Joined: 01 Jan 2009, 15:11

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by TheCobra »

orbtastic wrote:I wonder how many people would be sweetness and light if someone came on here day after day criticising them for being crap at their job despite pulling off successively better results?
I guess people just want Burns to fight Broner. There's obviously good money on the table, so there's no real reason not to do it, other than to keep defending the paper title that is the WBO belt.

Carl Froch has earnt massive respect in the boxing world for taking on the best in his division and ducking nobody. That's all people want to see really, stop the bullshit, stop the paper titles, the best fighting the best, that is what boxing fans and the general public want to see.
JimJim2009
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3131
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 09:48

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by JimJim2009 »

Carl Froch has earnt massive respect in the boxing world for taking on the best in his division and ducking nobody. That's all people want to see really, stop the bullshit, stop the paper titles, the best fighting the best, that is what boxing fans and the general public want to see.[/quote]


Exactly
dbf
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1794
Joined: 28 Nov 2003, 11:06

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by dbf »

The thing is, it's not like Broner v Rees where really Rees didn't have much of a chance. Ricky will be a real test for Broner and has a chance of beating him, of that I am sure. So, when there is big money on the table for a big unification bout, you would think that taking it was the right option.

I know hatton got a mammouth pay day against Floyd but he actually fought him at the wrong time. He should have boxed him after the Tszyu fight (when Mayweather wanted it) as he was less shopworn at that point stood a bet chance.

Don't leave to late Ricky and miss this opportunity.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by palooka »

orbtastic wrote:I wonder how many people would be sweetness and light if someone came on here day after day criticising them for being crap at their job despite pulling off successively better results?
There are no established boxing 'insiders' (including boxers) who get respect from forum posters.
Tomasino
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7876
Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 16:39

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by Tomasino »

palooka wrote:
orbtastic wrote:I wonder how many people would be sweetness and light if someone came on here day after day criticising them for being crap at their job despite pulling off successively better results?
There are no established boxing 'insiders' (including boxers) who get respect from forum posters.


Surely that's not quite true...there are a quite few folk who abuse the boxers and that but it's not everyone.

The arseholes like boxingchat etc get what they deserve. Billy seems to get a disproportionate amount of grief but I am pretty new here and don't know what's went on before. He seems fine to me and generally reacts to, rather than starts the bollox that goes on.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by palooka »

Tomasino wrote:
palooka wrote:
orbtastic wrote:I wonder how many people would be sweetness and light if someone came on here day after day criticising them for being crap at their job despite pulling off successively better results?
There are no established boxing 'insiders' (including boxers) who get respect from forum posters.


Surely that's not quite true...there are a quite few folk who abuse the boxers and that but it's not everyone.

The arseholes like boxingchat etc get what they deserve. Billy seems to get a disproportionate amount of grief but I am pretty new here and don't know what's went on before. He seems fine to me and generally reacts to, rather than starts the bollox that goes on.
I'm certainly not an expert Tomasino and have seen a few boxers move away from the forum because of goading/ ill mannered/ rude questioning, though to be fair they were pretty thin skinned; representatives and friends of boxers and managers etc do get a fair amount of flack though some boxers in particular are held in high esteem. Billy does seem to have some humour and takes things in his stride and he he does sometimes react 'badly' to a post. He 'wears his heart on his sleeve' and though others may have started the conflagration he isn't shy at continuing an online spat.

Saint Billy? It remains to be seen :TU:
Tomasino
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7876
Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 16:39

Re: Q for Billy Nelson - why is Ricky not fighting Broner?

Post by Tomasino »

palooka wrote:
Tomasino wrote:
palooka wrote:
There are no established boxing 'insiders' (including boxers) who get respect from forum posters.


Surely that's not quite true...there are a quite few folk who abuse the boxers and that but it's not everyone.

The arseholes like boxingchat etc get what they deserve. Billy seems to get a disproportionate amount of grief but I am pretty new here and don't know what's went on before. He seems fine to me and generally reacts to, rather than starts the bollox that goes on.
I'm certainly not an expert Tomasino and have seen a few boxers move away from the forum because of goading/ ill mannered/ rude questioning, though to be fair they were pretty thin skinned; representatives and friends of boxers and managers etc do get a fair amount of flack though some boxers in particular are held in high esteem. Billy does seem to have some humour and takes things in his stride and he he does sometimes react 'badly' to a post. He 'wears his heart on his sleeve' and though others may have started the conflagration he isn't shy at continuing an online spat.

Saint Billy? It remains to be seen :TU:

Defo no a saint but seems to get jumped on a lot. Since I started posting there's not been many boxers about. I bow to your greater experience mate. :TU:

(Billy is fae buckfast country though mibby that's the problem) :o
Post Reply