Re: gerry cooney
Posted: 20 Aug 2013, 15:39
I think you can argue that they made a good decision in taking the big $ vs Holmes; at least financially.man wrote:plus i am not sure at the time of their fight ifgregor wrote:10 milions $$$ was guaranteed and available with no delay. If they decided to follow your way, it would take additional 2 years (roughly) and there is a good chance Cooney would lose some of those 8-10 fights - and the possibility for this kind of payday as well.max hord wrote:After only a handful of championship rounds he fought Holmes ????? Never could figure that out either. Don't know why his team didn't let him box 8 or 10 more guys and learn a little more.
Even if he wins all those fights, that does not mean he automatically wins with Holmes... and only in this case (if he wins the title and defends it) this kind of investment would be beneficial. Sounds more than risky to me.
holmes had that ATG status we give him today.
so they could as well have overestimated their
fighter's ability as underestimated holmes'.
However, after that fight, he had the big $ and was still young. They could have developed him; haad him fight an easy one, then a couple of tough gatekeepers, and build him up to fights vs Dokes, Weaver, Coeztee etc. He should have been fighting those guys in the mid-1980s.