BoxRec

He is very bad for the sport of boxing. I just don't understand how as a human being you think it is ok to act the way you do. I believe that the sport of boxing is not realizing how bad it is for him to be apart of anything boxing ever does. Regardless of his talent or skill, his attitude and actions in/out of the ring destroy those parts. I can only hope he figures it out before its really to late and he is used as a clown of some sort or something close to that.

NYY2424 wrote:He is very bad for the sport of boxing. I just don't understand how as a human being you think it is ok to act the way you do. I believe that the sport of boxing is not realizing how bad it is for him to be apart of anything boxing ever does. Regardless of his talent or skill, his attitude and actions in/out of the ring destroy those parts. I can only hope he figures it out before its really to late and he is used as a clown of some sort or something close to that.

I agree for the most part. But there are some that are attracted to his schtick. I like having him around, though, because his mouth is big enough, and his skill is just under par enough to get his @ss handed to him by the upper echelon of his division. So, it gives me great satisfaction seeing him get handled by the alphas of the sport.

ReggieDiggs wrote: This is all relative cuz the truth of the matter is boxing is a putting asses in seats business more than a the best get the best money business like it or not. And Adrien puts asses in seats like it or not so therefore he's being paid what he's worth. Its like some movie sh!t. Everyone may think 7 Years a Slave is a better film, but Guardians of the Galaxy makes more money.

I mean ability-wise.

On a ranking of purses, Broner would most likely be higher than he would be on a rankings of how good he is, thus the comment about his pay not being commensurate with his ability. I also wonder if he'll be as such a draw if the unimpressive performances continue; the antics go only so far without an 0 and consistently lackluster showings.

It's hard to dispute that a fighter's drawing power typically influences what they're paid, thought it's hardly the only factor determining their purses and I think there are many examples of fighters (e.g. Andre Ward, Devon Alexander, and Peter 'Undercard' Quillin) with earning power that is disproportionate to their drawing power.

diddy wrote:Broner has fought one good fighter. And got crushed.

Until he fights another top 10 guy I won't and can't truly judge him.

He's barely beating 2nd rate guys.

I don't even think he beat Paulie.

That was a very close fight, and I too gave it to Paulie... Wot told me the most about Broner was seeing him sat next to GBP Richard Schaefer for the Porter-Malignaggi fight... after Porter KTFO'd Paulie, Broner was nowhere to be seen (someone else was occupying the seat next to Schaefer for the next fight). I didn't see Broner in the crowd when Brook beat Porter so that belt/title/opportunity will reside in jolly ol blightly for a while... Broner doesn't seem to have the "fire" to be a contender. Not like Brook anyways, and Brook is still looking up at the top guys in that class...

I also wonder if he'll be as such a draw if the unimpressive performances continue; the antics go only so far without an 0 and consistently lackluster showings

Probably as long as he engages fans in such a way that they care about him. I expect that to continue. Do you really want to stop watching Broner's fights? If so, why? Because he doesn't make for bad ones.

Probably as long as he engages fans in such a way that they care about him. I expect that to continue. Do you really want to stop watching Broner's fights? If so, why? Because he doesn't make for bad ones.

Broner's a smart marketeer for sure.....watch me because you love my style/attitude or tune-in because you hope that I get my big mouth firmly shut. Either way, you're watching.

It's not new or revolutionary....he's walking a well worn path.....but he's updated it and put his own personal twist on it. And it works.

However, if he loses a second time round and badly then something has to give because his relevance as a headine fighter who can command coverage at big events will come under threat. There's alot resting on that proposed fight with Matthyse.

Broner losing will be the best thing for the fans in the long run, he has no 0 to protect so if he can still draw good numbers his advisors no a defeat isn't an issue.

I'm not saying throw him to the wolves but start taking chances again, Broner vs Judah at 140 would be a good selling fight?

The sooner Broner loses again and gets relegated from the spotlight the better it will be for everyone involved. You don't want this guy being emulated or becoming a role model in any way. He represents the worst aspects of a sportsman and is a low class douche.

world ranked wrote:

diddy wrote:Broner has fought one good fighter. And got crushed.

Until he fights another top 10 guy I won't and can't truly judge him.

He's barely beating 2nd rate guys.

I don't even think he beat Paulie.

crushed. I never seen a fighter get crushed and lost a Majority decision.

First off, you're wrong. Twice. Wasn't a MD. Never seen a guy lose a MD and not lose clearly?! Oh really?! And what sport do you follow again? Apparently not this one.

Baby Face Finster wrote:The sooner Broner loses again and gets relegated from the spotlight the better it will be for everyone involved. You don't want this guy being emulated or becoming a role model in any way. He represents the worst aspects of a sportsman and is a low class douche.

Totally agree. Awful excuse for a human being.

fergusg wrote:I feel that people are unable to provide an objective critique of Adrien Broner, because of his actions outside the ring fuel the hatred boxing fans have towards him… and the severity of the loathing they have for him clouds their judgement.

Adrien Broner is only 25 years old and he has time on his side and he will almost certainly improve with age.

The main reason why Broner lost his fight against Marcos Maidana, was because he sharing the ring with a man that is naturally much bigger than himself.

Adrien Broner is a solid talent and if he is carefully matched, he may potentially win more world titles, but let’s be honest, he doesn’t have the potential to eventually become a Hall-of-Famer. He is certainly not a pound-for-pound rated fighter and he is not destined to become Floyd Mayweather’s successor.

No, he was not. He was finally facing a man the same size as himself.

Check the fight-night weights. & then check what Broner used to weigh in (on fight-night) as at super-feather/lightweight, & the ten or fifteen pounds he had over those dudes.

Your constant contrarian stance is occasionally amusing, but you really must try harder in order to make it work.

PS: Broner's due most of the hate not because of the manufactured hoopla, but 'cos he is a product of the machine. If you hate what's done to boxing, the hollowing out of it, you by definition must root against Broner (or do what I do, ignore him unless he gets a shoeing).

Broner lost to maidana because Marcos is a better fighter. Though Adrien struggles with nothing, still drawing good ratings and purses when everyone that sucked his sack should recognize those skills just aren't there. Good for him, he takes an asswhipping like a man. If people stopped giving him the Floyd hate treatment he'd have been fighting Taylor in a fantastic FNF main event.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Broner lost to maidana because Marcos is a better fighter. Though Adrien struggles with nothing, still drawing good ratings and purses when everyone that sucked his sack should recognize those skills just aren't there. Good for him, he takes an asswhipping like a man. If people stopped giving him the Floyd hate treatment he'd have been fighting Taylor in a fantastic FNF main event.

fergusg wrote:

Datsue wrote:

fergusg wrote:The main reason why Broner lost his fight against Marcos Maidana, was because he sharing the ring with a man that is naturally much bigger than himself.

No, he was not. He was finally facing a man the same size as himself.

Check the fight-night weights. & then check what Broner used to weigh in (on fight-night) as at super-feather/lightweight, & the ten or fifteen pounds he had over those dudes.

Your constant contrarian stance is occasionally amusing, but you really must try harder in order to make it work.

PS: Broner's due most of the hate not because of the manufactured hoopla, but 'cos he is a product of the machine. If you hate what's done to boxing, the hollowing out of it, you by definition must root against Broner (or do what I do, ignore him unless he gets a shoeing).

Weighing the same and being physically the same size are two completely different things.

Ten months prior to the Maidana bout, Broner was a lightweight, which is 12lbs lighter than welterweight.

Whereas Marcos Maidana was a full-fledged 147lb-er for almost two years… and against Broner, he physically appeared to be the much bigger man.

It’s an extreme example, but a 5’ 10” man, who is a couch potato could theoretically weigh the same as a 6′ 6½″ Deontay Wilder.

Broner was a "lightweight" for about twelve seconds on the day of the weigh-in, before they put him back on the pasta drip or whatever it is they do to reinflate these guys.

JCC XXL Jr used to "weigh" in as a middleweight. So does Miguel Cotto. Are they the same size? Were Martinez & Chavez the same size?

& now Chavez can't kill himself/can't afford the proper diuretics to make middle & must weigh in as a light-heavy, is he facing "naturally bigger" men?

I would say, no. He is the same fvcking size as always by the time he gets between the ropes, he just can't kill his liver/kidneys (or afford the state of the art diuretics/masking agents for same) to make "middleweight" any longer.

Chavez vs a light-heavy is in reality two fighters the same size fighting, no matter that one "used to fight at middleweight".

Broner (though a somewhat less extreme example) presents exactly the same scenario. Maidana "appearing" to be the bigger man was because we are used to seeing Gavin Rees or Vicente Escobedo try to use climbing gear & pitons in order to get close enough to land a jab. It's perspective.

fergusg wrote:@Datsue - I could be wrong, but didn’t Arien Broner weigh 150lbs against Gavin Rees (for his 135lb world title fight), but ten months later against Maidana, his official weight was 144½lbs, which is well within the 147lb limit… and he then rehydrated to 156lbs.

In stark contrast, Marcos Maidana rehydrated to 162lbs against Broner and then ballooned to 165lbs against Mayweather. He had being campaigning at 147lbs for two years and regularly rehydrating to 160+lbs come fight night.

Is this correct?

JESUS! I had to go look that up (MM's fight night weight vs Floyd) but you are indeed correct, sir. Sincere apologies.

So, Maidana outweighed Floyd by (Jesus Christ) 17 pounds.

But--& entertain my addled notions here, please--he outweighed Broner by what, six pounds in the ring? Is it more likely that those six pounds were the reason he lost? Or is it more likely that he was used to being in the same position Maidana was vs Floyd (i.e. able to ignore the incoming)?

Against Floyd, obviously that's totally valid, I mean, fvck 17 pounds... But versus Broner, whilst I concede that yes MM is a bigger dude, he's not like three weight divisions bigger.

PS: Fvcking great post in the "Al Heymon..." thread, btw, I meant to say that earlier.

Part of Broner's problem against Maidana was size and power, but really I think most of it came down to him having a shitty workrate and hanging out on the ropes where his defense isn't good enough to save him from taking punishment. He doesn't have Floyd's skills or work ethic and it's doubtful he ever will.

fergusg wrote:

Datsue wrote:But--& entertain my addled notions here, please--he outweighed Broner by what, six pounds in the ring? Is it more likely that those six pounds were the reason he lost? Or is it more likely that he was used to being in the same position Maidana was vs Floyd (i.e. able to ignore the incoming)?

There’s no question that Broner got out-worked by Marcos Maidana in their fight. In fact, Adrien Broner has always suffered from a lack of work-rate throughout his career… and when he jumped two weight classes, he also lacked the venomous punching power that he held at lightweight and below. He simply didn't have enough weaponry to deter and stop Maidana's onslaught.

That being said, there are weight classes for a reason… and the 6lbs differential between Maidana and Broner is roughly the same difference between two weight classes from super-featherweight up to light heavyweight (i.e. lightweight versus light welterweight is 5lbs; light welterweight versus welterweight is 7lbs).

Datsue wrote:PS: Fvcking great post in the "Al Heymon..." thread, btw, I meant to say that earlier.

Thanks.

Well if that's the case, you have to take in account just about all of the fights Broner had at 135 and below being he was almost always a weight class bigger than his opponent with the exception of maybe Demarco.

Also fergusg: are you Rover?

fergusg wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:Well if that's the case, you have to take in account just about all of the fights Broner had at 135 and below being he was almost always a weight class bigger than his opponent with the exception of maybe Demarco.

This point is irrelevant to the actual topic under discussion.

If you create another thread to discuss the unfair size advantages that Broner held over the opponents he faced at super-featherweight and lightweight, then I’ll comment accordingly.

Hey, you made the point that Broner lost to Maidana because Maidana was "a weightclass bigger" Broner was a weight class bigger than just about everyone at 130 and 135 so that point in of itself is irrelevant.

Datsue wrote:Also fergusg: are you Rover?

Seems like it doesn't it?

fergusg wrote:
Just because Adrien Broner held a size advantage over his opponents at 130lbs or 135lbs, that doesn’t mean that he wasn’t at a disadvantage when he faced Marcos Maidana at 147lbs.

Actually, I’m going to have some fun with this… are you seriously suggesting that Marcos Maidana’s size advantage was not one of the reasons for him being able to overcome Adrien Broner? :??

6 pounds? No

fergusg wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:

fergusg wrote:
Just because Adrien Broner held a size advantage over his opponents at 130lbs or 135lbs, that doesn’t mean that he wasn’t at a disadvantage when he faced Marcos Maidana at 147lbs.

Actually, I’m going to have some fun with this… are you seriously suggesting that Marcos Maidana’s size advantage was not one of the reasons for him being able to overcome Adrien Broner? :??

6 pounds? No

So in other words, lightweights would not be at a disadvantage facing light welterweights?

If you’re a genuine fan of the sport, you should know that weight classes exist for a reason, right?

If you're a genuine fan of the sport, you would realize that all of these extra 5 lbs between 17 classes is BS. The original 8 classes are fine. 5lbs isn't much of a difference unless you're below featherweight.

Broner didn't lose because he was that much smaller than Maidana, he lost because he freezes, has mediocre defense, doesn't throw enough punches and rely on power on his counters to back guys off him. He's not the "slick" fighter that he's made out to be. The same reason Berto loses today.

fergusg wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:If you're a genuine fan of the sport, you would realize that all of these extra 5 lbs between 17 classes is BS. The original 8 classes are fine. 5lbs isn't much of a difference unless you're below featherweight.

You’re entitled to your opinion, but in all honesty, I really do think you’re talking complete and utter nonsense!

Most boxing fans agree that there are too many weightclasses. I've never heard anyone blame any of Duran's losses on him being too small which he was the smallest of the kings in his era.

fergusg wrote: Who's this Rover fellow? :??

that's exactly the response I'd expect from rover

Baby Face Finster wrote:

Datsue wrote:Also fergusg: are you Rover?

Seems like it doesn't it?

I don't think so. Rover didn't employ emoticons, nor was he a Brut like troll, just very argumentative. This guy seems like an ESB import