BoxRec

WelshJack wrote:It's a shame the casuals only care about the big names. Look at the bill Saturday, it's competive and I can't call a winner in most (apart from Joshua)

No offense but do you believe most of the people that are saying anything negative on here are casuals?

He's a gangster, and no different to allegedly I've said it from day 1. He's just fresh faced, theres no way he'll be promoting Boxing as long as Warren and if he is the signs are there he'll be just as bad.

He's done well, but that's a massive silver spoon he was born with. And Sky do half his work for him, he can't fail really.

WelshJack wrote:It's a shame the casuals only care about the big names. Look at the bill Saturday, it's competive and I can't call a winner in most (apart from Joshua)

Or look at the bill tomorrow and there isn't a single 50-50 fight on there.

Whilst he ain't perfect by any stretch of the imagination i think the positives massively outweigh the negatives?

Is it his fault his dad was a success? No, why shouldn't he reap the rewards?

Yo my mind he looks like he works his arse off, puts his fighters first, pays them on time and has managed to get some great opportunities for fighters like Rees, rose and smith who otherwise wouldn't have got them.

Yes he has put on some mismatches but show me a promoter who hasn't , I think he deserves credit for froch and groves and he delivered successful title fights for barker and brook.

Yep all in all very positive for me and I was very cynical when he burst onto the scene

Overall I quite like the guy and think he's been good for UK boxing. I know that's probably not the fashionable opinion on a "hardcore boxing fans" site, but its true.

Positive

It's generally positive. Competition is healthy

Regarding the silver spoon, daddy's boy bit, makes no difference to me. Are Fwankys boys any different? Of course not, they just can't make the step out of their dads limelight. Eddie could probably end up more succesful as a promoter than his old man.

lefty wrote:I honestly think that fight would of been massive no matter what providing it had sky's influence on it. Also, Groves played a big part in how big that became with his mind games and what have you. I dont think Eddie done anything particularily amazing in promoting that. If anyone can come up with things that he personally did that made that fight as big as it was, do correct me obviously.

Agree with that. Eddies getting too much credit it's the fighters making the fight.

The way I would answer this is by saying whoever got the exclusivity contract with Sky would have to be pretty fuckin useless not to be a success.
Eddie played no part in that - Barry did.
Sadly other minority sports were proving to earn Sky more money than boxing.
There was a four to six week period just before this exclusivity deal when there was every chance that Sky were pulling the plug on boxing 100%.
Who Promotes a lot of the minority sports that make Sky money ? - Matchroom.

Would so many fighters have defected to Matchroom without this contract ? No.
If for instance Wazza had got it despite all the historyonics - would they have moved to him ? Yes.

The old cliche - they all piss in the same pot.

I also don't think its anything to do with Eddie why a lot of the fringe world title challengers have to go abroad to get their chance. I don't think Sky are that interested which then means the money in the pot isn't enough to persuade Champions to come over.
Different ball game if they bring the title home but that is rare and why Brook's victory has to be applauded.

I always look at the attendances at the shows to see how a promoter is doing,the average is about 4/5 thousand which beats the hell out off half empty leisure centres.He must be doing something right.

.... because he can stack the cards and because 80% of active UK boxers are signed to him.

lefty wrote:When you actually think about it, sky are promoters more than the boxing promoters are. They're the one's really that make or break fights IMO.

As others have mentioned you'd have to go some to not be successful with Sky's backing. Eddie seems to have nailed the social media aspect and the more modern promotion tools such as the online media outlets (IFL tv etc.) I'd say this is the one main thing he does a lot better than the other promoters.

ashedward wrote:I always look at the attendances at the shows to see how a promoter is doing,the average is about 4/5 thousand which beats the hell out off half empty leisure centres.He must be doing something right.

You can't read too much into that because it isn't a level playing field. Only way we could use that as a barometer would be to get a time machine and give every promoter a shot at having all the fighters Sky currently have and see how each one does in terms of attendances etc.

Parson Cross wrote:.... because he can stack the cards and because 80% of active UK boxers are signed to him.

Yeah that helps,It`s all in his favour being the promoter with the best tv deal.He has used Twitter pretty well to get his Matchroom boxing brand across to people through.

jameswilson wrote:

ashedward wrote:I always look at the attendances at the shows to see how a promoter is doing,the average is about 4/5 thousand which beats the hell out off half empty leisure centres.He must be doing something right.

You can't read too much into that because it isn't a level playing field. Only way we could use that as a barometer would be to get a time machine and give every promoter a shot at having all the fighters Sky currently have and see how each one does in terms of attendances etc.

Fair point.

Awful, crap, prizefigther - eurgh. His pedigree in boxing is a first round KO over Jodie Marsh. Hardly the
messiah - just a naughty boy fornicating around with our sport.

I will take it all back if he brings boxing back to the excitement levels of when I would tune into
'Midweek Sports Special' and 'Sportsnight' at 10.30 in the evening with I was 13 years old.

Until then, he is just another naked emperor thinking he is walking around with Lacoste on.

jameswilson wrote:

lefty wrote:When you actually think about it, sky are promoters more than the boxing promoters are. They're the one's really that make or break fights IMO.

As others have mentioned you'd have to go some to not be successful with Sky's backing. Eddie seems to have nailed the social media aspect and the more modern promotion tools such as the online media outlets (IFL tv etc.) I'd say this is the one main thing he does a lot better than the other promoters.

Yeah I wouldnt argue with that. Also, he does seem to do well with packing out shows like tonight and other events like it so I have to give him his due there.

jameswilson wrote:

ashedward wrote:I always look at the attendances at the shows to see how a promoter is doing,the average is about 4/5 thousand which beats the hell out off half empty leisure centres.He must be doing something right.

You can't read too much into that because it isn't a level playing field. Only way we could use that as a barometer would be to get a time machine and give every promoter a shot at having all the fighters Sky currently have and see how each one does in terms of attendances etc.

fornicating hell James, what's happened? Eddie has reduced your wage has he? Or you been poached by fwank? ;) haha

Fat Git wrote:Awful, crap, prizefigther - eurgh. His pedigree in boxing is a first round KO over Jodie Marsh. Hardly the
messiah - just a naughty boy effing around with our sport.

I will take it all back if he brings boxing back to the excitement levels of when I would tune into
'Midweek Sports Special' and 'Sportsnight' at 10.30 in the evening with I was 13 years old.

Until then, he is just another naked emperor thinking he is walking around with Lacoste on.

If, when you were 13, I'd found out you were taking time out from learning capital cities it would have been 50 lashes for you.

Anyone see Fwankys replacement in the sun? Yep Bazza himself. Today there was a piece "by him" about Joshua...worse than anything allegedly ever "wrote"!

Jab like Larry Holmes, right hand like Earnie Shavers, moves like Ali...

jameswilson wrote:

Fat Git wrote:Awful, crap, prizefigther - eurgh. His pedigree in boxing is a first round KO over Jodie Marsh. Hardly the
messiah - just a naughty boy effing around with our sport.

I will take it all back if he brings boxing back to the excitement levels of when I would tune into
'Midweek Sports Special' and 'Sportsnight' at 10.30 in the evening with I was 13 years old.

Until then, he is just another naked emperor thinking he is walking around with Lacoste on.

If, when you were 13, I'd found out you were taking time out from learning capital cities it would have been 50 lashes for you.

Knew them all by the age of six, needed another facts and figures based discipline to get obsessed about. :geek2:

lillywhite14 wrote:Anyone see Fwankys replacement in the sun? Yep Bazza himself. Today there was a piece "by him" about Joshua...worse than anything allegedly ever "wrote"!

Jab like Larry Holmes, right hand like Earnie Shavers, moves like Ali...

Is that the parkinson's afflicted Ali he meant?

lefty wrote: Is that the parkinson's afflicted Ali he meant?

No that seems like you mocking the disabled.

Overall its been positive. Saying that, I have this nagging feeling he is slowly starting to take the pee a bit. Hope he doesn't go too far with it.