Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

mike john
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 271
Joined: 26 Jan 2007, 06:24

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mike john »

Bigdogsnose wrote:
I think Brooks resume prior to the Porter fight is there to be shot at. Certainly not the depth in quality as on Khans, but he went through all the eliminators. Post porter hasn’t been great either, but I think it’s been more a case of wanting and Eddie not putting up the cash. Again, fought the mandatorys and Chaves is a genuine top 10 Welter.

No doubt though, Amir’s just been treading water and keeping it safe, waiting for Pac or Mayweather.

It probably doesn’t fill Wembley (although only one boxing fight has, so not sure why that is suddenly the bar). It is however a big fight that sells more tickets than any other I can see in Britain today (maybe Haye/Joshua/fury). A lot of that is down to that fact that Khan does still sell to the casuals, he is still the draw and can therefore make or break a fight. I just wish he would make this one.

Remember it took a dodgy ending and a bit of needle and a re-match to fill Wembley. Maybe if the first fights good enough a re-match would!
this is my issue in a nutshell. defend kell brooks opponent, but slate khans as stay busy opponents.
Bigdogsnose
Middleweight
Posts: 1473
Joined: 02 Dec 2013, 08:36

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by Bigdogsnose »

mike john wrote:
Bigdogsnose wrote:
I think Brooks resume prior to the Porter fight is there to be shot at. Certainly not the depth in quality as on Khans, but he went through all the eliminators. Post porter hasn’t been great either, but I think it’s been more a case of wanting and Eddie not putting up the cash. Again, fought the mandatorys and Chaves is a genuine top 10 Welter.

No doubt though, Amir’s just been treading water and keeping it safe, waiting for Pac or Mayweather.

It probably doesn’t fill Wembley (although only one boxing fight has, so not sure why that is suddenly the bar). It is however a big fight that sells more tickets than any other I can see in Britain today (maybe Haye/Joshua/fury). A lot of that is down to that fact that Khan does still sell to the casuals, he is still the draw and can therefore make or break a fight. I just wish he would make this one.

Remember it took a dodgy ending and a bit of needle and a re-match to fill Wembley. Maybe if the first fights good enough a re-match would!
this is my issue in a nutshell. defend kell brooks opponent, but slate khans as stay busy opponents.
Said straight up, Kells record has holes in it and he does need to step up. Chaves is a step up from anything that Kell has fought, bar porter. Khan would be a step up again. Hopefully, now Pac seems to be off the table, Khan will go in with a genuine top 10 welter, Garcia was mentioned.. hope it happens. Hope they both stay unbeaten long enough to fight each other (but actively fighting top guys). I hope a lot.
whiskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11956
Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 14:52

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by whiskey »

mike john wrote:
i dont really have an issue with any of your points here, unless you're someone who will fail to cast the same critical eye over kell brooks affairs?
Is Kell ducking Khan ?

I'd say he is the one doing all the chasing the make it happen, and holds all the cards - larger crowd puller, Sky box office. Khan did 6,000 tops the last fight he had in the UK, with a heavy undercard support. Sky didn't bother picking it up either.

Kell is the unbeaten welterweight IBF champion, whom went stateside and took the belt from an unbeaten American - since then despite having a career threatening injury, he's actually got in the ring and demolished his [mandatory] IBF challenger and took a stay-busy fight against Frankie Gavin in the last 12 months.

Thats a world title fight, a mandatory and defense.

In the last 12 months or so, Khan has fought Alexander (beaten soundly by Shawn Porter) and Chris Algieri. He has not got a world title, he has been on PBC freeview. It's by no means a 'terrible' 12 month , but let's not pretend it's better than Kell Brook over the same stretch?

Brook is getting in the ring yet again in just a week's time, against a man whom has just come off the back of a draw against Timothy Bradley - whilst what does Khan have planned?

It's all very well trying to ridicule Brook and pick holes in him - but at least he is willing and trying to fight Khan, whom by return is doing everything he can NOT to fight Brook - because it's easily the biggest purse, crowd and fight of his career. It would generate far more interest than him fighting Pacquiao whom has looked really faded lately. I dare say it would excel interest in a Mayweather fight too - definitely in the UK.

I no longer think it's ego or arrogance on Khan's part - I think he knows Kell Brook will walk straight through him and knock him sideways. He'd much prefer losing abroad, and still coming home to lord it over his domestic peers - but a brutal loss in his home country is something that he can't chance. He'd lose face, he'd lose standing and probably sponsors.
mike john
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 271
Joined: 26 Jan 2007, 06:24

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mike john »

G0mez wrote:
mike john wrote:
i dont really have an issue with any of your points here, unless you're someone who will fail to cast the same critical eye over kell brooks affairs?
Is Kell ducking Khan ?

I'd say he is the one doing all the chasing the make it happen, and holds all the cards - larger crowd puller, Sky box office. Khan did 6,000 tops the last fight he had in the UK, with a heavy undercard support. Sky didn't bother picking it up either.

Kell is the unbeaten welterweight IBF champion, whom went stateside and took the belt from an unbeaten American - since then despite having a career threatening injury, he's actually got in the ring and demolished his [mandatory] IBF challenger and took a stay-busy fight against Frankie Gavin in the last 12 months.

Thats a world title fight, a mandatory and defense.

In the last 12 months or so, Khan has fought Alexander (beaten soundly by Shawn Porter) and Chris Algieri. He has not got a world title, he has been on PBC freeview. It's by no means a 'terrible' 12 month , but let's not pretend it's better than Kell Brook over the same stretch?

Brook is getting in the ring yet again in just a week's time, against a man whom has just come off the back of a draw against Timothy Bradley - whilst what does Khan have planned?

It's all very well trying to ridicule Brook and pick holes in him - but at least he is willing and trying to fight Khan, whom by return is doing everything he can NOT to fight Brook - because it's easily the biggest purse, crowd and fight of his career. It would generate far more interest than him fighting Pacquiao whom has looked really faded lately. I dare say it would excel interest in a Mayweather fight too - definitely in the UK.

I no longer think it's ego or arrogance on Khan's part - I think he knows Kell Brook will walk straight through him and knock him sideways. He'd much prefer losing abroad, and still coming home to lord it over his domestic peers - but a brutal loss in his home country is something that he can't chance. He'd lose face, he'd lose standing and probably sponsors.
at no point have i tried to "pretend" khan has had a better 12 month period than kell. and i do think youve missed my point.
i feel parallels can be drawn between khan and brook with regards to their recent activity.
both have chased the biggest money fights available to them, and both have failed to set the world alight waiting for those fights to materialise.
you say that kell "demolished" the mighty jo jo dan, whilst khan fought alexander, and point out devons loss to porter.
you say getting in the ring "yet again" against a guy who got a draw against bradley. no respect for algieri for beating provo then?
you constantly try and shine a positive light on what brook is doing, whilst criticising what khan is doing, when in reality, theres nothing between them. this is my point exactly.

do you honestly think a brook fight for khan is bigger than a meeting with pacquiao or mayweather? utter nonsense
whiskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11956
Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 14:52

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by whiskey »

mike john wrote:
do you honestly think a brook fight for khan is bigger than a meeting with pacquiao or mayweather? utter nonsense
Utter nonsense ? :lol:

I didn't realise Amir was fighting Floyd or Pacquiao to make a comparison !

Put your ear close to the PC monitor because I am going to whisper a little secret to you *there is no Mayweather or Pacquiao fight for Amir Khan*
mike john
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 271
Joined: 26 Jan 2007, 06:24

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mike john »

G0mez wrote: It's all very well trying to ridicule Brook and pick holes in him - but at least he is willing and trying to fight Khan, whom by return is doing everything he can NOT to fight Brook - because it's easily the biggest purse, crowd and fight of his career. It would generate far more interest than him fighting Pacquiao whom has looked really faded lately. I dare say it would excel interest in a Mayweather fight too - definitely in the UK.
mike john wrote: do you honestly think a brook fight for khan is bigger than a meeting with pacquiao or mayweather? utter nonsense
G0mez wrote: Utter nonsense ? :lol:

I didn't realise Amir was fighting Floyd or Pacquiao to make a comparison !

Put your ear close to the PC monitor because I am going to whisper a little secret to you *there is no Mayweather or Pacquiao fight for Amir Khan*
wtf are you talking about? are you not aware you made the comparison yourself?
sweetscience
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2816
Joined: 22 Sep 2004, 09:09

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by sweetscience »

they BOTH need to step up the competition pronto

more so Brook as he is the Champ

if Khan wants to piss around then that's fine... he doesn't hold a belt & is under no obligations
Pugilist-specialist
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1632
Joined: 11 Jul 2008, 04:37

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by Pugilist-specialist »

mickey1975 wrote:Is Brook really a Wembley fight? The public are hardly screaming for it.
I can remember you saying that it wasn't a stadium fight, but Brook's promoter claims he booked Wembley for June 13 and has consistently said it is a Wembley fight and he would sell it out.
mickey1975
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 23148
Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mickey1975 »

Pugilist-specialist wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:Is Brook really a Wembley fight? The public are hardly screaming for it.
I can remember you saying that it wasn't a stadium fight, but Brook's promoter claims he booked Wembley for June 13 and has consistently said it is a Wembley fight and he would sell it out.
It's easy when you sell 90% of tickets to your sponsor before they go on sale... Seriously, it could be built into a super fight, but Khan is inactive, and rarely on Sky whereas Brook is not that high profile himself.
freddydoesdallas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 9436
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by freddydoesdallas »

mickey1975 wrote:
Pugilist-specialist wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:Is Brook really a Wembley fight? The public are hardly screaming for it.
I can remember you saying that it wasn't a stadium fight, but Brook's promoter claims he booked Wembley for June 13 and has consistently said it is a Wembley fight and he would sell it out.
It's easy when you sell 90% of tickets to your sponsor before they go on sale... Seriously, it could be built into a super fight, but Khan is inactive, and rarely on Sky whereas Brook is not that high profile himself.
It is amazing how people can be tricked into thinking it's a massive event just by saying it's 'sold out'
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45238
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

G0mez wrote:
mike john wrote:
id be interested to know if you are equally as critical of kell brooks post title run, upcoming fight included?
The thing is fella, Amir Khan has had just 7 fights in over 4 years now.

Two of them were losses, two of them against former lightweights in Molina and Diaz - which leaves Collazo (rumuored to be an alcoholic) Alexander whom was defeated by Shawn Porter.

He turned down a straight shot at the IBF strap, easily the biggest box office payday of his career in front of a possible crowd of tens of thousands - and also the opportunity to settle the score with a fierce unbeaten domestic rival....to fight a guy floored six times by Pacquiao in Algieri on terrestial television - and then proceeded to get wobbled and look completely average.

He's got no credible excuse and is nothing but press release after press release nowadays. He was part of a strategic 'spat' with Broner on twitter, then when he announced on youtube it was indeed Algieri, they had to remove the video due to the horrendous backlash and negative comments.

Sorry , but he has no credible excuse. He can't stay relevant by putting press releases out that call for Mayweather or Pacquiao - he needs to stay relevant by fighting, because he is fading from the general public's minds.

His handlers are clearly treading water in the hope that Brook moves up to 154lb sooner rather than later.
Precisely Gomez me old china. The problem is Khan does more talking than fighting these days, angling for a monster payday that he hasn't really earnt and getting peeved at being passed over, rather than fighting his way

I suspect Khan wants to exit the game soon, I'm sure he's realised he's not as good as he thought he was going to be, and that he risks losing now every time he fights one of the top contenders - so he's hoping he can blather his way to a retirement fund fight, which clearly isn't forthcoming.

Khan needs to have some meaningful fights soon, because he is becoming an irritant more than a fighter.
Boxerbeetle
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 32972
Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 10:59

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by Boxerbeetle »

Khan's best win in recent years - Devon Alexander - looks quite a bit less impressive after last night.
black panther
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4097
Joined: 11 Dec 2003, 07:06

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by black panther »

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
G0mez wrote:
mike john wrote:
id be interested to know if you are equally as critical of kell brooks post title run, upcoming fight included?
The thing is fella, Amir Khan has had just 7 fights in over 4 years now.

Two of them were losses, two of them against former lightweights in Molina and Diaz - which leaves Collazo (rumuored to be an alcoholic) Alexander whom was defeated by Shawn Porter.

He turned down a straight shot at the IBF strap, easily the biggest box office payday of his career in front of a possible crowd of tens of thousands - and also the opportunity to settle the score with a fierce unbeaten domestic rival....to fight a guy floored six times by Pacquiao in Algieri on terrestial television - and then proceeded to get wobbled and look completely average.

He's got no credible excuse and is nothing but press release after press release nowadays. He was part of a strategic 'spat' with Broner on twitter, then when he announced on youtube it was indeed Algieri, they had to remove the video due to the horrendous backlash and negative comments.

Sorry , but he has no credible excuse. He can't stay relevant by putting press releases out that call for Mayweather or Pacquiao - he needs to stay relevant by fighting, because he is fading from the general public's minds.

His handlers are clearly treading water in the hope that Brook moves up to 154lb sooner rather than later.
Precisely Gomez me old china. The problem is Khan does more talking than fighting these days, angling for a monster payday that he hasn't really earnt and getting peeved at being passed over, rather than fighting his way

I suspect Khan wants to exit the game soon, I'm sure he's realised he's not as good as he thought he was going to be, and that he risks losing now every time he fights one of the top contenders - so he's hoping he can blather his way to a retirement fund fight, which clearly isn't forthcoming.

Khan needs to have some meaningful fights soon, because he is becoming an irritant more than a fighter.

Hard to disagree with that.
Ricky_
Middleweight
Posts: 8896
Joined: 16 Oct 2013, 08:03

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by Ricky_ »

Khan's a joke.

Fight brook or pac and get knocked out, or line up another Devon Alexander.
freddydoesdallas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 9436
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by freddydoesdallas »

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Precisely Gomez me old china. The problem is Khan does more talking than fighting these days, angling for a monster payday that he hasn't really earnt and getting peeved at being passed over, rather than fighting his way

I suspect Khan wants to exit the game soon, I'm sure he's realised he's not as good as he thought he was going to be, and that he risks losing now every time he fights one of the top contenders - so he's hoping he can blather his way to a retirement fund fight, which clearly isn't forthcoming.

Khan needs to have some meaningful fights soon, because he is becoming an irritant more than a fighter.
Sums it up well Jim
mike john
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 271
Joined: 26 Jan 2007, 06:24

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mike john »

jamesmcdonnell wrote: Precisely Gomez me old china. The problem is Khan does more talking than fighting these days, angling for a monster payday that he hasn't really earnt and getting peeved at being passed over, rather than fighting his way

I suspect Khan wants to exit the game soon, I'm sure he's realised he's not as good as he thought he was going to be, and that he risks losing now every time he fights one of the top contenders - so he's hoping he can blather his way to a retirement fund fight, which clearly isn't forthcoming.

Khan needs to have some meaningful fights soon, because he is becoming an irritant more than a fighter.
if khan hasnt earnt a shot at pacquaio or mayweather, id be interested to know which welterweight has?
freddydoesdallas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 9436
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by freddydoesdallas »

mike john wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote: Precisely Gomez me old china. The problem is Khan does more talking than fighting these days, angling for a monster payday that he hasn't really earnt and getting peeved at being passed over, rather than fighting his way

I suspect Khan wants to exit the game soon, I'm sure he's realised he's not as good as he thought he was going to be, and that he risks losing now every time he fights one of the top contenders - so he's hoping he can blather his way to a retirement fund fight, which clearly isn't forthcoming.

Khan needs to have some meaningful fights soon, because he is becoming an irritant more than a fighter.
if khan hasnt earnt a shot at pacquaio or mayweather, id be interested to know which welterweight has?
what has Khan done to earn the shot at Mayweather or Pacquiao at welterweight?
mike john
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 271
Joined: 26 Jan 2007, 06:24

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mike john »

freddydoesdallas wrote:
mike john wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote: Precisely Gomez me old china. The problem is Khan does more talking than fighting these days, angling for a monster payday that he hasn't really earnt and getting peeved at being passed over, rather than fighting his way

I suspect Khan wants to exit the game soon, I'm sure he's realised he's not as good as he thought he was going to be, and that he risks losing now every time he fights one of the top contenders - so he's hoping he can blather his way to a retirement fund fight, which clearly isn't forthcoming.

Khan needs to have some meaningful fights soon, because he is becoming an irritant more than a fighter.
if khan hasnt earnt a shot at pacquaio or mayweather, id be interested to know which welterweight has?
what has Khan done to earn the shot at Mayweather or Pacquiao at welterweight?
at least as much as any other top welterweight
Bigdogsnose
Middleweight
Posts: 1473
Joined: 02 Dec 2013, 08:36

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by Bigdogsnose »

mike john wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote: Precisely Gomez me old china. The problem is Khan does more talking than fighting these days, angling for a monster payday that he hasn't really earnt and getting peeved at being passed over, rather than fighting his way

I suspect Khan wants to exit the game soon, I'm sure he's realised he's not as good as he thought he was going to be, and that he risks losing now every time he fights one of the top contenders - so he's hoping he can blather his way to a retirement fund fight, which clearly isn't forthcoming.

Khan needs to have some meaningful fights soon, because he is becoming an irritant more than a fighter.
if khan hasnt earnt a shot at pacquaio or mayweather, id be interested to know which welterweight has?
Kell Brook – IBF Champion

Tim Bradley – WBO Champion

Danny Garcia – Already sparked Khan out and is unbeaten

(My personal feeling is Thurman is going to prove to be best of the lot, but does need to go out and prove it)

It shouldn't all be about Pac and Mayweather (retired?!), But Amirs the one who keeps banging on that drum.
mike john
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 271
Joined: 26 Jan 2007, 06:24

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mike john »

Bigdogsnose wrote: Kell Brook – IBF Champion

Tim Bradley – WBO Champion

Danny Garcia – Already sparked Khan out and is unbeaten

(My personal feeling is Thurman is going to prove to be best of the lot, but does need to go out and prove it)

It shouldn't all be about Pac and Mayweather (retired?!), But Amirs the one who keeps banging on that drum.
with as undisputed a champion as floyd mayweather at the top of ones division, those titles mean what exactly? marketing tools, nothing more
when you look at who's actually beaten who, no-one stands clearly above khan at welter.

i agree, if and when keith thurman beats shawn porter, he will be clear number one challenger.
Nightmare Roy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16942
Joined: 18 May 2003, 17:29

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by Nightmare Roy »

mickey1975 wrote:Is Brook really a Wembley fight? The public are hardly screaming for it.
I think he'd earn much more fighting Kell than either PAC or Floyd, against Kell he'd get at least 50% and would be at a huge venue and PPV. Against PAC and Floyd he'd get 15 % tops.
Pugilist-specialist
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1632
Joined: 11 Jul 2008, 04:37

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by Pugilist-specialist »

mike john wrote: when you look at who's actually beaten who, no-one stands clearly above khan at welter.
Ok mate - nice wind-up.
Last edited by Pugilist-specialist on 15 Oct 2015, 12:31, edited 1 time in total.
freddydoesdallas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 9436
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by freddydoesdallas »

mike john wrote:
Bigdogsnose wrote: Kell Brook – IBF Champion

Tim Bradley – WBO Champion

Danny Garcia – Already sparked Khan out and is unbeaten

(My personal feeling is Thurman is going to prove to be best of the lot, but does need to go out and prove it)

It shouldn't all be about Pac and Mayweather (retired?!), But Amirs the one who keeps banging on that drum.
with as undisputed a champion as floyd mayweather at the top of ones division, those titles mean what exactly? marketing tools, nothing more
when you look at who's actually beaten who, no-one stands clearly above khan at welter.

i agree, if and when keith thurman beats shawn porter, he will be clear number one challenger.
So do you agree that Garcia has done more to earn it than khan?

Does Bradley getting the W over khan mean more than anything khan has done on top of being wbo champ?

I do think the welters should fight each other to start eliminating the actual contenders. Brook v Khan would be a great starting point to select our representative
mike john
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 271
Joined: 26 Jan 2007, 06:24

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mike john »

Pugilist-specialist wrote:
mike john wrote: when you look at who's actually beaten who, no-one stands clearly above khan at welter.
Ok mate - nice wind-up.
these are the top weltereweight contenders and their best wins as far as i can see-

thurman has beaten guerrero, collazo
porter has beaten malignaggi, broner, and lost to brook
brook has beaten porter

please, enlighten me, which of these is the record that is clearly better than khans? if you think im having a laugh, im guessing you think at least one of these guys is far more deserving than khan, which is it?
mike john
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 271
Joined: 26 Jan 2007, 06:24

Re: Khan says Pacquiao talks are off

Post by mike john »

freddydoesdallas wrote: So do you agree that Garcia has done more to earn it than khan?

Does Bradley getting the W over khan mean more than anything khan has done on top of being wbo champ?

I do think the welters should fight each other to start eliminating the actual contenders. Brook v Khan would be a great starting point to select our representative
i wasnt aware garcia had fought at welterweight in his last few fights, so i would make him more worthy of a challenge to the title, yes.

i dont understand your comment regarding bradley having a win over khan?
id probably put bradley ahead of khan also
Post Reply