BoxRec

boxingchat wrote:Spud, did he ever actually have a TV deal in place? I know he tried to give the rights away to ITV (Hardly a smart move and in the interests of the sport as a whole I might add) but they weren't interested in the product for one and secondly because the production costs were still not within their budget restraints. Furthermore, FA had no substance to back up Jeffries early fights and after Audley's embrionic career no TV exec was going to fall for that and show a 4 or 6 round contest on prime time, with no back up.

Jeffries states publically that it's not Dennis' fault but privately it's no secret that he is seething. He didn't receive his signing bonus nor the car he was promised either did he, hence the reason the deal has gone pear-shaped? You stated recenty (and with a puffed-out chest no doubt) that Fight Academy were thriving and then almost at the same time this news breaks - mugged you off a a tad I think!.

So enlighten us Spud because whilst you waive the FA flag with pride you really don't know the truth of whats going on do you? The truth and the facts are that FA took a punt and it backfired (Thats commendable in one respect and unfortunate in another) but the hard facts are, before anyone blames ITV for this debacle, is that there never was an ITV deal or the possibility of one either according to ITV.

Tony Jeffries has been let down badly and maybe he should blame himself initially for taking what was undoubtedly a good offer, the best out there no doubt, but he was blinkered by size of the carrot instead of looking at the ground in which it was growing.

Needless to say, with the dreaded credit crunch in full swing and budgets being cut everywhere, not to mention most of the big Promoters now having signed their new faces, set their dates and selling tickets, Tony may find himself taking a smaller offer than he would have got originally had he not signed with Hobson in the first place.

Forget the fact that many people are indeed using the excuse of the credit crunch and TV budgets being cut, in this case it appears to me that Tony Jeffries was duped from the off by Fight Academy and the deal he was offered was just pie in the sky from day one.

Perhaps you can enlighten us all Spud and let me know if I'm off the mark.

My T Sharp wrote:This is a national disgrace.

Someone give this Olympian a big money TV deal and flash car signing on bonus quick.

I would hate the thought of him having to have some pro fights before earning a decent crust :P

boxingchat wrote:Pathetic would be sitting on here 24/7 waiting for replies!

As for the FW/SN situation with TV - very healthy would be the simple answer!

And finally, I can't help thinking of the insults and accusations that would have been posted on here if FW or SN had treated Jeffries in the way FA appear to have?

leforge wrote:Will Clinton fight still go ahead on that date?

leforge wrote:Shame its not on TV. It seems strange tv wants to show some shows not others!

leforge wrote:I hope all the best for CLinton! Any idea who Jeffries will sign with?

Terence wrote:Class stuff guys, once again. Can we get an 'Odds and Sods' forum for these odd sods? F*ck the boxing, let's discuss the politics..

Spud wrote:
All the best Boxing Tw*t - maybe one day our paths will cross - hopefully we will be on our own so you cant cry to your boss or security!!!

beagleboy wrote:

Spud wrote:
All the best Boxing Tw*t - maybe one day our paths will cross - hopefully we will be on our own so you cant cry to your boss or security!!!

Surely as an important member of Team Woods your paths would have crossed at the Reebok for the Glen Johnson fight. Or is it true that Team Woods was a man short that night ?

stujones wrote:

Terence wrote:Class stuff guys, once again. Can we get an 'Odds and Sods' forum for these odd sods? F*ck the boxing, let's discuss the politics..

Yes, I do note when you, myself and others get into debates about fighters and their abilities - those more focused on the politics are always silent.

stujones wrote:Boxing politics threads are fine, and I have started my fair share, but when it takes over discussing signed fights - gets a little bit much.

Spud wrote:

leforge wrote:Will Clinton fight still go ahead on that date?

Yes - the show is a complete sell out and the Jersey public are very much looking forward to seeing Clinton fight - where incidentally he is extremely popular due to appearing on various functions.

Clint is in a real fight - this Muriqi geezer is no knock over job and in my view Clinton will have to be at his very best to win.

Spud wrote:
Sorry completely disagree - who the f*ck are you to say what is fine or not ??

It gets said time and time again on here - if you dont like what is being said - join in another thread.

Whether you like it or not boxing politics is massive.

Look on this thread - a tv contract, a boxers contract and loss of boxing to our terrestrial tv screens - all the ingedients which make up the boxing politics.

Look what is going on with Pacman/Hatton.

I could go on and on - stop coming with your sh*t Stu your comment was directed at me and others on this thread - and whether you like it or not what is happening with Tony Jeffries at the moment is because of what is going on outside of the ring!!!

stujones wrote:

Spud wrote:
Sorry completely disagree - who the f*ck are you to say what is fine or not ??

It gets said time and time again on here - if you dont like what is being said - join in another thread.

Whether you like it or not boxing politics is massive.

Look on this thread - a tv contract, a boxers contract and loss of boxing to our terrestrial tv screens - all the ingedients which make up the boxing politics.

Look what is going on with Pacman/Hatton.

I could go on and on - stop coming with your sh*t Stu your comment was directed at me and others on this thread - and whether you like it or not what is happening with Tony Jeffries at the moment is because of what is going on outside of the ring!!!

ugghh? Whats with the paranoia? I merely said that it would be nice to here some peoples views on the stuff inside the ropes in addition to the insightful comments on the boxing politics.

Yes, I know boxing politcs is a big part of boxing, didn't you read my response. Your preaching to the converted there.

And as for my shit and "pathetically childish debate" into who knows what - again, I never debated anything I just said that chief contributors to boxing politics threads are far more silent on inside the ropes stuff... that is not a "debate" and I didn't question yours, or anyone else's knowledge of inside the ropes stuff.... all I said was that you/boxingchat and others are quiet when it comes to those matters. Even still, who was it who chiefly supporting Frank Maloney's idea of a "Boxrec vs Doghouse" quiz.... which sole purpose was to find out "who knows this and that" about boxing amongst us geeks.

All I implied with my post is that I would like to hear more contributions on stuff inside the ropes, you've responded with a "I can post where and when I went to" - which is fine, your contributions to the politics side of things does strengthen the forum and thats good with me.