BoxRec

Captain Hook wrote:Who would you like him to step up and fight at a later date? When he's 34, 35?!

Try 12-18 months down the line. Whenever Kahn has left the division.

So who is an easier fight? Tim Bradley? Devon Alexander? Mabuza, Ortiz, Peterson, Maidana?

I can't stand this attitude of waiting until the best fighters have aged, faded or been beaten up before taking them on, that or waiting until they've left the division and then making a move because they're too big and tough to go for a title.

Come on Crease, you can't really think that. Surely?

Far, far better fighters than Paul McCloskey have losses on their record, and Khan is one of them.

Sadly that's the attitude of many Captain. Warren even said in reference to Brook, and I'm paraphrasing, 'Of course he won't fight Pacquiao this year but we are hoping to pick up his vacant title'. Of course Brook is nowhere near Pacquiao but it's just the attitude that's so common of looking for the weakest champ or someone to age/vacate.

Yeah I know mate, but I'd rather have 2/3 losses on my record and have taken on the best guys, especially if the opportunity was there, than avoid the best and wait to pick up vacant titles.

Look at Booth, Jennings, Elcock....all were beaten against far superior opposition (Molitor, Cotto, Abraham) but didn't shy away from the challenge, that's the attitude to have.

McCloskey should grab this with both hands and be grateful he's been given such a wonderful chance to shine, and on UK soil.

PS Brook v Pac would be a clinic, a 3/4 round beatdown. Brook talks a good game and needs to back it up in 2011.

Dioufy wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Dioufy wrote:McCloskey brings nowt to the table to beat Khan. Speed? It's ok, nothing Khan hasn't seen before. Power? I have yet to see it. Angles? It's McCloskey's best too, but Khan will cope. Chin? Maybe it's decent but I remember him a little hurt by Lynes. Experience? Nope. McCloskey is decent, but Khan should take him apart.

He's not Maidana but he had a sensational KO last year. But yes, Khan should take him apart. He's more of a challenge stylistically than quite a few in the division though.

I didn't see that KO - do you have a link to it, matey?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGyzlOMEg1U

Captain Hook wrote:So who is an easier fight? Tim Bradley? Devon Alexander? Mabuza, Ortiz, Peterson, Maidana?

I wouldn't give McCloskey much chance against Bradley or Alexander. But I would give him a fair chance at beating Peterson or Mabuza or Ortiz, at least those fights would be more competitive.

Captain Hook wrote:I can't stand this attitude of waiting until the best fighters have aged, faded or been beaten up...
Come on Crease, you can't really think that. Surely?

Your argument is superficial at best mate. Earlier on you (and another) said that he should take the Kahn fight because "it's a big payday".

slapbangwhallop wrote:Not to mention a career high pay day!

Captain Hook wrote:He could make money

So please stop trying to take the moral high ground here, you simply can't. Is boxing primarily about money? Boxers just fight to make cash and that's it?

No, I believe that boxing is about legacys, I would like to see McCloskey do well. But if he takes this title shot against Kahn he might not get another one.

I don't want Paul to fight Kahn, because Kahn would make a fool of him, he's too quick and sharp for Paul, and that's it.

If I were his Manager I would reccomend that he continues his European title reign, defends twice more this year and then goes for the big world title at the start of next year.

I don't mean to repeat myself, as much as I am enjoying the conversation, it is circular.

I would like to see Paul ending up World Champion, and fighting Amir Kahn is not the way to go about it.

Crease wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:So who is an easier fight? Tim Bradley? Devon Alexander? Mabuza, Ortiz, Peterson, Maidana?

I wouldn't give McCloskey much chanceagainst Bradley or Alexander. But I would give him a fair chance at beating Peterson. Mabuza or Ortiz.

Captain Hook wrote:I can't stand this attitude of waiting until the best fighters have aged, faded or been beaten up...
Come on Crease, you can't really think that. Surely?

Your argument is superficial at best mate. Ealier on you (and another) said that he should take the Kahn fight because "it's a big payday".

slapbangwhallop wrote:Not to mention a career high pay day!

Captain Hook wrote:He could make money

So please stop trying to take the moral high ground here, you simply can't. Is boxing primarily about money? Boxers just fight to make cash and that's it?

No, I believe that boxing is about legacy's, I would like to see McCloskey do well. But if he takes this title shot against Kahn he might not get another one.

I don't want Pual to fight Kahn, because Kahn would make a fool of him, he's too quick and sharp for Paul, and that's it.

If I were his Manager I would reccomend that he continues his European title reign, defends twice more this year and then goes for the big world title at the start of next year.

I don't mean to repeat myself, as much as I am enjoying the conversation, it is circular.

I would like to see Paul ending up World Champion, and fighting Amir Kahn is not the way to go about it.

If a fan has this opinion then the promoters have won. No wonder Burns can get away with fighting Layrea etc etc

Here is the question: In 10 years time, do you want to talk about Paul McCloskey as a retired World Champion (which is what I would like to hear) or the guy who got brushed aside by Amir Kahn.

I'd love to know what McCloskey's been offered. Judah and Mabuza are getting $25k each to fight for the IBF title. I'm sure it must be more than that. Perhaps it's the options that's the main sticking point? Having said that I just can't see what he has to lose by taking the shot.

Crease wrote:Here is the question: In 10 years time, do you want to talk about Paul McCloskey as a retired World Champion (which is what I would like to hear) or the guy who got brushed aside by Amir Kahn.

Or the guy that never got past Euro level because he turned down his title shot and didn't get another chance. You can come back from a loss, it's a terrible attitude that someone shouldn't go into a fight they could lose. Especially one that would boost his profile so much.

Jean Pierre-Coopman (sp).

Khan entitled to a easier one after Maidana and ahead of potential unification fights.

McCloskey is unbeaten, Euro champion and awkward.

Khan should blast him to be fair but its still a C+ defence which he's entitled to after the Maidana war.

On the assumption Bradley is next.

Crease wrote:Here is the question: In 10 years time, do you want to talk about Paul McCloskey as a retired World Champion (which is what I would like to hear) or the guy who got brushed aside by Amir Kahn.

Or the guy who retired due to injury without fighting for a title.

or 'who's that guy that turned down the shot at Khan and got caught cold in his next fight'

Also, you mention that he should go for it in 12-18 months when Khan leaves the division. No doubt Frankie Gavin will be around that level by then. Does he give up his title to avoid him as well?

Crease wrote:
No, I believe that boxing is about legacys

You say that but you believe McCloskey should stay clear of a beltholderand arguably the best in the division whilst padding his unbeaten record against Italians in EBU scraps. That is everything a legacy is not.

If McCloskey was to turn down Khan to "contentrate on his legacy", then that's a little bit silly. It's like Chisora turning down Wlad, to wait for him, Vitali and Haye to retire. It just goes against the history of the sport, and fans DO NOT pay good money just for fighters to cash-in with easier fights.

Plus you never... one punch can change a fight.

Deno1986 wrote:

Crease wrote:
No, I believe that boxing is about legacys

You say that but you believe McCloskey should stay clear of a beltholderand arguably the best in the division whilst padding his unbeaten record against Italians in EBU scraps. That is everything a legacy is not.

Agred but I read today that the money on offer was pathetic from the Khans.

Crease wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:So who is an easier fight? Tim Bradley? Devon Alexander? Mabuza, Ortiz, Peterson, Maidana?

I wouldn't give McCloskey much chance against Bradley or Alexander. But I would give him a fair chance at beating Peterson or Mabuza or Ortiz, at least those fights would be more competitive.

Captain Hook wrote:I can't stand this attitude of waiting until the best fighters have aged, faded or been beaten up...
Come on Crease, you can't really think that. Surely?

Your argument is superficial at best mate. Earlier on you (and another) said that he should take the Kahn fight because "it's a big payday".

slapbangwhallop wrote:Not to mention a career high pay day!

Captain Hook wrote:He could make money

So please stop trying to take the moral high ground here, you simply can't. Is boxing primarily about money? Boxers just fight to make cash and that's it?

No, I believe that boxing is about legacys, I would like to see McCloskey do well. But if he takes this title shot against Kahn he might not get another one.

I don't want Paul to fight Kahn, because Kahn would make a fool of him, he's too quick and sharp for Paul, and that's it.

If I were his Manager I would reccomend that he continues his European title reign, defends twice more this year and then goes for the big world title at the start of next year.

I don't mean to repeat myself, as much as I am enjoying the conversation, it is circular.

I would like to see Paul ending up World Champion, and fighting Amir Kahn is not the way to go about it.

You learn more about yourself when faced with defeat, it's how you deal with it which counts, take a look at someone like Frank Bruno who lost 3 shots at a world title before he finally got his hands on one, now I'm not saying Frank is a legend or anything close to it but he is a perfect example of a man who just got over his set backs and had another go and that's the way it should be.

Now I don't rate McCloskey all that highly and wouldn't fancy his chances against Khan at all but who knows, he has nothing to lose, he's in his early 30's now and may not get another chance.

Scottrf wrote:

Crease wrote:Here is the question: In 10 years time, do you want to talk about Paul McCloskey as a retired World Champion (which is what I would like to hear) or the guy who got brushed aside by Amir Kahn.

Or the guy that never got past Euro level because he turned down his title shot and didn't get another chance. You can come back from a loss, it's a terrible attitude that someone shouldn't go into a fight they could lose. Especially one that would boost his profile so much.

I agree; Paul wouldn't get much of a hiding and a strong and game showing against a high profile star like Khan would do him more good than defences of the European crown. Those chances don't come around very often and I've seen managers and boxers being too clever for their own good. A loss is a loss but a good loss (he could win!) at world title level is bloody good publicity for a fighter. It'd make his mark better than a few; pretty low key; defences of the Euro.

DavidPayne wrote:Jean Pierre-Coopman (sp).

Khan entitled to a easier one after Maidana and ahead of potential unification fights.

McCloskey is unbeaten, Euro champion and awkward.

Khan should blast him to be fair but its still a C+ defence which he's entitled to after the Maidana war.

On the assumption Bradley is next.

I think most of Khan's fight have been 'easier ones' up until now, would like to see him in with someone a bit better than McCloskey even if it is a treading water fight before Bradley/Alexander winner.

Crease wrote:Here is the question: In 10 years time, do you want to talk about Paul McCloskey as a retired World Champion (which is what I would like to hear) or the guy who got brushed aside by Amir Kahn.

When a person decides to be a boxer, isn't it their dream to become a world champion. Surely at 32 years old if any boxer gets a crack at a world title they take it??

I'm a bit lost with this one and have to say, without this sounding rude, but you are sounding like a deluded McCloskey fan. Any fighter can come back with a single loss on their record, but not every fighter gets the chance to have a shot at a world title and make a statement in the sport by beating one of the best in the division.

Crease wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:So who is an easier fight? Tim Bradley? Devon Alexander? Mabuza, Ortiz, Peterson, Maidana?

I wouldn't give McCloskey much chance against Bradley or Alexander. But I would give him a fair chance at beating Peterson or Mabuza or Ortiz, at least those fights would be more competitive.

Captain Hook wrote:I can't stand this attitude of waiting until the best fighters have aged, faded or been beaten up...
Come on Crease, you can't really think that. Surely?

Your argument is superficial at best mate. Earlier on you (and another) said that he should take the Kahn fight because "it's a big payday".

slapbangwhallop wrote:Not to mention a career high pay day!

Captain Hook wrote:He could make money

So please stop trying to take the moral high ground here, you simply can't. Is boxing primarily about money? Boxers just fight to make cash and that's it?

No, I believe that boxing is about legacys, I would like to see McCloskey do well. But if he takes this title shot against Kahn he might not get another one.

I don't want Paul to fight Kahn, because Kahn would make a fool of him, he's too quick and sharp for Paul, and that's it.

If I were his Manager I would reccomend that he continues his European title reign, defends twice more this year and then goes for the big world title at the start of next year.

I don't mean to repeat myself, as much as I am enjoying the conversation, it is circular.

I would like to see Paul ending up World Champion, and fighting Amir Kahn is not the way to go about it.

Your argument is almost too pathetic for words, it really is. I hope McCloskey doesn't have the same negative, cowardly attitude you have or he'll never step up to the big time.

Unbelievable...

Deno1986 wrote:

Crease wrote:
No, I believe that boxing is about legacys

You say that but you believe McCloskey should stay clear of a beltholderand arguably the best in the division whilst padding his unbeaten record against Italians in EBU scraps. That is everything a legacy is not.

Well said Deno, I find his whole argument leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Avoid the best because he's too good, and wait for someone easy for your 'legacy'

Dear me....

Captain Hook wrote:Your argument is almost too pathetic for words, it really is. I hope McCloskey doesn't have the same negative, cowardly attitude you have or he'll never step up to the big time.

Unbelievable...

The thing is McCloskey has other options so it would be unfair of Khan to expect him to fight for a pittance especially when he is unbeaten, European champion, in the Ring top 10 and will sell a lot of tickets bring a lot of SKY PPV from Irish fans.

If we say that its does 200,000 PPV sales at £15 each and the average ticket price in the MEN is £100 x 21,000 then that is a basic revenue of over £5,000,000 the how much do you think McCloskey deserves for taking the fight?

He does not deserve a pittance agreed, and the tickets are £30-50 away from ringside I believe..

I never said this was about money though, if it's about 'legacy' and a shot at a world title there are fighters who would get in and go for it whatever the money.

Look at someone like Jamie Moore, so deserving of a title shot and never got it.

He HAS to grab this opportunity, it may never come again

PS Slap, what other options does he have? Realistically?

Is he lined up for someone else?

Captain Hook wrote:He does not deserve a pittance agreed, and the tickets are £30-50 away from ringside I believe..

I never said this was about money though, if it's about 'legacy' and a shot at a world title there are fighters who would get in and go for it whatever the money.

Look at someone like Jamie Moore, so deserving of a title shot and never got it.

He HAS to grab this opportunity, it may never come again

I very much doubt there will be any tickets for under £50 not even in the corners of the upper tier. I would say that the average tickets price of £100 a tickets is relatively conservative.

Sure legacy is great, but I would cry myself to sleep every night on my pillow of cash if it never came along.

Its all about risk reward, McCloskey doesn't have to grab this opportunity. In reality there is a high probability that he will lose. He team should be aware of this and should not "grab this opportunity" unless sufficiently recompensed.

I think a minimum of £150,000 would be about fight considering the revenue for the fight.

Captain Hook wrote:PS Slap, what other options does he have? Realistically?

Is he lined up for someone else?

Well he has a handy European title defence coming up in Belfast, his increased profile from all this shenanigans should ensure that ticket sales for that are brisk. Another one of those and he will have made as much if not more from those fights then he would from a significantly risky proposition such as Khan.

McCloskey is in the Ring top ten and got a very good WBC ranking. I am sure something will come along for the chap without having to slit his throat for it.