The disadvantage of a short season
Posted: 22 Apr 2011, 20:12
By the word short I mean a season that lasts 20 weeks such as the Featherweight season and the recent Middleweight season...
The question is, should fighters still be allowed to enter despite the season lasting 20 weeks.
In the past, seasons of that duration played a massive disadvantage for the fighters who participated in them. No-one was voted in after the Featherweight season.
But now that the Middleweight season has lasted 20 weeks as well, should that be used as a deterent to stop any of the fighters entering?
In the past respected managers have voiced concerns:
If there is a YES vote. I suggest (now that we need have nothing else to do on here) we look at the Featherweights again.
The question is, should fighters still be allowed to enter despite the season lasting 20 weeks.
In the past, seasons of that duration played a massive disadvantage for the fighters who participated in them. No-one was voted in after the Featherweight season.
But now that the Middleweight season has lasted 20 weeks as well, should that be used as a deterent to stop any of the fighters entering?
In the past respected managers have voiced concerns:
jBacca wrote:Plus, i don't think Arguello should be there. Yes, he did a good thing in unifying, but the season was too short to show who were the true greats.
SO, have your say... What do you think?glittermonkey wrote:No. No one should get in from this season.
If there is a YES vote. I suggest (now that we need have nothing else to do on here) we look at the Featherweights again.