BoxRec

http://www1.skysports.com/boxing/news/1 ... ext-Spring

Bottled it. This fight will never happen. This is whats wrong with boxing. Why would burns not take this fight??? Looks like we will be expecting a another "ppv" fight such as walsh or maybe a Laryea rematch. No excuses the fight is on the table, champions should fight champions. The ball is firmly in burns court, broner is game.Once your a world champion there should be no such thing as tune up. You should fight only fight the best or give up the belt.

Feel sorry for cleverly. He could not get the fight he wanted for whatever reason but burns does not have that excuse. The fight is there and the money is on the table. You have to think team burns do not fancy there chances. They already vacated a belt rather face him. Funny thing is I dont remember anyone mentioning burns was struggling with weight, then once broner becomes mandatory they couldent vacate quick enough.

I like Burns a lot but I can't disagree with the title of this thread.... he has got a big fight offered to him on a plate, with a venue, date, purse, tv, the lot, and for the 2nd time in two years, Burns dodges Broner. Ricky Burns is fighting fit, and has no other commitments holding him back, he was happy to fight Walsh, and then the late sub, but when a bona fide top fighter wants to share the ring with him and gives him a massive opportunity on a plate, he declines.

The problem is he wants to fully prepare and to be honest Broner is fight Abril in February so a spring date is surely what will happen regardless. In my opinion Burns should look at a unifaction fight with Broner as a real possibility which he could win. I think Broner will win but I have ruled Burns out too many times so I won't be doing it this time.

It does look like his manager is trying to price him out. To take home £400k after fees, deductions and tax means they're probably looking at £1 million - about $1.3 million for the fight. I can't see the Americans paying that. From what I've seen so far they're offering £400k gross. That's a big difference. I guess we can expect some more Eastern Europeans and Ghanians

Boxers and their teams are entitled to make money from their champions but please be honest and admit that,instead of trying to insult the boxing fraternity's intelligence by talking about 'unification' when in reality you constantly dodge anybody who seems to have a genuine pulse.

The real 'greats' like Lewis,Tyson, Hagler, Leonard, Duran and Hearns used to fight anyone and everybody who claimed they had a right to title recognition.These days there is too much manouvering and manipulation of people making money out of 'papers champions' who are hell bent on denying the public out of seeing genuine contenders contesting titles in order to maintain their little nest eggs in the bank.[/quote]


That is bang on the money.

There's no doubt that Burns did have weight problems at super feather, as did broner!
On this occasion though, there can't be an excuse apart from money.
I'd try and negotiate a two fight deal, away then home. That would boost the bank balance and raise Broners profile in the UK. Burns V Broner, Clev v Hopkins and negotiate with Hearn to get Froch v Ward all on the same night. Britain vs America....... If only it was so simple.

fornicate it, lets throw in a Brook vs Malinaggi aswell. Haha

As I said before, it is good money for a Lightweight title fight, but is it good money for a title fight for a fighter being groomed for stardum?

How much did Genero Hernandez get for defending his belt against Mayweather Jnr, how much did Jimi Bredhal get for defending his belt against DLH.... probably close to career best paydays - but I imagine they have some regrets for not demanding more.

GBP want unifications to elevate Broner to the next level - to getting in the P4P lists and being a superstar. The fight that took DLH to the next level of stardum was the Unification with Reulas, the fight that took Mayweather to the next level was the champion vs champion match (I know the both belts weren't on the line) against Corrales.

Burns should be looking at how much the likes of Javier Castelejo and Oba Carr got for fighting DLH and making some comparisons. He is potentially giving up a lot here - and if GBP think Broner is going to be a multi million pound fighter eventually, opponents on the earlier steps of the ladder should negotiate.

I agree with the above post. I don't think for one minute that "team Burns" are bottling anything. I reckon it boils down to this, Broner needs Burns more than Burns needs Broner and for that they are going to have to pay a premium. I'd also be holding out for the maximum I could get too. It's just business. I wouldn't give Ricky too much flak yet, let the story unravel a bit first.

The Insider wrote:I agree with the above post. I don't think for one minute that "team Burns" are bottling anything. I reckon it boils down to this, Broner needs Burns more than Burns needs Broner and for that they are going to have to pay a premium. I'd also be holding out for the maximum I could get too. It's just business. I wouldn't give Ricky too much flak yet, let the story unravel a bit first.

100% agree with all you said.
He will only get one career needs to make as much as poss.
Ricky Burns has proved his doubters time and again and does not deserve anything but praise for me.
Would like to see them fight as much as anyone.

The Insider wrote:I agree with the above post. I don't think for one minute that "team Burns" are bottling anything. I reckon it boils down to this, Broner needs Burns more than Burns needs Broner and for that they are going to have to pay a premium. I'd also be holding out for the maximum I could get too. It's just business. I wouldn't give Ricky too much flak yet, let the story unravel a bit first.

This x2 lets get the real story first before we shoot down our own world champ. Don't get me wrong, i want him to fight Broner more than anything but we are too quick to judge without knowing whats going on in the background.

I don’t think Broner needs burns more than the other way around. I'd look closely at, for example, when Calzaghe (Sports Network) offered Woods £1m when Clinton was Light Heavy champion. Clinton refused because he had "loads" of other options, that payday floated down the river and he didn’t get anything close again. If Broner doesnt fight Burns he continues to headline HBO in America and build his name. A damend sight more americans have heard of Broner than Burns, who on the googlebox there is already having his career to date drawing comparisons with ODH and Mayweather. Beating Broner elevates Burns to potential million dollar fights and makes him a name over the pond. Losing to Broner pretty much leaves him where he is. Im sure fights with Walsh and that phillipino can be made again to manoeuvre back into mandatory by which time Broner will be long gone.

TJ77 wrote:Burns has proved his doubters time and again

How, when?

Caustic wrote:

TJ77 wrote:Burns has proved his doubters time and again

How, when?

I think hes referring to the people who doubted he'd beat martinez, katsidis then mitchell, of which there were many.

Caustic wrote:

TJ77 wrote:Burns has proved his doubters time and again

How, when?

Are you for real?????

Katsidis, Martinez, Earl and it was pretty split on here as to whether he would beat Mitchell.

Mystic Meg would not have predicted Burns as a future credible world champion.
Wether you like him or not he has overcome the odds Martinez put him down and he came back and beat him,
Katsidis was past his best but no one had it as a given Burns would win .
Mitchell was supposed to rip his title off him didnt happen.
He is a British success story and seems like a decent humble bloke is all im saying.

The Insider wrote:I reckon it boils down to this, Broner needs Burns more than Burns needs Broner

I don't see it this way. Burns could do well to remember that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I think he, Burns, is a good fighter with a terrific attitude and work ethic but he's not, in my eyes, top drawer and could come unstuck long before he ever sees a similar offer being shoved across the table. I hope he doesn't live to regret this decision.

JLP wrote:

The Insider wrote:I reckon it boils down to this, Broner needs Burns more than Burns needs Broner

I don't see it this way. Burns could do well to remember that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I think he, Burns, is a good fighter with a terrific attitude and work ethic but he's not, in my eyes, top drawer and could come unstuck long before he ever sees a similar offer being shoved across the table. I hope he doesn't live to regret this decision.

I see the logic in what your saying but for Broner to unify the division he needs to go through Burns, he needs Burns. As you say Burns is not a box office fighter and I think he knows this at this stage in his career so he can pick and choose who and when he fights at the moment. He doesn't need Broner. Whether this is the right attitude to take it remains to be seen. I still don't think Burns is bottling anything and if he can negotiate more favorable terms and squeeze every last drop we might see the fight happen yet.

The Insider wrote:I see the logic in what your saying but for Broner to unify the division he needs to go through Burns, he needs Burns.

Really? Since when did the WBO title mean shit to anyone on here? Im sure if broner fights vasquez for the IBF and then fights the WBA champion whoever that may be after rios moves up nobody will bat an eye at Ricky burns whowill be left to fight whoever he wants, just as WBO champions are.

Wales wrote:

The Insider wrote:I see the logic in what your saying but for Broner to unify the division he needs to go through Burns, he needs Burns.

Really? Since when did the WBO title mean shit to anyone on here? Im sure if broner fights vasquez for the IBF and then fights the WBA champion whoever that may be after rios moves up nobody will bat an eye at Ricky burns whowill be left to fight whoever he wants, just as WBO champions are.

But then the risks go up along with the money. Burns is perfect for Broner and that's why they want him. It's fair to say the WBO is as good as it champion. It just the sanctioning body gets manipulated by certain promoters (as do other bodies to a certain extent). Burns for Broner ticks so many boxs that's why they were eager to get him.

Burns won the 'Interim Title' beating Katsidis (loser of his previous two fights) he's defended against (the nothing special) Paulus Moses and the (already exposed by Katsidis) Kevin Mitchell, he's another WBO/W*rren creation, beating him won't enhance Broners reputation one iota, as Wales states above Broner will gain greater credibility seeking unifications with the IBF/WBA titleholders.

Caustic wrote: Broner will gain greater credibility seeking unifications with the IBF/WBA titleholders.

Hey I agree but but they have offered the fight to Burns. Why? Is he a less riskier fight? will they get this fight cheaper? Is the WBO champ free and ready to fight? Has Burns arguably got the better fighters beat on his record? In the perfect world the best should fight the best. All I'm saying is I don't blame Broner for going after Burns ( would be my choice too) and I don't blame Burns for not committing yet.

The Insider wrote:

Caustic wrote: Broner will gain greater credibility seeking unifications with the IBF/WBA titleholders.

Hey I agree but but they have offered the fight to Burns. Why? Is he a less riskier fight? will they get this fight cheaper? Is the WBO champ free and ready to fight? Has Burns arguably got the better fighters beat on his record? In the perfect world the best should fight the best. All I'm saying is I don't blame Broner for going after Burns ( would be my choice too) and I don't blame Burns for not committing yet.

Is it more a 'personal' issue with Broner, he's still convinced Burns gave up the 130lbs title rather than face him?

Caustic wrote:

The Insider wrote:

Caustic wrote: Broner will gain greater credibility seeking unifications with the IBF/WBA titleholders.

Hey I agree but but they have offered the fight to Burns. Why? Is he a less riskier fight? will they get this fight cheaper? Is the WBO champ free and ready to fight? Has Burns arguably got the better fighters beat on his record? In the perfect world the best should fight the best. All I'm saying is I don't blame Broner for going after Burns ( would be my choice too) and I don't blame Burns for not committing yet.

Is it more a 'personal' issue with Broner, he's still convinced Burns gave up the 130lbs title rather than face him?

Could well be. Every little helps though.....

Wales wrote:

The Insider wrote:I see the logic in what your saying but for Broner to unify the division he needs to go through Burns, he needs Burns.

Really? Since when did the WBO title mean shit to anyone on here? Im sure if broner fights vasquez for the IBF and then fights the WBA champion whoever that may be after rios moves up nobody will bat an eye at Ricky burns whowill be left to fight whoever he wants, just as WBO champions are.

Isn't Vasquez with toprank? If so then thats why that avenue is probably not being pursued. I also think the WBA is currently vacant hence why the onus is on Burns.

Amazing Billy hasn't popped up yet