Page 1 of 4

The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 07:16
by earsjohn
From the quill of Mr F Warren, esq:

With the defection of St George following the recent departures of Bellew and Degale and the postponement of the big London card as a result of some dodgy lasagne, it appears that my empire is crumbling. But, given that I am not at fault after my years in the sport and my unending love and concern for its health, who is the real culprit?

British Boxers - Not prepared to fight for purses that would have been considered generous when I first started out back in the early 80's, they spend their time training and not putting in enough effort selling tickets or promoting and then some have the gall to get in the ring and not win. Even when I present them with no lose opportunities. How is a promoter supposed to survive when the boxers can't even do the one thing they are paid to?

Foreign Boxers - No respect for the traditions of the Lonsdale belt or the home of boxing (historically and televisually). They present belts they have "won in the ring" as a reason for outrageous purse demands and then turn down my offers for them fighting on huge cards with at least 2 weeks notice.

Matchroom - Eddie Hearn thinks he can just turn up and promote without the grounding of 30 years dealing with the likes of King and Duff. He's not related to Lenny McLean. He talks about his fighters without going over his own personal sacrifices and I've never once seen him filmed with his Rolls. He doesn't promote, he just reads the internet and decides what to do from there.

The Internet - When I started in this game, the only voice punters had was the letters page of Boxing News, and I used to send enough letters each week to ensure that the only voice heard was mine. Now, anyone who has an interest or concern in the sport can go online and discuss events before they've happened. It's not right. Boxing is a sport that was born in the shadows and should stay there. Do you know how many emails I get telling me what people think of me?

George and Francis - They've had 30 years learning at the feet of Europes Greatest Promoter. They have been exposed to every secret and cunning trick in becoming a top class promoter and what have they done? They can't even remember not to leave the sodding emails in the car.

Steve Bunce - When you appoint a man to become your mouth piece, you expect him to deliver a no-holds barred support for your regime. Yet I've heard him regularly talking about non-FWP fighters, he mentions other TV outlets and even works for the competition from time to time. I've clearly made a mistake there.

George Groves.

Please note, this is a joke thread meant in a spirit of fun, please take it as such. FWIW, if Warren does collapse, it would be disasterous for the sport in this country, in particular a lot of young fighters who rely on Team Warren to earn a living.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 07:40
by loaded_gloves
His own.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 07:56
by stevieb_8006
karmic law

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 07:58
by jessi
Anyone who believes w a r r e n is over is a fool !
Watch the tides change yet again in the next two years

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 08:02
by stevieb_8006
jessi wrote:Anyone who believes w a r r e n is over is a fool !
Watch the tides change yet again in the next two years
I dont think he'll go away but i dont think he'll ever be the power he was. for one, young boxers are far less likely to sign with him what with the constant exposure of his previous mistreatment of his stable. also, hes just not really moving with the times, it seems to me he feels hes got promoting cracked and refuses to consider other options.

but your right, hes survivor. like a cockroach.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 08:07
by Looking On
To be honest if i was a young boxer/ prospect turning over i dont think it would be that bad an idea to go with Warren despite the recent stories.

Lets face it hes done well at bringing some people through and getting them exposure , it would probably be a good idea to have the intial 10 or so fights under Warren and then jump ship before it starts becoming the bum of the week times as opponents , ie if cleverly had jumped after the bellew fight .

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 08:22
by banjo
When you climb Everest it's dangerous, thrilling and hard work, when you reach the top it's the greatest feeling in the world and something you must enjoy while you can because you eventually have to go back down.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 08:41
by ThereByTheGrace
All of the above should be an option. I went for the internet though; streaming and acquired knowledge through forums like this have put an emphasis on distrust of promoters, especially successful ones.

Anyways Jelly and Ice Cream.....

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 09:32
by MarkMcBurney
Warren was so big thanks to that TV deal with ITV, meaning his shows & boxers were live on free to air TV to millions of people ever week/month. allegedly just doesn't give people that exposure. Only hardcore boxing fans spend £10 a month on it. And that's if they can afford to, I've had to cancel my sub recently.

The next best thing is Sky, hence Carl Froch suddenly becoming such a massive name to the casual fight fan. Watch George Groves do the same over the next 18 months.

Warren will never give up but he is definitely on the slide.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 10:05
by mickey1975
MarkMcBurney wrote:Warren was so big thanks to that TV deal with ITV, meaning his shows & boxers were live on free to air TV to millions of people ever week/month. Allegedly channel just doesn't give people that exposure. Only hardcore boxing fans spend £10 a month on it. And that's if they can afford to, I've had to cancel my sub recently.

The next best thing is Sky, hence Carl Froch suddenly becoming such a massive name to the casual fight fan. Watch George Groves do the same over the next 18 months.

Warren will never give up but he is definitely on the slide.
Carl was on ITV, BBC1, Sky Sports, Primetime. The most covered British Boxer in recent times. Right from his am days. I have never known a fighter with more exposure.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 10:10
by Bard of Boxrec
Either Richard 'Richard the secret Williams' Williams, or George 'I blame George Groves' Groves

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 10:26
by earsjohn
Riddick Blowe wrote:Either Richard 'Richard the secret Williams' Williams, or George 'I blame George Groves' Groves
Fixed

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 11:02
by Looking On
MachoMan09 wrote:
earsjohn wrote:
Riddick Blowe wrote:Either Richard 'Richard the secret Williams' Williams, or George 'I blame George Groves' Groves
Fixed
I've been over that about ten times and I can't see what you've 'fixed'. Please enlighten me before I go nuts.
Haha i thought the same

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 11:03
by forcefraser
I`ve gone with the secret. It has to be his fault.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 11:13
by earsjohn
MachoMan09 wrote:
earsjohn wrote:
Riddick Blowe wrote:Either Richard 'Richard the secret Williams' Williams, or George 'I blame George Groves' Groves
Fixed
I've been over that about ten times and I can't see what you've 'fixed'. Please enlighten me before I go nuts.
I fixed the poll and not Blowes post.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 16:10
by Ratchet Exits Nu
When he took the Benns and Bruno Naz etc to SKY he was happy to milk it.
He served up some proper shite on SKY for years, allegedly!

It went on for years, and FTM served up shite also, imo.

But I like allegedly.

:OhYes:

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 16:39
by greenyox3
Bunch of ingrates.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 16:44
by dondada
Definitely the Internet. People getting ideas above their stations and doing things like asking simple questions, making statements based on matters of fact, or adding two and two and coming up with four.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 18:09
by squared circle
mickey1975 wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote:Warren was so big thanks to that TV deal with ITV, meaning his shows & boxers were live on free to air TV to millions of people ever week/month. Allegedly channel just doesn't give people that exposure. Only hardcore boxing fans spend £10 a month on it. And that's if they can afford to, I've had to cancel my sub recently.

The next best thing is Sky, hence Carl Froch suddenly becoming such a massive name to the casual fight fan. Watch George Groves do the same over the next 18 months.

Warren will never give up but he is definitely on the slide.
Carl was on ITV, BBC1, Sky Sports, Primetime. The most covered British Boxer in recent times. Right from his am days. I have never known a fighter with more exposure.
Is that the same carl froch who by most reckoning was flown under the radar, for various reasons, until maybe the past 18 months or so when he has become more of a 'name'?

I bet you ask the random man on the street, name me a british boxer from last five years and he tells you audley, khan, haye, hatton, calzaghe and fury before he even mentions froch.

Wazza isn't in demise. If you saw bunce earlier he was very clear about that....everything is rosy in the garden but there is a recession on you know!

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 18:29
by banjo
A lot of the reason why Hatton, Khan and Haye became so well known before Froch is because they put themselves out there and promoted themselves, they were appearing on chatshows etc. appearing to the masses, Hatton putting on the "i'm a lickle ex-carpet fitter from a council estate" persona, Khan with the "I'm just a normal kid from Bolton" routine and Haye playing the pantomime villain. Froch didn't do any of this which is why he lagged behind and had to do it the hard way, but ultimately that's why these fighters were more famous because they exposed themselves to the public at every opportunity they could.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 18:31
by jameswilson
banjo wrote:because they exposed themselves to the public at every opportunity they could.
I remember Hatton had to strip naked to make weight a few times but I think you've been searching these guys careers in more detail than me.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 18:32
by banjo
jameswilson wrote:
banjo wrote:because they exposed themselves to the public at every opportunity they could.
I remember Hatton had to strip naked to make weight a few times but I think you've been searching these guys careers in more detail than me.
nom

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 18:57
by si7dog7
the internet..hmmm maybe but not forums'

otherwise 9-10 years ago everyone would have been aboard the Hennessey express with Froch (win), Daws (did well) and others like Dave Walker (overmatched and career screwed too early-real shame).

Otherwise yes, its the internet's fault.

:OhYes:

But no people, it is where the money is - Allegedy's guys are well paid no? if not they walk. or if its not the money, then the glory.

Allegedy will do ok...he is a business man and a good one with a love for boxing.
Just so happens, as has been in the past, there are two contenders for the promotors championship here - the wily old fox....and the young man who has taken the title from him (at this point in time)

it can only be good for boxing domestically and the elite among them.

just hope Fury can see the wood for the trees and get in amongst it. he could be a player - but hope he doesn't waste time because C5 is not where it is at in terms of media (Twitter is ok but if not known your message is on deaf ears)

Allegedly- His star has fallen.
He either retires (sells whats left) or comes back again, and.......

I think he may revert to type and battle on - it is the business he is in
and we have had some great nights, historically, because of it

Good luck FW, EH and meaty bloke (you'll need it in this game)
Boxing in the UK and Ireland depends on you trailblazers - ALONG with ALL promotors (too many too mention) who work their asses off to bring the game to us all....Its about the money yes....but I dont begrudge them a penny....as long as their fighters don't get screwed.. :TU:

In terms of the thread title - yes a slight demise, but its like football/rugby etc...its all cycles....Micky / Frank / Micky / Frank / Barry / Frank / Barry / Frank / Frank / Eddie......

It could be you next

No not you XXXX

night all
tata

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 19:05
by Finn
I know its a joke thread but i dont think warren is on the ropes. A couple of tweaks and he could make something special from b-o-x nation. He needs a couple of things, another stable to back up his own now a few of the big names have gone - possibly hattons, some more shows that people regularly tune into - buncey has his show, but a ringside style show, a where are they now show, a behind the scenes boxing show, an Ultimate fighter / Contender style show would all be things to get people tuning in each week. I also think it might be worth FW stealing a prize fighter style competition format and using that would be a good idea. Sign a few more big names he's got chisora, price, why not get audley or at least broker a decent fight and host it? He would have a run on the british HW scene if he did that.

Why not think about introducing some MMA, forget the UFC what about trying to get in some cheap non live feeds for Bellator or even live K1.

It could be the channel for fight nuts. Lets face it sky is pretty poor for boxing at the moment.

Re: The Demise of Warren - whose fault?

Posted: 04 Mar 2013, 19:09
by si7dog7
MachoMan09 wrote:I don't get why people revel in the downfall of others - if there even is a downfall.
agreed
I don't think there is...not yet anyways...we hope