Eddie Hearn's Overall Impact On British Boxing

danamba7 · Post by **danamba7** » 03 Oct 2014, 07:18

Seems like a very current topic at the moment.

Personally, I think he's had a positive affect overall but I agree with the negative reaction to the Bellew Cleverly PPV.

He talks well, the IFL interviews are always worth a watch IMO and he's put on the biggest British fight in a decade. He also has a fantastic stable including 2 genuine world champs (Froch, Brook) and a few fighters with the potential to join them (Degale, Quigg, Selby, Yafai, Campell, Smith, Joshua)

However, he puts on too many one sided fights and now, rightfully so, is getting a lot of stick about his ideas on what's PPV worthy.

I think it will be interesting to see how the poll turns out.

Gazmac81 · Post by **Gazmac81** » 03 Oct 2014, 07:31

overall i would say positive - hes got some of his fighters in againts Big names ( albeit out of there depth) Brian Rose , Gavin Rees , Bellew ect , Pulled it off with the Kell Brook win and delivered the Froch Vs Groves fight which was a Global Event ( fornicate im starting to sound like Eddie Here Ditching my scottish roots for a Wideboy accent )

still think it Stinks that Bellew Vs Cleverly is Pay per view
i dont mind paying for big Events every so often but they need to be pretty special or involve a special boxer , ie Hatton , Naz , Pacquio , Mayweather

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 03 Oct 2014, 07:39

overall done well but a fair bit of luck along the way, ie:-

i. rich daddy
ii. dodgy ending to froch/groves 1
iii. Brook winning a tough fight abroad for low purse

danamba7 · Post by **danamba7** » 03 Oct 2014, 07:42

sweetscience wrote:overall done well but a fair bit of luck along the way, ie:-

i. rich daddy
ii. dodgy ending to froch/groves 1
iii. Brook winning a tough fight abroad for low purse

True but all promoters need luck as they can't control what happens in the ring (bar corruption!). Your first point is the main one though, an incredibly easy way in to the industry.

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 03 Oct 2014, 07:53

I am a big believer in you make your own luck

but those ones were luck luck

Ricky_ · Post by **Ricky_** » 03 Oct 2014, 07:54

A bit like Richard Schaeffer. These management type guys are ten a penny. But the rich kid has played his part in helping his father's company beat off competition from transvestites to become Britain's no.1 promotional company.

Boxerbeetle · Post by **Boxerbeetle** » 03 Oct 2014, 08:08

I voted neutrally. Initially I thought he was good for British boxing, but now I'd say he's pretty much the same as all the other promoters. Hearn is no better or worse than FW or Hennessey - although I'd say the recent run of mismatches Hearn has put on rivals anything FW promoted in the dark old days of his WBO/WBU champs.

Personally I'm not sure how positive any promoter has ever been in terms of boxing - I'd much rather see a properly organised structure where fights are commissioned & put on by a single governing body. Yes I know I'm dreaming...

danamba7 · Post by **danamba7** » 03 Oct 2014, 08:10

Boxerbeetle wrote:I voted neutrally. Initially I thought he was good for British boxing, but now I'd say he's pretty much the same as all the other promoters. Hearn is no better or worse than FW or Hennessey - although I'd say the recent run of mismatches Hearn has put on rivals anything FW promoted in the dark old days of his WBO/WBU champs.

Personally I'm not sure how positive any promoter has ever been in terms of boxing - I'd much rather see a properly organised structure where fights are commissioned & put on by a single governing body. Yes I know I'm dreaming...

Luke the UFC?

Boxerbeetle · Post by **Boxerbeetle** » 03 Oct 2014, 08:21

danamba7 wrote:
Boxerbeetle wrote:I voted neutrally. Initially I thought he was good for British boxing, but now I'd say he's pretty much the same as all the other promoters. Hearn is no better or worse than FW or Hennessey - although I'd say the recent run of mismatches Hearn has put on rivals anything FW promoted in the dark old days of his WBO/WBU champs.

Personally I'm not sure how positive any promoter has ever been in terms of boxing - I'd much rather see a properly organised structure where fights are commissioned & put on by a single governing body. Yes I know I'm dreaming...
Luke the UFC?

I can't say I know enough about how the UFC is structured to know if that's what I want, but I imagine I'm thinking of a similar model. Every other sport I can think of has a single, over-arching governing body with a relatively clear & transparent structure. Boxing is the complete opposite.

I wouldn't mind, but it's the fans who suffer - even the potentially richest fight in history (Floyd / Pacquiao) hasn't yet been made just because of promotional & egotistical differences. Truly absurd.

danamba7 · Post by **danamba7** » 03 Oct 2014, 08:38

Boxerbeetle wrote:
danamba7 wrote:
Boxerbeetle wrote:I voted neutrally. Initially I thought he was good for British boxing, but now I'd say he's pretty much the same as all the other promoters. Hearn is no better or worse than FW or Hennessey - although I'd say the recent run of mismatches Hearn has put on rivals anything FW promoted in the dark old days of his WBO/WBU champs.

Personally I'm not sure how positive any promoter has ever been in terms of boxing - I'd much rather see a properly organised structure where fights are commissioned & put on by a single governing body. Yes I know I'm dreaming...
Luke the UFC?
I can't say I know enough about how the UFC is structured to know if that's what I want, but I imagine I'm thinking of a similar model. Every other sport I can think of has a single, over-arching governing body with a relatively clear & transparent structure. Boxing is the complete opposite.

I wouldn't mind, but it's the fans who suffer - even the potentially richest fight in history (Floyd / Pacquiao) hasn't yet been made just because of promotional & egotistical differences. Truly absurd.

Yeah the UFC has it's critics but, 99 times out of 100, the best will fight the best. Manny and Floyd would have fought in their peaks if boxing had the same setup (not that it ever will).

Gazmac81 · Post by **Gazmac81** » 03 Oct 2014, 09:42

I dont watch UFC never really tried to get into it
but UFC being realitivly new to the scene than boxing , as this grows could some other money men not create there own Titles Ect also and in years to come it would just end up like boxing in that way or does Dana White actually own the UFC Brand so this wouldnt be possible?

seems so long ago that we were getting fights on Tv off Mosley , Delahoya , Barrerra vs anyone , even giving up titles so he could get the best fights on as i belive he did agaisnt Naz ?

even back then you had a fair idea of who was the best in some of the divisons and alot of the time they proved it.

but then i suppose there plenty of Fights that didnt happen back then too , far too many different promotors ,tv networks now

danamba7 · Post by **danamba7** » 03 Oct 2014, 09:56

Gazmac81 wrote:I dont watch UFC never really tried to get into it
but UFC being realitivly new to the scene than boxing , as this grows could some other money men not create there own Titles Ect also and in years to come it would just end up like boxing in that way or does Dana White actually own the UFC Brand so this wouldnt be possible?

seems so long ago that we were getting fights on Tv off Mosley , Delahoya , Barrerra vs anyone , even giving up titles so he could get the best fights on as i belive he did agaisnt Naz ?

even back then you had a fair idea of who was the best in some of the divisons and alot of the time they proved it.

but then i suppose there plenty of Fights that didnt happen back then too , far too many different promotors ,tv networks now

MMA is the sport, UFC is the organization. MMA has hundreds of other organizations of varying sizes worldwide. The UFC however is universally recognized as the best, especially since it bought out Price, the WEC and Strikeforce. The Fertitta bros own Zuffa which runs UFC, Dana is the president. They run the UFC and I'm pretty sure they'll never introduce more belts as it will subtract from one of their main advantages. I prefer boxing to MMA but at least in MMA we know who the best is in each division.

lefty · Post by **lefty** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:01

danamba7 wrote:
Gazmac81 wrote:I dont watch UFC never really tried to get into it
but UFC being realitivly new to the scene than boxing , as this grows could some other money men not create there own Titles Ect also and in years to come it would just end up like boxing in that way or does Dana White actually own the UFC Brand so this wouldnt be possible?

seems so long ago that we were getting fights on Tv off Mosley , Delahoya , Barrerra vs anyone , even giving up titles so he could get the best fights on as i belive he did agaisnt Naz ?

even back then you had a fair idea of who was the best in some of the divisons and alot of the time they proved it.

but then i suppose there plenty of Fights that didnt happen back then too , far too many different promotors ,tv networks now
MMA is the sport, UFC is the organization. MMA has hundreds of other organizations of varying sizes worldwide. The UFC however is universally recognized as the best, especially since it bought out Price, the WEC and Strikeforce. The Fertitta bros own Zuffa which runs UFC, Dana is the president. They run the UFC and I'm pretty sure they'll never introduce more belts as it will subtract from one of their main advantages. I prefer boxing to MMA but at least in MMA we know who the best is in each division.

The UFC normally just ends up buying competing organisations anyway. Bellator is it's main north american threat at the moment as you know with the backing of a major american entertainment company and yet they're still not really putting any kind of dent into the ufc's sales.

Sklar · Post by **Sklar** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:03

danamba7 wrote:...he's put on the biggest British fight in a decade.

That fight sums him up for me. He's an excellent promoter, usually, in that he can see an opportunity and knows how to polish a turd. Froch is a legend, but he's shopworn and Groves is nothing to write home about in the big scheme of things, yet Eddie made the fight into a monster. That's his job and he generally does it very well. He's bound to rub proper boxing people up the wrong way from time to time because they can see some of the shite for what it is but that'll be justifiably acceptable to him providing the books look right.

lefty · Post by **lefty** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:09

Sklar wrote:
danamba7 wrote:...he's put on the biggest British fight in a decade.
That fight sums him up for me. He's an excellent promoter, usually, in that he can see an opportunity and knows how to polish a turd. Froch is a legend, but he's shopworn and Groves is nothing to write home about in the big scheme of things, yet Eddie made the fight into a monster. That's his job and he generally does it very well. He's bound to rub proper boxing people up the wrong way from time to time because they can see some of the shite for what it is but that'll be justifiably acceptable to him providing the books look right.

Did eddie make that into a monster though or did sky with it's constant coverage and promo's and all round reach? To put it into context, if eddie was on allegedly, would that fight of ended up what it was?

lefty · Post by **lefty** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:14

I honestly think that fight would of been massive no matter what providing it had sky's influence on it. Also, Groves played a big part in how big that became with his mind games and what have you. I dont think Eddie done anything particularily amazing in promoting that. If anyone can come up with things that he personally did that made that fight as big as it was, do correct me obviously.

Gazmac81 · Post by **Gazmac81** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:21

i Agree its all about SKY TV and the audience that it can reach
sticking that on sky sports news all the time gets you on screen nearly every day in every Pub in Britain

makes a major difference , i dont know how many times people have saw a little bit of someone on sky sports news and spoke to me about it cause they know im involved / intrested in boxing and i have to explain to them that its a farce ect but they have been blinded by a 5minute clip on Sky of a couple of boxers bad mouthing each other or sticking there heads into each other.

or on the other effect it has is - if a big fight like Haye vs Harrison turns into a turd then they compalin to me that it was a farce but theyve already parted with there cash.

lefty wrote:I honestly think that fight would of been massive no matter what providing it had sky's influence on it. Also, Groves played a big part in how big that became with his mind games and what have you. I dont think Eddie done anything particularily amazing in promoting that. If anyone can come up with things that he personally did that made that fight as big as it was, do correct me obviously.

lefty · Post by **lefty** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:23

When you actually think about it, sky are promoters more than the boxing promoters are. They're the one's really that make or break fights IMO.

Gazmac81 · Post by **Gazmac81** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:25

yea Eddie is like a Wedding planner type character arranging all the nessisary

lefty wrote:When you actually think about it, sky are promoters more than the boxing promoters are. They're the one's really that make or break fights IMO.

jamiedavies02 · Post by **jamiedavies02** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:31

Negative for me. Mainly down to the Matchroom monopoly of the Sky cards.

Sklar · Post by **Sklar** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:32

lefty wrote:
Sklar wrote:
danamba7 wrote:...he's put on the biggest British fight in a decade.
That fight sums him up for me. He's an excellent promoter, usually, in that he can see an opportunity and knows how to polish a turd. Froch is a legend, but he's shopworn and Groves is nothing to write home about in the big scheme of things, yet Eddie made the fight into a monster. That's his job and he generally does it very well. He's bound to rub proper boxing people up the wrong way from time to time because they can see some of the shite for what it is but that'll be justifiably acceptable to him providing the books look right.
Did eddie make that into a monster though or did sky with it's constant coverage and promo's and all round reach? To put it into context, if eddie was on allegedly, would that fight of ended up what it was?

Hearn did. Watch the post fight press conference, shortly after Froch had been booed. Hearn could have played that a million ways but you can almost see the lightbulb flash and pound signs appear in his eyes - he was on it for the rematch from the get go. I don't particularly like the guy but I do think he's good at what he does and he's the right man for the times. He's probably fucked up this time short-term but I wouldn't be surprised if he turns it around before fight time one way or another. Even if he doesn't, everyone makes mistakes.

chiggsy · Post by **chiggsy** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:32

I've been very impressed with how he's gone about his business and would much rather see him in the top promoters seat than the other fella.

This bellew vs clev pay per view clanger is the first time i've thought ''what the fornicate are you playing at?'' and hopefully eddie will see it was a bad move,the figures are will be awful and it doesn't happen again.

lefty · Post by **lefty** » 03 Oct 2014, 10:37

Sklar wrote:
lefty wrote:
Sklar wrote:
That fight sums him up for me. He's an excellent promoter, usually, in that he can see an opportunity and knows how to polish a turd. Froch is a legend, but he's shopworn and Groves is nothing to write home about in the big scheme of things, yet Eddie made the fight into a monster. That's his job and he generally does it very well. He's bound to rub proper boxing people up the wrong way from time to time because they can see some of the shite for what it is but that'll be justifiably acceptable to him providing the books look right.
Did eddie make that into a monster though or did sky with it's constant coverage and promo's and all round reach? To put it into context, if eddie was on allegedly, would that fight of ended up what it was?
Hearn did. Watch the post fight press conference, shortly after Froch had been booed. Hearn could have played that a million ways but you can almost see the lightbulb flash and pound signs appear in his eyes - he was on it for the rematch from the get go. I don't particularly like the guy but I do think he's good at what he does and he's the right man for the times. He's probably fucked up this time short-term but I wouldn't be surprised if he turns it around before fight time one way or another. Even if he doesn't, everyone makes mistakes.

That was always gonna be a big rematch though mate anyway because of the nature of how the first one ended.

Kingfield · Post by **Kingfield** » 03 Oct 2014, 11:41

When someone puts money over the health of a boxer, then their impact is negative.

WelshJack · Post by **WelshJack** » 03 Oct 2014, 11:45

It's a shame the casuals only care about the big names. Look at the bill Saturday, it's competive and I can't call a winner in most (apart from Joshua)