BoxRec

Kevin Mitchell, the Guardian writer, wrote this on Al Haymon.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2 ... /al-haymon

I am personally excited but wary of Haymon's plans, could all be a stack of cards waiting to be blown over or could be the emergence of boxing into a UFC style system, which I think I would be in favour of.

I'm a bit dubious of it all myself. It might seem great for some fans now but i can't see this being the long term model for it. A boxing UFC isn't going to solve the problems in boxing either, UFC is a brand that i'm sure most casual people don't recognise in the same way a lot of people still call a vacum cleaner a hoover. Brilliant brand awareness but it is just a glorified sanctioning body.

Good to see Mitchell knows where fighters are from though.

What is certain is that boxing requires a serious shake up - it's been stuck in the doldrums for some time, and is becoming less and less relevant.

As for people who think the biggest names in MMA are not household stars, I think those people are living in the past. The under 30 demographic know who all the biggest names in the sport are. They are the future, not 40 plussers like me who love boxing largely based on what happened in the 1980's and 1990's.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:What is certain is that boxing requires a serious shake up - it's been stuck in the doldrums for some time, and is becoming less and less relevant.

As for people who think the biggest names in MMA are not household stars, I think those people are living in the past. The under 30 demographic know who all the biggest names in the sport are. They are the future, not 40 plussers like me who love boxing largely based on what happened in the 1980's and 1990's.

A major part of the problem is the alphabet bodies. Glad Floyd told the WBO where to go when they asked for a sanctioning fee for his fight with Pacquiao and sent them back the belt. Having only one champion in each division would go a long way to fixing the problems. Take the middleweights; GGG vs Martinez, Chavez, Cotto, Canelo and Qullin would have all happened if there was just one belt. Instead they all avoid GGG like the plague and go for the multitude of different belts instead. Maybe if a million boxing fans chipped in we could buy them out and form one body?

I can dream....

black panther wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:What is certain is that boxing requires a serious shake up - it's been stuck in the doldrums for some time, and is becoming less and less relevant.

As for people who think the biggest names in MMA are not household stars, I think those people are living in the past. The under 30 demographic know who all the biggest names in the sport are. They are the future, not 40 plussers like me who love boxing largely based on what happened in the 1980's and 1990's.

A major part of the problem is the alphabet bodies. Glad Floyd told the WBO where to go when they asked for a sanctioning fee for his fight with Pacquiao and sent them back the belt. Having only one champion in each division would go a long way to fixing the problems. Take the middleweights; GGG vs Martinez, Chavez, Cotto, Canelo and Qullin would have all happened if there was just one belt. Instead they all avoid GGG like the plague and go for the multitude of different belts instead. Maybe if a million boxing fans chipped in we could buy them out and form one body?

I can dream....

Yes, agreed, Haymon is circumventing the belts, however, in doing so, he may end up just creating his own, which just adds to the problem.

If the fighters begin to realise that belts don't matter that much, and that consensus opinion does, then it could work, but it could be tricky when fighters not with Haymon, get frozen out.

The biggest problem in boxing is the financial fear of a loss. Why risk a difficult fight unless you are getting big money as a loss will kill your career. In the UFC if you are a good fighter and lose it doesn't have anywhere near the same impact. The UFC fighter will be in another big fight a few months later for the same type of money. If he loses a couple but performs well, the fights keep coming and if he gets in a decent streak and wins 5 or 6 in a row he probably gets a title shot. I don't know what the big plan is for Haymon but I hope massive stable gets this type of message.

I always say this, but the sooner boxing fans in general stop treating the belts as anything other than meaningless trinkets, the better for all concerned.

Floyd had the right idea - a belt on its own is worth nothing & proves nothing. The sanctioning bodies are a joke, and so are their titles.

the sanctioning bodies have cooked their own goose, the wbc went the interim route, wba has multiple titles at the same weight, ibf caught bribing, wbo lacks credibility....best to get rid of them all.

let haymon do the spadework and destroy the network, then get some global independent sports board in control.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:What is certain is that boxing requires a serious shake up - it's been stuck in the doldrums for some time, and is becoming less and less relevant.

As for people who think the biggest names in MMA are not household stars, I think those people are living in the past. The under 30 demographic know who all the biggest names in the sport are. They are the future, not 40 plussers like me who love boxing largely based on what happened in the 1980's and 1990's.

That's true, all the young kids where I work love it and laugh at me when I talk about boxing, they always say the same thing " boxing is Sh1t the best don't fight each other" Sadly these days it's a hard argument to win.

veriton wrote:the sanctioning bodies have cooked their own goose, the wbc went the interim route, wba has multiple titles at the same weight, ibf caught bribing, wbo lacks credibility....best to get rid of them all.

let haymon do the spadework and destroy the network, then get some global independent sports board in control.

A recent allegedly interview on IFL was spot on about a lot of things with sanctioning bodies for me. IE forcing good mandatoiry fights and other routes for fighters. Obviously things which I don't like IE prospect v eastern european no hoper for xxx international/continental/european title = top 10 ranking.

Hopefully they can work to get unifications on ie in fairness the WBC tried to make Kovalev v Stevenson.

Thing is it's the TV companies that legitimised all these belts. The bodies would wither on the vine if the TV people refused to acknowledge them.

Ezzard wrote:Thing is it's the TV companies that legitimised all these belts. The bodies would wither on the vine if the TV people refused to acknowledge them.

Yes, but the promoters sold them the idea of those belts in the first place, so they could get better deals.

yes one minute you're in a meeting with tv executives telling them you can supply world title fights, next minute you are lining steve roberts and troy lowry up for the wbf title in barnsley

Promoters will tell you it was the other way around. If itv had said no to the wbo. They simply would not have got a foothold here.