Guys like Oscar and now Hatton seem to be able to bank serious dough each and everytime they fight: being regular good guys, Pavlik is another one who is marketable in the same way.
On the otherside of the coin you have guys like Hopkins. Who has an unpalatable public persona (note the word public, he could be a saint, we don't really know him) Hopkins obviously has done very well out of boxing and is a multi-millionnaire but surely he would have banked even more if people liked him especially as he is a physical phenom. I know that him being cast as the bad guy boosted PPV sales against Tito and Winky (was Calzage a PPV fight?) but it means he can't really be the draw on his own. He definetely isn't the kind of guy that will ever be a cross-over star.
Obviously there are loads of guys that fit into the nice guy/bad guy categories. It would be boring if all boxers were gentlemen.....but..
Who is a bad guy who made a lot of money, historically, presently, whatever? Does it pay to be a bad guy?
'Good guys make more money' Is this a correct assessment?
Discuss. Whatever.
Tyson was a very amicable person... when he first entered the game. Lots of people loved him, post prison he became loathed.
People are so ****ing fickle.
Thats what a rape charge does.
Tyson biggest fights PPV wise were after his release from prison. Not before
that's true but totally unrelated. I'm saying Mike wasn't marketed at the beginning as a villain, go watch his post-fight stuff during the up&coming phase. You're talking about the down&out phase
Tyson biggest fights PPV wise were after his release from prison. Not before
Being likeable and being an attraction are two completely seperate things. Tyson was likeable before he went to prison, afterwards he was an attraction.
Yes, exactly. Lifestyle...flashy.
http://cache.deadspin.com/assets/resources/2008/01/floyd%20and%20fifty.jpg
500k on the wrist, a Mill on the neck, drinkin a ****in virgin Daquiri with 50 cent. if that ain't flashy, what is mate, what is
PBF is definetely one.
But his ZERO is basically the main reason, because he is regarded as he best in the game.
I think what matters more for more fighters is skill and record. Guys like Oscar and Ricky are not the norm. Most fighters earn their money based on accomplishments. But among the elite fighters maybe you're "nice guy" theory is the truth.
No one ever liked Tyson. They just enjoyed watching a pit bull destroy much larger opponents. Tyson rep is based on being the baddest man on the planet. Look at Lewis – Tyson hype and his release from prison
Mike Tyson on his way up was very likable. Watch some interviews from like 85 or 86. You got the impression he was a driven athlete, but still a nice guy. He was all yes sir, no sir, I trained hard sir, I'll be the champ sir. In the 80s anybody that saw Mike fight and then saw he was pretty well spoken had to know he was gonna be BIG. Mike was always so much more intelligent than most people give him credit for.
Tyson always brought in the bucks. I never heard much about the purses of Mayo and Toney, but they've played the villain in some fights. Vargas was the bad guy against DLH too, but always seemed to be pretty popular beyond that. PBF has made some coin makin everybody wanna see him KTFO his last 2 fights. Hagler and Duran came off as the bad guy against SRL too. Bein the antagonist can net you some $ if you got a popular star across from you. Nicer guys just come off as more charismatic so it's easier for fans to get behind em. Those kinda fighters are the ones who achieve crossover appeal beyond hardcore fans and make $ outside of boxing. take a look at Foreman in his 2nd career. He made more $ outside the sport than in it.
Guys like Oscar and now Hatton seem to be able to bank serious dough each and everytime they fight: being regular good guys, Pavlik is another one who is marketable in the same way.
On the otherside of the coin you have guys like Hopkins. Who has an unpalatable public persona (note the word public, he could be a saint, we don't really know him) Hopkins obviously has done very well out of boxing and is a multi-millionnaire but surely he would have banked even more if people liked him especially as he is a physical phenom. I know that him being cast as the bad guy boosted PPV sales against Tito and Winky (was Calzage a PPV fight?) but it means he can't really be the draw on his own. He definetely isn't the kind of guy that will ever be a cross-over star.
Obviously there are loads of guys that fit into the nice guy/bad guy categories. It would be boring if all boxers were gentlemen.....but..
Who is a bad guy who made a lot of money, historically, presently, whatever? Does it pay to be a bad guy?
'Good guys make more money' Is this a correct assessment?
Discuss. Whatever.
http://www.boxnews.com.ua/photos/413/floyd-mayweather46.jpg
Tyson was a very amicable person... when he first entered the game. Lots of people loved him, post prison he became loathed.
People are so ****ing fickle.
Mike Tyson........... end of thread
People liked him.
He always had charm. And he was a Heavyweight who knocked people unconcious, that's just a whole different ball game. Heavyweights always capture the casual fan.