i never want to hear the NFL heavyweight boxing theory again

Things in reality are not random, it is not random which sports guys choose to participate in all that is reason. There is no talent pool for heavyweight boxing in the US a couple guys wandering into the sport is not a talent pool, all that is is a roll of the dice with worse odds than hitting snake eyes or boxcars back to back. That is the point like it or not there is no talent pool that exists because boxing is not a realistic option for any athlete to choose. Also yea out of that 100 I would have to be severely unlucky to not do better than Arreola, would I find someone to beat Wlad is an open question but Arreola come on that isn't even a real challenge because he lack dedication out of the 100 I am sure to find 1 talented guy athletically that clicks and has true dedication to the game and I would figure to find more because drive would be something I would look for. A few years ago, Puerto Rico managed to produce a heavyweight champion. This coming from a tiny population of approximately 4 million people. The island is a commonwealth of the U.S., whose opportunities and financial advantages are comparable to the mainland. Are all of P.R.'s athletes going into boxing? Many, perhaps most, choose baseball, and a growing number are getting into basketball. Would you say Ruiz was a fluke? Then what about Oquendo, who, although he didn't make it as far, was pretty highly regarded at one time. We can go on and on; but, in the end, the "NFL Theory" and its kin are convenient excuses for the decline of U.S. heavyweights. They are partial explanations at best.

Are you seriously saying boxing is more attractive than school sports which are practically thrown at you all your life, sports that you play with your friends at school, for free, etc?... Is this "put words in CubanGuy's mouth night"? It's quite tiresome. It's difficult enough debating, but defending a position I never held is a bit much. Please highlight where in my post I directly or indirectly said that. There are 300 million people in the US but they're not all kids lmao For fuuuck's sake. Where did I say or imply that? The point was that a country as large as the U.S. has more kids than a much smaller country of, say, 10 million, thereby giving them a larger pool to draw from.

You just gave a fantasy scenario, where you would take all the best athletes from every sport and train them to box from a young age. That's not random. What's random is the way things are in reality. As I've said before, I think it's self-evident that a larger pool of quality talent would naturally be expected to produce more quality fighters. Nevertheless, I don't believe that necessarily means there would be someone better than Arreola in that group, as crazy and counterintuitive as that may seem. In the final analysis, in the real world, results are what count. Anything less than excellence always garners excuses. If Americans were still dominating heavyweight boxing, I'm sure that many of the same "NFL Theory" supporters would be only too happy to claim natural superiority over every other country. It's often difficult to accept that one is no longer the top banana, but it's not a birthright. The one constant in life is change. Things in reality are not random, it is not random which sports guys choose to participate in all that is reason. There is no talent pool for heavyweight boxing in the US a couple guys wandering into the sport is not a talent pool, all that is is a roll of the dice with worse odds than hitting snake eyes or boxcars back to back. That is the point like it or not there is no talent pool that exists because boxing is not a realistic option for any athlete to choose. Also yea out of that 100 I would have to be severely unlucky to not do better than Arreola, would I find someone to beat Wlad is an open question but Arreola come on that isn't even a real challenge because he lack dedication out of the 100 I am sure to find 1 talented guy athletically that clicks and has true dedication to the game and I would figure to find more because drive would be something I would look for.

It isn't reasonable, in part, because the sheer numbers make it highly unlikely. A country the size of the U.S., with a population of over 300 million, with millions of kids from all walks of life playing sports and dreaming of becoming a star, can't produce anything better than Chris Arreola? Does that seem reasonable? Do you honestly think that every kid in America wants to go to school, scholarship or no? How many big, athletic kids do you think there are in the inner cities that would love nothing more than to smash someone's face in for a living? Don't you think that there might be even a handful of talented athletes that just happen to love boxing over all other sports? I've read your posts. Every one of them. I've answered the gist of your responses. You seem to think you've got press-stopping news. The crux of your argument essentially rehashes the notion that athletic kids are gravitating towards the other sports, but you haven't proven anything we don't already know. I've made a lot of points myself, which you haven't addressed. Are you seriously saying boxing is more attractive than school sports which are practically thrown at you all your life, sports that you play with your friends at school, for free, etc? Boxing is RARELY free, you have to drop at least $30 a month, how many inner city kids can afford that? Do you realize the majority of American boxers got into boxing because of their fathers/family members? How exactly does an American child get interested in boxing? From watching HBO/Showtime? (Two channels I don't even have) or watching crappy ESPN FNF's? To ahead and tune into ESPN, tell me how much coverage the biggest fight since DLH/Mayweather is getting. Arreola's father was a boxer, Ward's father was a boxer, Mayweather's father was a boxer, Danny Garcia's father was a boxer, Guerrero's father was a boxer, etc. the list goes on and on. These top American fighters didn't pursue boxing, boxing came to them, understand? Do boxers sell shoes/shirts/jerseys/underwear/socks/shoes/backpacks/hats? You're from NY no? Go outside and look at the shoes kids are wearing, Kobe's, Lebron's, Jordan's, Wade's, etc. they're everywhere. And organized sports are HUGE in America, and if you aren't playing them you're probably in Band/Choir/ROTC etc. usually reserved for unathletic kids. There are 300 million people in the US but they're not all kids lmao, you don't realize how big sports are here. http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/9469252/hidden-demographics-youth-sports-espn-magazine "Competitive sports look bigger in a survey of students done by Don Sabo, a longtime youth-sports researcher and a professor at D'Youville College in Buffalo. He queried a research sample of 2,185 students in 2007 for the Women's Sports Foundation and found that 75 percent of boys and 69 percent of girls from 8 to 17 took part in organized sports during the previous year -- playing on at least one team or in one club. Do the math on the 39.82 million U.S. students ages 8 to 17 in 2011 and that would be 28.7 million of them playing organized sports,more than the population of Texas today plus most of Oklahoma. This chart shows the participation rate of Sabo's sample. Whichever estimate you have faith in, it's far below the actual total, because it doesn't count the millions of kids who start before age 6 or 8."

Because 0 of those 100 guys would currently be in boxing~ so that 20-30 would be superior to out current compliment. There is nothing random about it, they have better options so they don't take up boxing everything happens for a reason. You just gave a fantasy scenario, where you would take all the best athletes from every sport and train them to box from a young age. That's not random. What's random is the way things are in reality. As I've said before, I think it's self-evident that a larger pool of quality talent would naturally be expected to produce more quality fighters. Nevertheless, I don't believe that necessarily means there would be someone better than Arreola in that group, as crazy and counterintuitive as that may seem. In the final analysis, in the real world, results are what count. Anything less than excellence always garners excuses. If Americans were still dominating heavyweight boxing, I'm sure that many of the same "NFL Theory" supporters would be only too happy to claim natural superiority over every other country. It's often difficult to accept that one is no longer the top banana, but it's not a birthright. The one constant in life is change.

Those are not very good numbers. By your own admission, even selecting "la creme de la creme" doesn't guarantee major success. So why is it so difficult to accept that in a random world America fails to produce a great heavyweight? Because 0 of those 100 guys would currently be in boxing~ so that 20-30 would be superior to out current compliment. There is nothing random about it, they have better options so they don't take up boxing everything happens for a reason.

This thread is really stupid, not unlike most of your others slim. I am NOT making an argument supporting the NFL theory but your thread makes no argument against it, in fact it supports it. Mitchell is a guy who chose American Football over Boxing and started Boxing well into his mid 20's as an injury stopped his Football career. The whole basis of the NFL argument is that people choose to play American Football at an early age over Boxing. Seth Mitchell supports this argument as he also chose to play Football and not Boxing when he was young. Your thread is ill-conceived and your argument actually goes against the point your are trying to make. Good post, but he doesn't get it and would rather remain purposely obtuse. His agenda isn't about boxing or football, but his nationalistic hate of America. :usa2:

There are athletes that wander along Micheal Grant, Bryant Jennings, Wilder but still the washout rate in boxing is high, hoping you hit the triple 7 on one out of three bets isn't a very good bet. If I picked 100 athletes I think could make good boxers went back in a time machine and got them to box at a young age I would expect maybe 5 to turn out good 10 if I was really lucky. I might get a couple others who were highly thought of prospects that wouldn't turn out, then maybe a few gate keeper sorts/journeymen. 20 maybe in total 30 if I hit a rich vain hopefully 1 would be a super stud. Sure there are lots of stupid people but ones with real talent usually get pushed by someone else, talented big men used to get pushed into boxing possibly baseball now they get pushed into other sports including baseball Those are not very good numbers. By your own admission, even selecting "la creme de la creme" doesn't guarantee major success. So why is it so difficult to accept that in a random world America fails to produce a great heavyweight?

I don't look at it like that. The likes of Ward and Klitschko are special fighters. Just because they're excellent, it doesn't mean that others in the division are not very good, or even just good. Speaking as a boxing fan, I don't limit my viewing to just the guy who is on top at any given point. I like watching the top 10 duke it out in any division. E.g. Floyd might be the best at 147 but I can still enjoy watching Broner or Thurman. It would be pointless to say, one guy is dominating, let's ignore the rest. When I think about a division I care about who is best and who could possibly take down the best even a totally unproven prospect coming up or someone who might be able to come up a division and make waves. At 168 no one is messing with Ward or even wants to really take that challenge, at heavy guys will take the challenge but they are mostly no hopers so they are boring division to think about, but I still watch fights in those divisions because....... In terms of actually watching fights I like watching the best most, but I can watch any fight because all I have to do is form an opinion about how it might go then see if I am right or wrong. To see if a guy can exceed my expectations, and I always try to learn something from every fight I watch for later use.

nobody is guaranteeing that a premium athlete can jump from one sport to another. what's being guaranteed is that a group of premium athletes are more likely to produce a champion than a group of chris arreolas and tony thompsons. No question. I think that's self-evident. I've never said anything to the contrary. If you thought otherwise, then I either miscommunicated, or you misread. However, that bolded statement does not explain why there hasn't been a great American heavyweight in years. It also doesn't prove the "NFL Theory," which is the topic of this thread. What your group presupposes is that, because there are no great American heavyweights, that necessarily means no great athletes care to box. Arreola and Thompson being the best we've got at the moment doesn't explain it either. Your biggest assumption is that those guys would have their asses handed to them if guys like LeBron and Ray Lewis boxed from a young age. I know it seems counterintuitive, but it's not necessarily so. Were there no big, crazy athletic guys to challenge the relatively small Marciano when he was champ, at a time when boxing was king? if thompson had the talent they would have been steered into basketball and football from a young age. nobody cared about their talents, so they stayed in boxing gyms and got to the top of a sport of crap athletes. HW boxers today are F#cking awful. they're fat and unmotivated. there's nothing tough about that. that's not a natural fighter. if you can't just see that with your eyes i don't know why i'm wasting time in this thread. Maybe, but that's another assumption. Think about the classic "starving artist." He or she lives for the love of their chosen path. They obviously give little thought to what the chances of success might be. And who says a guy like Thompson, or any given young athlete, had/has concerned adults in their lives to steer them anywhere? Those guys, however fat and unmotivated, are natural fighters. They couldn't do what they do with those bodies if they didn't have something that's not visible to the eye. it's certainly not my most gracious thread, looking back through it. i've got the right to believe what i'd like, and to believe that certain ideologies (that an exodus of american talent isn't the major contributing factor to the poor quality if the division,) are wrong, but i shouldn't be insulting people. for that i apologize. Apology accepted. I simply don't expect certain language and insinuations flung at me by someone on my friends list. lol this topic gets me riled up. the history of the HW division is the history of american boxing, and it is extremely important to me. i consider it a disservice to the sport not to acknowledge the nearly uninterrupted, century long tenure with an american HW champion. that's the important aspect of the argument, and people ignore it to suit their biases. That much is clear. lol In my nearly fifty years of life (Jesus, I can't believe I'm that old. SMH), I have learned that there are things that one can be utterly and unshakably convinced of and still be wrong about. It's humbling, and sometimes downright embarrassing. I try to question more and judge less.

It's not a matter of me liking it or not: The division is crap and all the so called "contenders" are crap. It is what it is. You can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a fvcking pig. It really is, because the division exists just like any other. As long as it exists it will have its top fighters and then the levels below. Right now the top fighters are from Europe.

IF that one guys is dominating it the rest really don't amount to much. I don't look at it like that. The likes of Ward and Klitschko are special fighters. Just because they're excellent, it doesn't mean that others in the division are not very good, or even just good. Generally speaking as an American I care about who is the best and who is possibly the best~ at 168 there are decent fighters but they have been proven inferior already to the best so they concern my thinking about the division little. Speaking as a boxing fan, I don't limit my viewing to just the guy who is on top at any given point. I like watching the top 10 duke it out in any division. E.g. Floyd might be the best at 147 but I can still enjoy watching Broner or Thurman. It would be pointless to say one guy is dominating, let's ignore the rest.

^^^^^ Oh how cute! Another alt! Some little b1tch-boi too chickensh1t to post under his real account :jerk0ff9: Lil baby needs his NFL sucker to keep his mouth happy. Here you go - :bottle:

Boxing is shitty, and I wouldn't recommend it myself; but there are a lot of wild, dangerous, even shitty, pursuits that people insist on engaging in all the time. Fuck, bro, there are beautiful young women on the Internet getting their faces jizzed on for all to see for literally a couple of bucks. And people do worse! You obviously follow sports in general. You know that there are very few guaranteed contracts in the NFL. There are many ex-players that are on the skids after the playing days are over. (Look up the 30 for 30 "Broke" episode on Youtube.) Highly promising kids get their knees torn up all the time in basketball and football. (Ever see the great documentary "Hoop Dreams"?) I have personally known a couple of guys that played in the minors and one that played in MLB. It's hard as hell to make it! "Shitty" is a relative term. I just use Arreola as an example. Let's not lose the forest for the trees. My point is simply that (and I'm sure you'll appreciate this) the odds that every single American male that fits our criteria is not participating in boxing is not statistically likely, not by a long shot. There are athletes that wander along Micheal Grant, Bryant Jennings, Wilder but still the washout rate in boxing is high, hoping you hit the triple 7 on one out of three bets isn't a very good bet. If I picked 100 athletes I think could make good boxers went back in a time machine and got them to box at a young age I would expect maybe 5 to turn out good 10 if I was really lucky. I might get a couple others who were highly thought of prospects that wouldn't turn out, then maybe a few gate keeper sorts/journeymen. 20 maybe in total 30 if I hit a rich vain hopefully 1 would be a super stud. Sure there are lots of stupid people but ones with real talent usually get pushed by someone else, talented big men used to get pushed into boxing possibly baseball now they get pushed into other sports including baseball

It's not a matter of me liking it or not: The division is crap and all the so called "contenders" are crap. It is what it is. You can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a fvcking pig. It's a hell of a lot deeper than 135, the horrible division that Broner still couldn't look good in.

To answer the last part first Because boxing is a shitty proposition compared to trying to make it in the NFL or NBA or baseball, a guy can still make it big in boxing but there is no safety net, anyone with good athletic talent including hand eye coordination will always chose a different way. As they should because the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow of boxing is even more unattainable than those other sports. There is no reason for them to choose boxing and no one in their right mind would push them in that direction. I know if I knew a superior athlete I would not tell him to box in fact even if he wanted that I would advise him against it because it is a poor career move. That is even as a huge boxing fan that wants to see the next great American heavyweight. Boxing is shitty, and I wouldn't recommend it myself; but there are a lot of wild, dangerous, even shitty, pursuits that people insist on engaging in all the time. Fuck, bro, there are beautiful young women on the Internet getting their faces jizzed on for all to see for literally a couple of bucks. And people do worse! You obviously follow sports in general. You know that there are very few guaranteed contracts in the NFL. There are many ex-players that are on the skids after the playing days are over. (Look up the 30 for 30 "Broke" episode on Youtube.) Highly promising kids get their knees torn up all the time in basketball and football. (Ever see the great documentary "Hoop Dreams"?) I have personally known a couple of guys that played in the minors and one that played in MLB. It's hard as hell to make it! "Shitty" is a relative term. As for Arreola being the best, he is pretty much the best I would pick him at his current level of fitness over most guys out there and he even given his weight issues has more athletic talent than most other American heavies out there. That is straight up sad and depressing if you want to acknowledge why this is the case that is up to you but the answer is clear as day. I just use Arreola as an example. Let's not lose the forest for the trees. My point is simply that (and I'm sure you'll appreciate this) the odds that every single American male that fits our criteria is not participating in boxing is not statistically likely, not by a long shot.

That is because the rest of the top fighters at 168 aren't American, Ward is an exception amongst the top fighters at 168 not the rule. lol, you can't have a division with just one fighter and pretend the rest don't exist. IF that one guys is dominating it the rest really don't amount to much. 168 is superior in depth as opposed to heavy but the situation is roughly the same 1 guy on top clearly then the rest. Generally speaking as an American I care about who is the best and who is possibly the best~ at 168 there are decent fighters but they have been proven inferior already to the best so they concern my thinking about the division little. You can be worried about who is second through 10th best though we all like different things~

It's your judgement that it means anything. The ten best piles of dogsh1t are still dogsh1t. It means they're considered the best in the division. You might not like the division but that is inarguable.

Just imagine the number of Americans failing to qualify for a Cuban or Ukrainian national team. A very limited number would make it against their absolute weakest qualifiers.

And I have said what about those division but here, last I checked 168 was headed by an American who smashed on all his European foes, I would not say America is dominating 168 I would say is is dominated by an American. Much like the heavyweight division is dominated by A Ukrainian That is because the rest of the top fighters at 168 aren't American, Ward is an exception amongst the top fighters at 168 not the rule. lol, you can't have a division with just one fighter and pretend the rest don't exist.