Every day you hear "today's fighters don't dare to be great like the fighters of the past." In some cases that may be true. But what people fail to realize is that, yes these old school fighters dared to be great, but they were compensated HEAVILY for taking on such risks. Let's take a look at how some of these fighters of the past were rewarded for "Daring to Be Great".
Common examples that are used where a smaller fighter moves up in weight:
1. Duran made $1.5 million, by far his biggest payday ever in his first fight with Leonard. $8 million for an immediate rematch.
2. Leonard made $12 million in his fight against Marvin Hagler at 160.
3. Pacquiao made $11 million plus to fight Oscar De La Hoya
4. Mayweather made:
-$25 million to fight Oscar De La Hoya
-$32 million to fight Miguel Cotto
-$mega trillion gazillion to fight Canelo
5. Marquez made $3.2 million to fight Mayweather, $5 million to move up and fight Pacquiao
6. Roy Jones made $10 million to fight John Ruiz
7. Amir Khan made $13 million to fight Canelo
8. Shane Mosley made $4.5 million plus to fight Oscar De La Hoya
9. Cotto made $7 million to fight Martinez
10. B-Hop made $5 million to fight Tarver
Very rarely do you see a guy "daring to be great" without making millions upon millions of dollars. So be careful when you criticize "X fighter" for not "moving up like my favorite fighter of the past" when your favorite fighter was compensated greatly for taking on such a risk.
Aren't better examples of "daring to be great" like Rigondeaux unifying a division in 12 fights, Lomachenko fighting for a world title in 2 fights, Pacquiao going after Barrera in his first test at 126, etc. etc.??? And what goes unnoticed is the failures (e.g. every over-matched Golovkin opponent that could have gone another route but wanted a shot at the best)
The number one argument I see coming is:
C'mon PBP. Every guy you listed was a proven, elite fighter that earned the right to those paydays.
My counter to that is:
How did they become proven, elite fighters in the first place? They became proven, elite fighters by beating the best fighters in their division and moving up after they handled their business in each respective division. That's why you need to be patient and let these current fighters build their resumes by knocking off the top fighters in their divisions before asking them to "dare to be great."
1. It wasn't an illegal amount like Floyd
2. Oscar was fighting at a weight where he hadn't fought in over 5 years
3. Oscars last fight was around 160 not 147
4. Floyd fanboys claim his walk around weight is 150 so why does he need an illegal amount of iv for losing 3 pounds?
You dont know the amount Oscar used. USADA wasn't involved for that fight. And Floyd definitely doesn't walk around at 147. He probably walks around at 160
so thats about $13.5 mil.
Respectfully, that doesn't make sense. That means Khan took less money for a less winnable fight.
Any idea what the site fee was and how many PPV's this expected to sell in England?
Yes, but that is credit to Khan factor in his paper chin. Sure you're sick of hearing "daring to be great" by Khan fans but if it isnt that then what is? Khan always said he wanted the big fights and he wasn't kidding when he left similar $ on the table to go up two weights understanding the risk.
People say any WW would do that yet not every WW is worth $13 mil nor do they have the option of making similar $ in a comparatively easier fight.
Well, they feel they can do 80K like Froch Groves if not better so that should give you an idea but personally no Im not sure how much?
so when they had the likes of Tyson, Lewis, Holyfield, De la Hoya etc on their books?
amazing they would be willing to pay more for these guys than they would for Kovalev or GGG.
Back then the budget was hundreds of millions of dollars. Tyson was a Showtime fighter but De La Hoya was primarily a PPV fighter and PPVs don't affect the budget.
The budget was cut as boxing became less popular in the United States and they wanted to spend more money on original programming like Game of Thrones to get more subscribers.
Actually, Hearn just confirmed Khan would've made more than he did vs Alvarez.
http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/boxing/10276915/hearn-khan-mad-not-to-face-brook
Not sure what Brook wouldve made but I doubt he has ever made 7 figures.
The fight didnt materialize earlier this year cuz Brook would've made 2 to 2.5 mil pounds and Hearn felt he deserved more.
so thats about $13.5 mil.
Respectfully, that doesn't make sense. That means Khan took less money for a less winnable fight.
Any idea what the site fee was and how many PPV's this expected to sell in England?
what was Brook going to make?
Actually, Hearn just confirmed Khan would've made more than he did vs Alvarez.
http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/boxing/10276915/hearn-khan-mad-not-to-face-brook
Not sure what Brook wouldve made but I doubt he has ever made 7 figures.
The fight didnt materialize earlier this year cuz Brook would've made 2 to 2.5 mil pounds and Hearn felt he deserved more.
So what do you call it when a guy like Lara fights 3 bums in a row, and about to fight another one, and gets almost $3 million? There's plenty of those nowadays. I mean they don't even have to fight tougher competition, yet still get millions of dollars.
Khan had the option to make similar $ at WW vs Brook but he chose to go up 2 weights instead. Now tell me how many of those guys had that option?
Khan could've made more than $10 mil for Brook?
Nah, the budget has been declining since the mid to late 90s. Haymon has nothing to do with it.
so when they had the likes of Tyson, Lewis, Holyfield, De la Hoya etc on their books?
amazing they would be willing to pay more for these guys than they would for Kovalev or GGG.
Did HBO's budget drop before or after they lost pretty much all of their top fighters to the Al Haymon experiment?
Because iirc, HBO were splashing plenty of cash around when they had the fighters and fights which were worth the risk.
I bet if PBC failed and a flood of prime American fighters came back to HBO, you would see their budget increased.
Nah, the budget has been declining since the mid to late 90s. Haymon has nothing to do with it.
That just goes to show you don't know sh*t about boxing and are a new age fan. Oscar also used an IV to rehydrate in his fight with Manny Pacquiao back in 2008 :lol1:
1. It wasn't an illegal amount like Floyd
2. Oscar was fighting at a weight where he hadn't fought in over 5 years
3. Oscars last fight was around 160 not 147
4. Floyd fanboys claim his walk around weight is 150 so why does he need an illegal amount of iv for losing 3 pounds?
The purses for Crawford and Postol are not outrageous in the least bit and if this was 1999, this would not be a PPV. HBO used to pay $6-10 million for fights like Mosley vs. Forest. Neither guy was a draw, their budget was just significantly larger. You can't ignore the facts bro: HBO's budget is approximately $30 million. In the late 90s it was in excess of $100 million. Less money = less fights. FACT.
Golovkin/Lemeiux happened why? Because Lemieux was "daring to be great" :lol1: No, because they found the money to pay Lemieux market value for a middleweight championship unification fight.
You want to live in a world where unification fights and fights between two top fighters in their prime get signed and sealed for $350-500K. That's just not going to happen.
Since you don't like Mayweather/Corrales, how much did it cost Cory Spinks make to put his titles on the line against Zab Judah? He made $800,000 in the first fight and $1 million in the rematch. Was Spinks a draw? Was that a fight were were anxious to see? No. HBO was just throwing more money around back then.
Did HBO's budget drop before or after they lost pretty much all of their top fighters to the Al Haymon experiment?
Because iirc, HBO were splashing plenty of cash around when they had the fighters and fights which were worth the risk.
I bet if PBC failed and a flood of prime American fighters came back to HBO, you would see their budget increased.