Pacquiao-Valero on Deck if Ricky Hatton Walks Away

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Chups
    Banned
    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
    • May 2004
    • 18400
    • 1,835
    • 1,281
    • 52,879

    #21
    Remember JMM when he turned down Pac and lost to John. Pac will lose to Valero for peanuts too.

    Comment

    • rj_ct
      Undisputed Champion
      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
      • Sep 2007
      • 1651
      • 43
      • 40
      • 8,006

      #22
      using valero as leverage to get hatton to budge...

      Comment

      • nozorok
        Interim Champion
        Gold Champion - 500-1,000 posts
        • Jul 2006
        • 955
        • 28
        • 41
        • 7,405

        #23
        Originally posted by Chups
        Remember JMM when he turned down Pac and lost to John. Pac will lose to Valero for peanuts too.
        That's what I'm thinking as well. The only difference will be if Pac loses to Valero it's going to be by a vicious knockout as in out cold type deal.
        That and making $2 million to fight Valero.

        Comment

        • Dave Rado
          Undisputed Champion
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Dec 2008
          • 8064
          • 266
          • 453
          • 14,460

          #24
          Originally posted by mangler
          Seems ******, but the $ thing gets way too much play on here. I don't give a **** what these guys make as long as they have good fights. Pac-Valero should be good, so let's do it.
          I agree, should be a good fight. I'm disappointed that the megafight that was on the table won't happen (or not for a while), and I think Pac badly screwed up the negotiations, but I don't care about the money as such, and I don't see why any boxing fan should care about that - I just want to see good fights. But in terms of making boxing a mainstream sport again, like it used to be, Pac-Hatton would have been far better for boxing than Pac-Valero. For real boxing fans, though, I agree that either would be great.

          Comment

          • -Boxzilla-
            undisputed
            Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
            • Jun 2008
            • 7975
            • 1,230
            • 1,610
            • 14,970

            #25
            i really hope this is just for leverage . . . but at the same time i dont think pac deserves the 60-40 split. i think 55-45 is more then fair.

            if the fight doesnt come off i'll loose a ton of respect for manny, the valero fight may be interesting. but i have not bought into the valero hype, he may have power but hes fought no one and has terrible form. i would rather see him unify at lightweight fight the winner of jmm diaz and nate fuenka.

            Comment

            • Dave Rado
              Undisputed Champion
              Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
              • Dec 2008
              • 8064
              • 266
              • 453
              • 14,460

              #26
              Originally posted by 3zilla
              i have not bought into the valero hype, he may have power but hes fought no one and has terrible form
              He has fought no-one because no-one will fight him. He has been The Ring's #1-rated Jnr. Lightweight for quite a long time, but none of the other leading Jnr. Lightweights or Lightweights have been willing to fight him. You can't blame Valero for that! If they thought he would be so easy, why are they all avoiding him? And I don't believe The Ring's ratings are based just on hype, they are compiled by a panel of highly respected boxing experts.

              Regarding the comments about him being limited, that's exactly what everyone said about George Foreman until he beat Frazier. Foreman was limited, but his power made up for that, and it was enough to get him into the Hall of Fame.

              Comment

              • raabd
                Undisputed Champion
                Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                • Dec 2007
                • 1122
                • 23
                • 0
                • 11,255

                #27
                This is lame on pacquiao's part. If he isn't gonna fight hatton a third fight with jmm makes more sense. He'll get more money and everyone knows they always put up a great fight (plus it would be for the lineal championship). Who the hell is valero and who has he fought? Just cause he's undefeated doesn't mean ****. I seriously don't know what the **** this guy is thinking.

                Comment

                • KILLA RIGHT
                  Undisputed Champion
                  Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                  • Aug 2007
                  • 8954
                  • 294
                  • 14
                  • 16,348

                  #28
                  i rather see a valero or jmm face manny anyways

                  Comment

                  • Left Hook Tua
                    VATNIK
                    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                    • Apr 2008
                    • 62306
                    • 7,010
                    • 1,581
                    • 951,318

                    #29
                    Originally posted by Dave Rado
                    He has fought no-one because no-one will fight him. He has been The Ring's #1-rated Jnr. Lightweight for quite a long time, but none of the other leading Jnr. Lightweights or Lightweights have been willing to fight him. You can't blame Valero for that! If they thought he would be so easy, why are they all avoiding him? And I don't believe The Ring's ratings are based just on hype, they are compiled by a panel of highly respected boxing experts.

                    Regarding the comments about him being limited, that's exactly what everyone said about George Foreman until he beat Frazier. Foreman was limited, but his power made up for that, and it was enough to get him into the Hall of Fame.
                    what?

                    when was he #1 at 130?

                    #1 over pacquiao? over marquez? over morales? over barrera? over guzman?

                    when was he #1? a few months ago with morales and barrera retired and after pacquiao , guzman and marquez all jumped up to 135.

                    Comment

                    • Dave Rado
                      Undisputed Champion
                      Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                      • Dec 2008
                      • 8064
                      • 266
                      • 453
                      • 14,460

                      #30
                      Originally posted by Left Hook Tua
                      when was he #1? a few months ago with morales and barrera retired and after pacquiao , guzman and marquez all jumped up to 135.
                      But none of them would fight him. He's been #1 for a few months and none of the other current top 5 Jnr. Lightweights want to fight him either.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP