Comments Thread For: Spence-Ugas Title Unification in Play; Stanionis Agrees To Step Aside, Will Next Face Butaev

[WBC WBA IBF]

[B]bullshlt !!

money does... and it has been that way for over a century, back when there was only one belt LMAO

There's never been one belt. That's something new fans assume because they don't know the history of the sport. Why not just admit you're new to the sport?

FACT: you admitted that 70/30 is not reasonable... so yea... it was unnecessary bullshlt, that killed any chance of that fight happening

It was more reasonable than 50/50. 50/50 killed the fight before 70/30 could kill it. You're just exposing yourself as a fanboy.

FACT: Crawford would be a distinct favorite in that fight

Which has nothing to do with the split. Since you're a casual fanboy who just started watching boxing, you don't understand how the sport works.

[MC Hammer]

Thurman a coward. He is ducking Vergil Ortiz who conveniently, no one mentions and is a real threat to anyone.

I don't hear Ortiz mentioning the likes of Boots either

[aboutfkntime]

There's never been one belt. That's something new fans assume because they don't know the history of the sport. Why not just admit you're new to the sport?




It was more reasonable than 50/50. 50/50 killed the fight before 70/30 could kill it. You're just exposing yourself as a fanboy.




Which has nothing to do with the split. Since you're a casual fanboy who just started watching boxing, you don't understand how the sport works.

FACT: back in the day... there was only one title, and there was only one belt... learn the sport, fanboy

you are an ass-clown for insinuating that Spence is some kind of superstar

and you are a even bigger ass-clown for ignoring this fact... FACT: Crawford would be a distinct favorite in that fight

NOBODY said the fact that Spence would probably lose, should affect the purse split... I said... the fact that Spence would probably lose, is why he priced himself out






...

[WBC WBA IBF]

FACT: back in the day... there was only one title, and there was only one belt... learn the sport, fanboy

That's 100% false and it shows you have no idea what you're talking about.

you are an ass-clown for insinuating that Spence is some kind of superstar

Never said superstar, but he's a much bigger star than Crawford and the numbers clearly prove that. You're arguing for the sake of arguing.

FACT: Crawford would be a distinct favorite in that fight

Who cares? What does that have to do with the split?

[BendOver]

That's 100% false and it shows you have no idea what you're talking about.





Never said superstar, but he's a much bigger star than Crawford and the numbers clearly prove that. You're arguing for the sake of arguing.




Who cares? What does that have to do with the split?

pretty sure back in the day was only one Champ per division. And they were only 8 divisions back then. They didn't have, franchise, diamond, gold, super, none of that bs to grab money.

[WBC WBA IBF]

pretty sure back in that long time ago, was only one Champ per division. And they were only 8 divisions back then.

Even when there were 8 divisions, there were still multiple titles. There have always been multiple titles. Newer fans for some reason just believe some myth about the days when there was only one world title. Those days never actually existed.

[BendOver]

Even when there were 8 divisions, there were still multiple titles. There have always been multiple titles. Newer fans for some reason just believe some myth about the days when there was only one world title. Those days never actually existed.

Titles? Yes, World Champ? One

[HrNY]

Ugas, and then Crawford, then I won't have any beef.

If he doesn't fight Crawford next, then there's no excuse except Spence is ducking Crawford

[aboutfkntime]

That's 100% false and it shows you have no idea what you're talking about.




Never said superstar, but he's a much bigger star than Crawford and the numbers clearly prove that. You're arguing for the sake of arguing.




Who cares? What does that have to do with the split?

if he is not a superstar... then only a dribbling idiot would accept that as an excuse to kill the fight

FACT: Spence is not a star

FACT: Spence was totally out of line with that prima donna 70/30 garbage

FACT: Spence has shown no real interest whatsoever in fighting Crawford

FACT: you are backing the losing side... again

you are like that koba idiot... I have seen you take the right side of an argument yet

never agreed with anything you have said about anything... EVER






...

[WBC WBA IBF]

FACT: Spence is not a star

You don't understand what a fact is.

FACT: Spence was totally out of line with that prima donna 70/30 garbage

Crawford asked for 50/50 first, which was far less justifiable than 70/30. I know you desperately want to ignore that part. There's no dis*****g that Spence is a bigger draw than Crawford, so you just keep trying to change the subject to anything other than the actual subject, which is who is the bigger draw? Clearly the answer is Spence, so you just keep resorting to your lame distraction tactics.