Comments Thread For: Alexis Rocha Embraces Possibility of Facing Terence Crawford Next

[Oregonian]

Don't know where the excuses are bc I'm just stating based on open knowledge from a general perspective. Just calling it like it I see it. Doesn't mean I agree with it. You clearly didn't get what I said bc, as I stated about most boxing fans, you're picking and choosing what you wanna comment on that fits your narrative of degrading a boxer bc they're not doing what you want them to do. BLK Prime overvalued him fighting a lesser guy and look where they're at now. Rocha is a MANDATORY. He is being ordered to fight him. Can't be any clearer than that. Those situations got nothing to do with name value. In regards to Khan, he brought name value and was criticized for him thinking he was greater than he really was, not bc he was great. You believe that a world champion should drop his title that he worked hard to get, to fight an interim titleholder for less money than face a lesser name for more money just bc you feel that's what he should do? You wouldn't even do what you're preaching. Only a dummy would do some bonehead ish like that. It's prizefighting my man. They fight for the biggest prize they can get. Business comes before the fans. As a "boxing fan" you should know that by now.

—-/-
This is where you lose your credibility
”You believe that a world champion should drop his title that he worked hard to get, to fight an interim titleholder for less money than face a lesser name for more money just bc you feel that's what he should do?”

BLK could have paid Crawford the same $10 mil to fight Boots. Where do you get that idea that he would get less money? It makes zero sense. The $10 mil that Crawford was not dictated by the opponent he was facing. He would have gotten the same amount had he fought Broner or Tommy Fury so why not Boots?

[Griever0730]

—-/-
This is where you lose your credibility
”You believe that a world champion should drop his title that he worked hard to get, to fight an interim titleholder for less money than face a lesser name for more money just bc you feel that's what he should do?”

BLK could have paid Crawford the same $10 mil to fight Boots. Where do you get that idea that he would get less money? It makes zero sense. The $10 mil that Crawford was not dictated by the opponent he was facing. He would have gotten the same amount had he fought Broner or Tommy Fury so why not Boots?

I'll stand corrected in regards to the money being paid to him after the fact. You can have that one. I still stand by the rest of what I said. Now, if he's gonna get his bread anyway, why risk it against somebody like Ennis who hasn't been tested against a top fighter(which is gonna be the main excuse if Crawford beats him) and poses more of a risk than Avanesyan? He ain't gonna get credit either way knowing how most boxing fans are so might as well take the lesser risk. Again, it's a business at the end of the day and he's making the best business choice for him. BLKP really F'd up paying him that money and made it more difficult for those fights that you, me and everyone else wants to see bc of them. Just like PBC overpaying their guys bc now everybody thinks they're worth $10M a fight now(partly refering to a recent Danny Garcia article). None of these guys nowadays are superstars like that. These promoters like PBC and BLKP overpaying their guys to take on lesser guys is the reason the marquee names aren't taking the risks that we as fans wanna see them take. Can't knock the fighter for taking advantage of that for the time being. Now look at what's happening with PBC and BLKP. One has high-priced below-average PPV cards one after another tryna make up that bread while fighters are barely fighting once a year bc of how much they're getting paid and the other is already pretty much RIP before they even got started, respectively. It's the promoters F'ing it up for us, not the fighters.

[ptek]

Brook and Porter were both in their prime. Brook got stopped at 160 because he was chasing greatness, as you guys like to say for Cinnabon. He challenged GGG, the fighter no one wanted to face in that division, and moved 2 weight classes up to fight him. There's a huge difference between 160 and 147. Before the GGG fight Brook was undefeated, and by the time Spence fought him in 2017, Brook was the IBF champion and Ring magazine ranked him as the top welterweight in the world.

Porter was the WBC champion and only had one loss to Thurman when Spence fought him. When Crawford fought them, they both were on their last lap before retirement. Spence fought the 3 current champions and took their straps, and former champions, there's no comparison.

So what your saying is Porter hadn't fought Kell Broke and lost his IBF strap to Kell Broke then right ?

[Rebelrbg]

So what your saying is Porter hadn't fought Kell Broke and lost his IBF strap to Kell Broke then right ?

Yes, Porter lost to Brook in a very close fight that came down to a majority decision.