Excellent article on HBO Boxing's recent missteps

[IMDAZED]

I'm amazed everyone is attacking the author. Does he have an agenda? Probably. But the focus should be on the article, not him. If Rafael has his own sources why doesn't he do his own in-depth research and provide it to us? We can start with the main point of this article: HBO is cutting their sports budget by 15 million dollars. You know that's about to hit their boxing dept hard. W can't ignore that like it's no big deal. That could be a sign of things to come.

So yes, while HBO remains the leader we must continue to scrutinize and demand the best because that's what keeps the sport thriving. Who knows, maybe this happening will be a plus for boxing. Maybe it returns to network TV. But if it doesn't and things take a turn for the worse, we'll all wish we were more vigilant in holding the sport's leaders accountable.

[warp1432]

I'm amazed everyone is attacking the author. Does he have an agenda? Probably. But the focus should be on the article, not him. If Rafael has his own sources why doesn't he do his own in-depth research and provide it to us? We can start with the main point of this article: HBO is cutting their sports budget by 15 million dollars. You know that's about to hit their boxing dept hard. W can't ignore that like it's no big deal. That could be a sign of things to come.

So yes, while HBO remains the leader we must continue to scrutinize and demand the best because that's what keeps the sport thriving. Who knows, maybe this happening will be a plus for boxing. Maybe it returns to network TV. But if it doesn't and things take a turn for the worse, we'll all wish we were more vigilant in holding the sport's leaders accountable.

We don't even know if they actually cut the budget by 15 million. According to Dan Rafael, his numbers are inaccurate.

We shouldn't attack the author, but focus on his points? He makes some good points, but a lot of them are ****.

[-EX-]

Dan Rafael says a lot of Hauser's numbers are inaccurate...

[-EX-]

I have a problem with both. GBP shouldnt get any date they please, wtf? You have to sell the matchup. I don't wanna see Rocky Juarez.

I'm with you there...I'm tired of seeing his ass...

Damn this budget cut might **** up how much boxing we're gonna see...

[warp1432]

I'm tired of seeing Rocky Juarez also, but if you keep in mind, them putting him on is kind of justified.

Soto vs Juarez was the step up fight and he failed. Then Juarez was the opponent for Barrera. Close, good fight the first time, so put him in a rematch. Then when he came back to HBO it was against John, which was a step up fight for john.

The times he was on the undercards of PPV's was GBP fault.

[Clegg]

I thought it was a good article overall.

Whether he has an agenda, or whether his figures are off, I think that if you look at what HBO could've done, and what they have done, there's quite a lot of bad choices IMO.

As for Juarez, I thought it was ****** that GBP/HBO twice paid to have Chris John come over, and twice they put him up against a gatekeeper rather than Luevano. CJ and SL are the two best in the division, they should've matched them up.

[IMDAZED]

I'm tired of seeing Rocky Juarez also, but if you keep in mind, them putting him on is kind of justified.

Soto vs Juarez was the step up fight and he failed. Then Juarez was the opponent for Barrera. Close, good fight the first time, so put him in a rematch. Then when he came back to HBO it was against John, which was a step up fight for john.

The times he was on the undercards of PPV's was GBP fault.

Your first sentence is just wrong and your second sentence explains why. Juarez stepped up and failed. Not that he should've been there in the first place, even before the Soto fight he looked awful winning a disgraceful hometown decision against Zahir Raheem. Then got his a** kicked by Soto. So please explain to me how it's justified this guy keeps getting HBO dates?

We don't even know if they actually cut the budget by 15 million. According to Dan Rafael, his numbers are inaccurate.

We shouldn't attack the author, but focus on his points? He makes some good points, but a lot of them are ****.

How about Dan Rafael counter with what he heard? Or is he just now starting to do some research? If he knows the number is inaccurate surely he'd have the right one, no?

Yes, we should focus on his points. Which did you disagree with?

[warp1432]

Your first sentence is just wrong and your second sentence explains why. Juarez stepped up and failed. Not that he should've been there in the first place, even before the Soto fight he looked awful winning a disgraceful hometown decision against Zahir Raheem. Then got his a** kicked by Soto. So please explain to me how it's justified this guy keeps getting HBO dates?



How about Dan Rafael counter with what he heard? Or is he just now starting to do some research? If he knows the number is inaccurate surely he'd have the right one, no?

Yes, we should focus on his points. Which did you disagree with?

Don't know why I didn't see this until now. Barrera vs Juarez seemed like a decent fight and it was good. HBO was all over Barrera's nuts and it was still a good fight. The rematch, on PPV because of the controversy and good fight the first time, was a dud and ******.

Fast forward three years later and Rocky Juarez fights Chris John on the undercard of Juan Manuel Marquez-Juan Diaz. That was a good undercard fight and it seemed like a decent fight going in too with John never really stepping up and him coming to America.

Other times seeing on PPV undercards had more to do with GBP then HBO.

How about Dan Rafael counter with what he heard? Or is he just now starting to do some research? If he knows the number is inaccurate surely he'd have the right one, no?

Yes, we should focus on his points. Which did you disagree with?

Couple of points here about Dan Rafael:

1. He briefly posted this in his chat. It's not like it was an article where he could have gone into depth more. He still had to answer other questions.

2. Who is more trust worthy, the guy who has written countless HBO-hate articles like Thomas Hauser has or the guy who, while has written negatively against HBO in points too, is connected to ESPN, who would have a much easier time in getting more trustworthy numbers. Dan's ESPN connection makes it a lot easier for him to get the facts straight. Plus Hauser's HBO bias doesn't make him credible. If he knows the numbers are inaccurate, then so what? If he has an agenda of discrediting HBO then what's it to him if he gets his numbers wrong?

As for the points I disagree with, read this post:

Does Thomas Hauser never stop bitching about HBO?

This was a terrible article. He made some good points particually the ones about Dawson Tarver 2, but HBO has stepped up this past year in bringing better quality of fights. They've made more competitive match ups and less PPV's (which is what we wanted. By the end of 09, there will have been only 3 HBO PPVs. That is nuts)

Besides bitching about HBO, he bitches about how it's golden boy's fault. But let's think about the worst HBO cards this year shall we?

Dawson-Tarver II (Promoted by Gary Shaw)
Berto-Urango (Promoted by Lou Dibella)

Those are non golden boy fighters.

Another thing he fails to accknowledge is how much better ratings were. Mosley-Margarito, Cotto-Clottey, Diaz-Malignaggi, and Marquez Diaz all did great ratings. HBO had much better match ups this year compared to last year and it paid off in the ratings.

The only thing I agree about with this article is how BAD needs to get better match making, but it's still mostly a terrible article in general. It focuses too much on the negative (which Hauser always does against HBO) and how they overpaid Dawson way to much money.

[warp1432]

You are also to hard on juarez for his poor outing against Raheem. At the time he was still a prospect. You don't throw the prospect that you've been builiding off the bandwagon just because he had a poor performance.

Another thing that got Juarez a shot against John, he beat Jorge Barrios, which wasn't a bad fight against a solid quality opponent. That's probably Juarez's best win to date and it got him a shot.