I Don't Get It.....

[Clyde Barrow]

that's fine.


but don't say it's better for the sport b/c there will be more action.

you guys on here really underestimate the intelligence of the general public. anybody can get in the ring and throw tons of punches, and get hit in the process, but there are fans of the sport that respect skills too. if it was all about "action," and not about "technical skill," mayweather honestly wouldn't draw as much as he does.

so if you're a fan of two fighters getting in there "slugging it out," then say YOU'D rather see pacquiao-mosley, but its ridiculous to state that fight is better for the sport, when everybody is clamoring for something else....

just keep it real.

I am being real mate. Your thread is addressing those fight fans, including me, who'd prefer Pac-Shane. I did say I want Pac-Shane more. I didn't say "everybody" else does. I don't care about everybody else. If I'm going to dedicate my night to being entertained by boxing, I trust Pac-Shane to deliver more than Pac-PBF.

I keep seeing the other PBF fans crying their eyes out when anybody dares adopt a stance that doesn't support PBF's agenda 110%. It's rubbish. The "general public" doesn't demand a damn thing. They watch whatever the TV tells them to watch. Pac-PBF has been trumpeted loudly, so they'd buy it. If Pac-Shane was hyped up greatly, then they'd buy that. Don't use casual fans as a gauge to what diehard fight fans think mate.

[sigrab]

your argument is ridiculous.


we can agree that any fight that does a million or more ppv buys is a success, since MOST fights don't come close to that, right?


so your argument, is that millions of ppl pay money to watch floyd fight, hoping he'll get KTFO? you actually thought JMM had a chance to KO floyd? a big enough chance to pay $50 for that fight?

maybe YOU did....but i'd bet the vast majority of ppl who either ordered that fight on ppv, or went into a theater to watch it, did so b/c they respect the dude's skills.

but that's my opinion.

Nowhere in my post did I mention that Floyd isn't skillful. It would be foolish to say that.

My point is, if you play the bad guy role enough times, you become the bad guy.

I believe more ppl wanted to see JMM win that fight.

JMM had a chance and ppl were hoping he'd pull it off.

I know I did.

If you're familiar with the WWE, you'd know that a lot of it's fans come mainly to see the bad guys.

[FLY TY]

now you are clearly overestimating the intelligence of the general public.
its not about skill at all. go to a bar when a fight is on and try to talk about the technical aspects about boxing.
violence = entertainment
violence = lowest common denominator
violence = mass appeal

mayweather doesnt sell becuz of his technical skill, he sells becuz of his mouth and persona.

your argument is so flawed, i don't know where to begin.....

boxing is a VIOLENT sport, period....

also, you think the only ppl that watch ppv's do so in bars?

when numbers for a ppv come out, whether it's a million, or 300,000, you think all those numbers counted come from bars?

according to many of you, mayweather is one of the most "boring" boxers alive. he didn't just turn that way. if everybody was as turned off by his fights, and only wanted to hear him run his mouth, it seems to me that they'd watch the 24/7's or the pre-fight press conferences, get their fix, and skip out on the fight itself.

there's gotta be a reason ppl pay for his fights.....then it's the excuse that ppl only pay to see him lose....but from what i understand, he only cherry-picks opponents that have NO CHANCE at beating him. if that's true, why throw down for a fight to see a guy lose, when he has no chance at losing?

it's either that, or many ppl in the general public, appreciate skills....you tell me which argument makes more sense.


like i said, you dudes prefer brawls, so if pacquiao-mosley is the fight YOU want to see, say that.

but saying that fight is better for the sport, when about 3 million other ppl, besides you dudes on this site, are calling for another fight, sounds just as ridiculous as saying most ppl tune in to see floyd lose.....even tho he only picks guys that can't beat him.

[Siggy]

your argument is so flawed, i don't know where to begin.....

boxing is a VIOLENT sport, period....

also, you think the only ppl that watch ppv's do so in bars?

when numbers for a ppv come out, whether it's a million, or 300,000, you think all those numbers counted come from bars?

according to many of you, mayweather is one of the most "boring" boxers alive. he didn't just turn that way. if everybody was as turned off by his fights, and only wanted to hear him run his mouth, it seems to me that they'd watch the 24/7's or the pre-fight press conferences, get their fix, and skip out on the fight itself.

there's gotta be a reason ppl pay for his fights.....then it's the excuse that ppl only pay to see him lose....but from what i understand, he only cherry-picks opponents that have NO CHANCE at beating him. if that's true, why throw down for a fight to see a guy lose, when he has no chance at losing?

it's either that, or many ppl in the general public, appreciate skills....you tell me which argument makes more sense.


like i said, you dudes prefer brawls, so if pacquiao-mosley is the fight YOU want to see, say that.

but saying that fight is better for the sport, when about 3 million other ppl, besides you dudes on this site, are calling for another fight, sounds just as ridiculous as saying most ppl tune in to see floyd lose.....even tho he only picks guys that can't beat him.

-yes, boxing is a violent sport, but some fights are more violent than others. the more violent, the better for the casual fan.

-no. if you have the chance go watch a fight in a bar so you can try to have a discussion with someone you dont know about the technical aspects of boxing. try it

-people tune to see floyd lose...among other reasons, but not becuz he is an entertaining fighter.

-the casual fan doesnt know the odds of a fighter losing. they usually dont know sht about boxing or the individual fighters.

-the general public does not appreciate skill. they want to be entertained. lateral movement, footwork and controlling distance with your feet is not entertaining to the casual fan. if you disagree you're just fooling yourself.

-pac/mosley WOULD be better for the sport becuz it would convert more fans from casual to possibly hardcore, whereas if they saw another mayweather/DLH they would remain casual fans or turn away from the sport altogether.

[FLY TY]

I am being real mate. Your thread is addressing those fight fans, including me, who'd prefer Pac-Shane. I did say I want Pac-Shane more. I didn't say "everybody" else does. I don't care about everybody else. If I'm going to dedicate my night to being entertained by boxing, I trust Pac-Shane to deliver more than Pac-PBF.

I keep seeing the other PBF fans crying their eyes out when anybody dares adopt a stance that doesn't support PBF's agenda 110%. It's rubbish. The "general public" doesn't demand a damn thing. They watch whatever the TV tells them to watch. Pac-PBF has been trumpeted loudly, so they'd buy it. If Pac-Shane was hyped up greatly, then they'd buy that. Don't use casual fans as a gauge to what diehard fight fans think mate.

the casual fans ARE the guage.....whether you like it or not, the "casuals" are the ones that carry any industry. boxing "die hards" only number so much.

judging by your posts, the casual fan is a robot, and does whatever it is told....if that's the case, more fights than just the ones that contain mayweather or pacquiao would do the numbers they do.

fact is diehards are gonna be around regardless.....things that are marketed, are done for whom? you think shows such as 24/7 were created to please "die hards?"


there's a reason HBO didn't waste time scheduling a 24/7 for pacquiao-clottey....it wasn't worth it. that fight was a joke and they knew it.

mayweather-mosley will have a 24/7. why? b/c hbo feels it will actually turn a decent profit by marketing at least a semi-interesting fight to the casual fans of the sport.....the die hards will be there.

ppl aren't gonna buy your product, if they're not pleased with it, so when you insinuate casual fans are brainless and do whatever they're told, my only response is that there's a reason some things are marketed and promoted widely, and others are not. you gotta give the ppl what they want, not what you think they want....and if it was up to you guys, you'd be giving the ppl what you want them to have, not what they want.

Nowhere in my post did I mention that Floyd isn't skillful. It would be foolish to say that.

My point is, if you play the bad guy role enough times, you become the bad guy.

I believe more ppl wanted to see JMM win that fight.

JMM had a chance and ppl were hoping he'd pull it off.

I know I did.

If you're familiar with the WWE, you'd know that a lot of it's fans come mainly to see the bad guys.

you wanted floyd to lose, b/c you're not a fan. dont make the mistake by trying to speak for "most" ppl....

i watched mayweather-marquez in a movie theater, b.c i wanted to see what the experience would be like. i was in miami, and miami is basically "latin america." i'll tell you one thing, the **** was packed, and mostly everybody in that ***** was cheering for floyd, not marquez.

what you don't understand, is that that "bad guy" persona floyd puts on, is just to give ppl who are actually "clueless" a reason to order the fight. floyd hasn't just burst onto the scene....ppl who didn't like him before, really don't like him now. ppl that did, look at the "bad guy" thing and laugh, b/c we realize it's just for show.

and i don't pay attention to WWE anymore, that **** is too "cartoony" nowadays......but it's definitely b.s. to say ppl tune in for the "bad guys."

name the most popular wrestlers in history, and you tell me what they spent most of their career doing....good guy or heel?

[FLY TY]

-yes, boxing is a violent sport, but some fights are more violent than others. the more violent, the better for the casual fan.

-no. if you have the chance go watch a fight in a bar so you can try to have a discussion with someone you dont know about the technical aspects of boxing. try it

-people tune to see floyd lose...among other reasons, but not becuz he is an entertaining fighter.

-the casual fan doesnt know the odds of a fighter losing. they usually dont know sht about boxing or the individual fighters.

-the general public does not appreciate skill. they want to be entertained. lateral movement, footwork and controlling distance with your feet is not entertaining to the casual fan. if you disagree you're just fooling yourself.

-pac/mosley WOULD be better for the sport becuz it would convert more fans from casual to possibly hardcore, whereas if they saw another mayweather/DLH they would remain casual fans or turn away from the sport altogether.

there is no such thing as "converting" a causal fan into a hardcore fan, and i can assure you, if there was, ONE FIGHT wouldn't do the trick.

you seem to be confused about what a "casual" fan and what a hardcore fan actually is.

casual fans are not "clueless," and blood-thirsty, as you believe, but instead of being excited everytime there's a boxing after dark card on HBO, most casual fans find a fighter or 2 that they like, and they pay attention when their favorites fight. hardcore fans are looking at showtime and hbo every saturday, and watching espn 2 nights during the week.

the casual fan doesn't care about that ****, which is why those things aren't marketed on the whole.


if all casual fans wanted was action, why aren't the Paul Williams' and the Antonio Margarito's and the Ricardo Mayorga's the money makers in the sport?

come on dude.

some of the so-called "hard core" fans, seem to be the most clueless to me....

go to the mall, and ask random ppl what boxing fight they want to see, and what fight they'd be more excited about; mayweather-pacquiao or mosley-pacquiao?


then you tell me what they say.....

[GT-R]

why do people say, "it's more beneficial to the sport," if mosley beats floyd?


keep it real, and say it's more beneficial to mosley fans and pacquiao fans.


mayweather-pacquiao is the fight EVERYONE wants to see, including the casuals, and those that don't follow the sport.....meaning no other boxing match would generate as much interest.

fact is, i've heard noone, but the dummies on this site, calling for mosley-pacquiao instead of mayweather-pacquiao, so how is that "more beneficial" to the sport of boxing?

money wise pac-floyd is better.
quality entertainment is pac-mosley.

[FLY TY]

money wise pac-floyd is better.
quality entertainment is pac-mosley.

quality entertainment is situational.....

if you want to see 2 guys beat the **** outta each other, than pacquiao-mosley is quality entertainment to you.


however, if you want to see the 2 best fighters, with 2 completely different styles, and see who is able to inflict their will on the other, then i beg to differ what quality entertainment is.....


by the way, there's a reason why mayweather-pacquiao is better money-wise.






that's b/c more ppl want to see it. it's better for the sport.



pacquiao-mosley is better for about 60 ppl on boxingscene.

[DR.ORGYY]

mosley-pac is more beneficial in the way of bringing in new fans to the sport. Mayweather-pac is beneficial for the fans that know boxing and know who these guys really are.

ahahah that sig is a good one.......

[zero188]

i hope you guys realize the only people calling for this fight are the people who want to see a mosley left hook take pacs head off.he is the only person capable of koing pac.