The Ring is considering Bradley vs Alexander for the Ring title

Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Dirk Diggler UK
    Deleted
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Jun 2008
    • 48836
    • 1,312
    • 693
    • 58,902

    #311
    Another one saying Alexander lost his last fight but that theres "nothing wrong" with him fighting for the vacant Ring Belt....

    This is funny to me.

    Its like saying Abraham and Ward should fight for the Ring Belt. Its just ***in ******ed.
    Last edited by Dirk Diggler UK; 01-12-2011, 12:11 AM.

    Comment

    • jrosales13
      undisputed champion
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Sep 2008
      • 32632
      • 738
      • 763
      • 40,023

      #312
      Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK
      Another one saying Alexander lost his last fight but that theres "nothing wrong" with him fighting for the vacant Ring Belt....

      This is funny to me.
      Does it or does it not say that a way you can fill a ring title vacancy is by a box off between #1 vs #2 or #1 vs #3?

      Where is Bradley and Alexander rank by the ring?

      Not the first time they filled a vacancy by #1 vs #3.

      Is funny that you don't get that. It is not like anybody is saying that the winner is going to be the lineal champion.

      Comment

      • jrosales13
        undisputed champion
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Sep 2008
        • 32632
        • 738
        • 763
        • 40,023

        #313
        Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK
        Another one saying Alexander lost his last fight but that theres "nothing wrong" with him fighting for the vacant Ring Belt....

        This is funny to me.

        Its like saying Abraham and Ward should fight for the Ring Belt. Its just ***in ******ed.
        That is fucking ******ed TBH. Does the ring rank Ward and AA at #1 and #3?

        Do you see the ****** comparison that you just made?

        Comment

        • Dirk Diggler UK
          Deleted
          Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
          • Jun 2008
          • 48836
          • 1,312
          • 693
          • 58,902

          #314
          Originally posted by jrosales13
          That is fucking ******ed TBH. Does the ring rank Ward and AA at #1 and #3?

          Do you see the ****** comparison that you just made?
          No because Abraham and Alexander both lost their last fights.

          Comment

          • Dirk Diggler UK
            Deleted
            Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
            • Jun 2008
            • 48836
            • 1,312
            • 693
            • 58,902

            #315
            Originally posted by jrosales13
            Does it or does it not say that a way you can fill a ring title vacancy is by a box off between #1 vs #2 or #1 vs #3?

            Where is Bradley and Alexander rank by the ring?

            Not the first time they filled a vacancy by #1 vs #3.

            Is funny that you don't get that. It is not like anybody is saying that the winner is going to be the lineal champion.
            This thread is debating whether its right or wrong for the Ring Belt to be up for grabs. You, like damn near everyone else, thought Alexander lost his last fight. So should he contest the vacant title in his next match? Im asking your opinion. I dont give a *** about what Rings rules may or may not be. Is it right ?

            The rules allowed Pac to fight for a title at 154, did that make it right?

            Comment

            • jrosales13
              undisputed champion
              Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
              • Sep 2008
              • 32632
              • 738
              • 763
              • 40,023

              #316
              Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK
              No because Abraham and Alexander both lost their last fights.
              Where are they rank?

              Again they fill their vacancies with a box off #1 vs #2 or in some instances #1 vs #3.

              If Alexander was ranked where AA is ranked and they did then complain all you want. But, since that is not the case there is nothing to complain about.

              Comment

              • jrosales13
                undisputed champion
                Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                • Sep 2008
                • 32632
                • 738
                • 763
                • 40,023

                #317
                Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK
                This thread is debating whether its right or wrong for the Ring Belt to be up for grabs. You, like damn near everyone else, thought Alexander lost his last fight. So should he contest the vacant title in his next match? Im asking your opinion. I dont give a *** about what Rings rules may or may not be. Is it right ?

                The rules allowed Pac to fight for a title at 154, did that make it right?
                My opinion yes it can be up for graps cuz' they're not making up new rules on the fly.

                For years they have stated this and they going by it. As long as they're consistent with it I'm fine with it. And, that is my opinion.

                But, I care more about lineage than the actually ring. The winner is not lineal champ but ring champ by their rules I have absolutely no problem with it.

                Comment

                • JDezi4
                  Undisputed Champion
                  Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                  • Jul 2010
                  • 3822
                  • 95
                  • 194
                  • 10,052

                  #318
                  Originally posted by irish lullaby
                  for those fussing about whether khan or alexander should be ranked #2 or #3, it really is irrelevant as the ring champion can also be determined by a fight between #1 and #3.


                  championship vacancies can be filled by winning a box-off between the ring's number-one and number-two contenders, or, in certain instances, a box-off between our number-one and number-three contenders.
                  ding ding ding ding ding

                  Comment

                  • Dirk Diggler UK
                    Deleted
                    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                    • Jun 2008
                    • 48836
                    • 1,312
                    • 693
                    • 58,902

                    #319
                    Originally posted by jrosales13
                    My opinion yes it can be up for graps cuz' they're not making up new rules on the fly.

                    For years they have stated this and they going by it. As long as they're consistent with it I'm fine with it. And, that is my opinion.

                    But, I care more about lineage than the actually ring. The winner is not lineal champ but ring champ by their rules I have absolutely no problem with it.
                    So in your opinion a guy who lost his last fight deserves to fight for the vacant Ring Belt. Ok....cool.

                    Comment

                    • JDezi4
                      Undisputed Champion
                      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                      • Jul 2010
                      • 3822
                      • 95
                      • 194
                      • 10,052

                      #320
                      Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK
                      So in your opinion a guy who lost his last fight deserves to fight for the vacant Ring Belt. Ok....cool.
                      Let's pay attention to FACT

                      Alexander is undefeated
                      Alexander did NOT lose his last fight (not officially)
                      Therefore, who cares. There's nothing u can say. Ur allowed to have ur opinion, but what r u even debating anymore?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP