Originally posted by Grandmarshall
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Is Pacquiao bad for boxing?
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Grandmarshall View PostSince it is said that Pacquiao cherry picks opponents, weight drains them, fights past their prime fighters, is on PEDs, picks up meaningless titles, is a farce. So the question has to be asked, "Is Pacquiao bad for boxing?" Meaning if there was not a Manny Pacquiao, would the sport be better overall.
Discuss.
and its arum that stipulates all that in the contract
If pac was really interesting in fighting the best he would tell uncle bob
to stop with it or tell him straight out
this is who i want to fight period!
make it happen
how can the Number 1 P4P fighter be bad for boxing
his opponents may be cherry picked but he always gives us our $ worth
Comment
-
Originally posted by Grandmarshall View PostSince it is said that Pacquiao cherry picks opponents, weight drains them, fights past their prime fighters, is on PEDs, picks up meaningless titles, is a farce. So the question has to be asked, "Is Pacquiao bad for boxing?" Meaning if there was not a Manny Pacquiao, would the sport be better overall.
Discuss.
Pac makes 20 mill per fight, his opponents all make million dollar paydays. UFC fighters make pennies in comparison so of course they can fight any guy out there because the overhead is nothing to what it is in boxing. Only certain opponents can bring in the revenue to sustain the boxers' wages. They either have to be giant names or under the same promo company as to minimize the overhead......boxing is a business and a sport, it is probably pretty hard to find a good mix of the 2.
Comment
-
Hate it or love it that's how it is with everybody in boxing, football and so on.
Manny Pacquiao was 1st criticized for weight draining opponents, then he was on something, now he is cherry picking.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by -MAKAVELLI- View Postwith that criteria, you can pretty much make a case for most of the fighters in boxing
seriously, the people that voted that he is bad for the sport have issues or are just noobs
Comment
-
Originally posted by Saddlebred View PostI do think greater than 90% of boxers are on PEDs. I voted he is bad because I'm sick of his ******ed fanbase talking down every other fighter to lace them up because they think it makes him look better.
so he's bad because be brought a fanbase that all of a sudden has an interest in the sport?
and just because a couple of dumb mother****ers said that, it means they speak for that entire fanbase?
you're gonna take that one issue and make it outweigh the positive impact he's had for the sport?
really?
counseling maing....get some
Comment
-
um... ts you are a ****ing dumb*ss. pacquiao pretty much saved boxing. mma was taking over a few years ago it seemed. as far as casual fans. pacquiao is keeping boxing alive.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bayareamike View Postum... ts you are a ****ing dumb*ss. pacquiao pretty much saved boxing. mma was taking over a few years ago it seemed. as far as casual fans. pacquiao is keeping boxing alive.
that even includes any news references to boxing day...I would add pugilism but I don't think that would help much lolLast edited by Saddlebred; 04-28-2011, 03:42 PM.
Comment
Comment