Should Froch vs. Groves be on PPV in the UK?

[LacedUp]

Yea, let's forget about 'exposure' for a second and look at where the two fighters are at in their careers.

Yes, let's do that. Carl Froch is coming off the biggest win of his career (more or less), a huge PPV event that sold out in 3 hours. Groves is undefeated and looked awesome in his last fight on the undercard and has previously come out victorious in what was also a big fight vs James Degale.

So both are at a very high point in their careers. I don't see the problem.

[D-MiZe]

Yes, let's do that. Carl Froch is coming off the biggest win of his career (more or less), a huge PPV event that sold out in 3 hours. Groves is undefeated and looked awesome in his last fight on the undercard and has previously come out victorious in what was also a big fight vs James Degale.

So both are at a very high point in their careers. I don't see the problem.

You must be ignorant to have written that and not even realise you've proven my point.

Groves is very high domestically, Froch is at the top on the world level - big difference.

[LacedUp]

You must be ignorant to have written that and not even realise you've proven my point.

Groves is very high domestically, Froch is at the top on the world level - big difference.

So your point is, because two fighters are on different stages of their careers it's not PPV worthy? You must be ignorant if you believe that.

Froch is becoming a solid name in British sports that alone drags a potential PPV fight with it. When it's against a young, hungry guy like Groves who's been fighting on PPV himself and on Sky, then it is justified to put it on ppv.

But I guess I won't see you here after the fight then. Fantastic.

[IronDanHamza]

I don't really mind.

If it's on PPV I will go and watch it at a pub or something.

[P4P_No1]

Not a PPV event in my mind.

Groves just isn't at that level that he deserves to be headlining a PPV. He's not that big a name and his level of competition isn't that great either.

I don't really see how people can justify this being a PPV.

Either way I won't be paying for the fight, even if the undercard is stacked, so it doesn't bother me too much but no way in hell this should be a PPV event.

[D-MiZe]

So your point is, because two fighters are on different stages of their careers it's not PPV worthy? You must be ignorant if you believe that.

Froch is becoming a solid name in British sports that alone drags a potential PPV fight with it. When it's against a young, hungry guy like Groves who's been fighting on PPV himself and on Sky, then it is justified to put it on ppv.

But I guess I won't see you here after the fight then. Fantastic.

It's painfully obvious that it's exposure that sells PPV events but there ain't no one wanting to see Shiming-Estrada. Fuck sake, Haye-Harrison was PPV.

It can be justified when either the undercard features quality bouts or the main event is a huge occasion - neither of them apply to Groves-Froch. Justifying it by saying 'oh but people know who he is' is a bitch move and only supports the greedy ****s who ruin this sport.

[Rossman]

If there was a very solid undercard they could do it.

[LacedUp]

It's painfully obvious that it's exposure that sells PPV events but there ain't no one wanting to see Shiming-Estrada. Fuck sake, Haye-Harrison was PPV.

It can be justified when either the undercard features quality bouts or the main event is a huge occasion - neither of them apply to Groves-Froch. Justifying it by saying 'oh but people know who he is' is a bitch move and only supports the greedy ****s who ruin this sport.

Yes, but we are talking from a business perspective, not whether or not I personally see it as being a huge event.

Also, I just think people are going too much into whether it's PPV or not. Boxing is an event sports, and worse fights than Froch-Groves has been on PPV.

Of course, if it was the actual quality of the fight, then more domestic fights should be on PPV. Mattews-Crolla were some great fights for example. But they lack the exposure or just general intrigue for it to become a ppv fight.

[P4P_No1]

Yes, but we are talking from a business perspective, not whether or not I personally see it as being a huge event.

Also, I just think people are going too much into whether it's PPV or not. Boxing is an event sports, and worse fights than Froch-Groves has been on PPV.

Of course, if it was the actual quality of the fight, then more domestic fights should be on PPV. Mattews-Crolla were some great fights for example. But they lack the exposure or just general intrigue for it to become a ppv fight.

You think there's enough general intrigue for this to be a PPV fight?

Gotta disagree with you on that one buddy.

[IronDanHamza]

Yes, but we are talking from a business perspective, not whether or not I personally see it as being a huge event.

Also, I just think people are going too much into whether it's PPV or not. Boxing is an event sports, and worse fights than Froch-Groves has been on PPV.

Of course, if it was the actual quality of the fight, then more domestic fights should be on PPV. Mattews-Crolla were some great fights for example. But they lack the exposure or just general intrigue for it to become a ppv fight.

Groves isn't really that known in the UK though.