No. No more belts. We already have 4 recognized legitimate championship titles, and that's too many.
PBC trying to get their own set of belts sanctioned, good or bad idea?
Collapse
-
Comment
-
Puh-lese man. Andy Lee was brought on bc he was already champ and Haymon tried to get his guy the belt back. Degale was the same thing bc Haymon's guy was mandatory for a belt (he'll never be back). And DeMarco and Burns were brought in to be beat by Haymon guys. I'll give you that we may on occasion get an upset and a non-Haymon guy will win the PBC belt. But if this belt meant anything in boxing they will only hold it until he fights and loses to another Haymon guy. And it would only be an upset situation, a favorite like Terence Crawford will not be on the network to win a belt from Broner and then go defend it as he pleases for another promoter.Comment
-
Comment
-
But it's still under the sport of boxing so how is adding more belts to an already saturated sport going to be less confusing?Comment
-
pbc is like Major Legue Soccer trying to make casuals believe that their champion is the "world champion"..Comment
-
1 belt eliminates duckingComment
-
This isn't for once in a decade stars like Cotto, Canelo, Pac and Floyd. This is for guys like Thurman, Porter, Garcia, etc. who are decent fighters that are having a difficult time filling venues and becoming mainstream.Comment
Comment