Did Mayweather Harm or Help the sport of boxing

[IronDanHamza]

You're right. I was thinking about not giving him a title shot but mistook it for not fighting him.

You were right originally.

He was reluctant to give him a rematch when it was a lot bigger and Langford was a legitimate heavyweight.

"Ducked" you could say is a strong word but he didn't give him the rematch and the people wanted it.

[Xi_]

Most of the posters itt complaining about Floyd's career are GGG fanboys.....they stan a man that has not taken a 1/10 the risk in his career that Floyd has lmao.

[SUBZER0ED]

How do you know this? You are making silly assumptions rather than the obvious.

You are suggesting that fans were motivated more by wanting to see him lose than actually liking him.

No other time in the sport, except Jack Johnson, did people watch to see a guy lose. Then it was because Jack was black.

Why doesn't this phenomenon work with other guys that have tried it?

mocking him after does not prove they purchased to see him lose.

Dude, even you know your argument has no validity.

Come on Dunn, you know plenty of people tuned in to see Mayweather lose. Many paid to see him lose live at the arenas & on PPV to Pacquiao, Maidana & Canelo. Did you not hear all of the cheering when it even looked like Either Pacquiao, Canelo or Maidana landed on Floyd? How about all of the boos for Floyd during those fights?

[The Big Dunn]

These statements seem a lot more common now a days then before. Maybe its the media, maybe the game changed and people figured out how to play hard ball to maximize profit. Imagine if Ali and Frazier realized how much more money the can make by fighting 5 years from now... tell me that is healthy for the sport.

Whatever the reasons were that the fighters chose to fight whether they were broke or not isn't my point, what i am saying that at the end of the day if Ali, Tyson and all those guys didn't exist the sport would be less than what it is today. Ask yourself (seriously), if i can remove one fighter from the history of the sport... would it be Ali or Floyd... would it be Tyson or Floyd, would it be SRL or Floyd. damn it Dunn you made me go off topic but still an interesting proposition.

When i say further the sport i mean literally the sport will be more thriving because of them and that could mean but isn't limited to 1) inspiring others to enter the sport 2) generate great memories for fans of the sport 3) inspire fighters 4) increase popularity of the sport (at the current time and for the future) 5) leading by example inside and outside the ring 6) furthering sportsmanship and warrior mentality (to me this is important, might not be to everyone) etc.

That was Bob arum, place blame where it lies.

When i say further the sport i mean literally the sport will be more thriving because of them and that could mean but isn't limited to 1) inspiring others to enter the sport 2) generate great memories for fans of the sport 3) inspire fighters 4) increase popularity of the sport (at the current time and for the future) 5) leading by example inside and outside the ring 6) furthering sportsmanship and warrior mentality (to me this is important, might not be to everyone) etc.

1. how do you know floyd hasn't done this? think for a second. your argument is Floyd has made it popular to get paid for doing nothing. Now you are suggesting this IA KEEPING PEOPLE OUT OF BOXING. seriously?

2. Seriously, great memories. A memory is not something everyone shares dude. You think people do not remeber Hatton, gatti, corrales? Does every fighter have to have an ali level memory FFS.

3. you say floyd is doing this, then you say he isn't. which is it?

4. I think its abudantly clear he has done that.

5. Leading by example- WTF?

6. WTF does this even mean? It's like you tried to create something specifically to hold it against Floyd. was sweet pea bad for the sport because he was defensive? was duran bad for the sport because he showed poor sportsmanship and quit? was ali bad for the sport the way he degraded his opponents.

Seriously WTF is wrong with you?

Here's one-you don't write about any of the guys you listed other than Floyd. Why is that?

[VERSION1 (V1)]

People were buying Pacquiao's fights.



Rubbish.




Yeah, you would going to hold his first PPV against him, which was against a nobody, huh? lol



If nobody gave a darn about the TV, then they wouldn't have even bothered to put him on PPV.

As what we see on TV very often, Golovkin is a KO artist and many fans (especially casuals) love KOs. He's also willing take one to land one and he's undefeated.



Which is why they thought Guerrero had a chance to win.



Based on what they saw in the Cotto fight, you clown.



For what reason? Can you tell me?

pac ppv numbers went down just like floyds so why did pac numbers go down

[The Big Dunn]

Come on Dunn, you know plenty of people tuned in to see Mayweather lose. Many paid to see him lose live at the arenas & on PPV to Pacquiao, Maidana & Canelo. Did you not hear all of the cheering when it even looked like Either Pacquiao, Canelo or Maidana landed on Floyd? How about all of the boos for Floyd during those fights?

No I don't and its utterly ******ed when you think about it.

The same people arguing this argue Floyd never took risks. So if he never took risks, why the **** would you then buy a fight thinking he will lose if you already think its an easy fight without risk?

see, some posters are just so ****** that they contradict their own points because they try to fit everything individually into one narrative when that isn't the case.

Booing for example-they booed the national anthem and floyd during the Hatton fight because it was a pro hatton crowd in attendance. Did the Hattonfans wnat floyd to lose -pf course. Did the floyd in attendance come there for that-of course not.

[GrandpaBernard]

The amount of growth (measured through revenue generated) Floyd is responsible for is very impressive when you take into account that:

1) Boxing is a niche underground sport

2) Floyd doesn't have a fighting style that caters to ignorant civilians


He was also a pioneer in how boxing is promoted. The 24/7 Boxing Reality Show was Floyd's idea.

Floyd revolutionized drug testing in boxing.

He broke the glass ceiling and showed that defensive wizards can break into mainstream consciousness to become superstars.

And lastly he reminded the ever foolish public that great fighters can retire undefeated.

[Mr. Punch-Out!!]

How do you know this? You are making silly assumptions rather than the obvious.

You are suggesting that fans were motivated more by wanting to see him lose than actually liking him.

No other time in the sport, except Jack Johnson, did people watch to see a guy lose. Then it was because Jack was black.

Why doesn't this phenomenon work with other guys that have tried it?

mocking him after does not prove they purchased to see him lose.

Dude, even you know your argument has no validity.

Way to change your argument; you were talking about how fans gravitate to people like that and I pointed out how they still get hate for that. Ronda Rousey is another example of that.

If you want to talk about why people buy his fights, it's because Conor can back up his talk with entertaining fights. Like I said earlier, it's about giving people their money's worth. This doesn't change the fact that people want to see him lose. I've never heard anybody say they're a fan of his trash talk but the fact that his fights are entertaining and memorable is why he's more appreciated compared to somebody who trash talks and then bore people to decision wins.

[MrRolltide91]

That was Bob arum, place blame where it lies.

When i say further the sport i mean literally the sport will be more thriving because of them and that could mean but isn't limited to 1) inspiring others to enter the sport 2) generate great memories for fans of the sport 3) inspire fighters 4) increase popularity of the sport (at the current time and for the future) 5) leading by example inside and outside the ring 6) furthering sportsmanship and warrior mentality (to me this is important, might not be to everyone) etc.

1. how do you know floyd hasn't done this? think for a second. your argument is Floyd has made it popular to get paid for doing nothing. Now you are suggesting this IA KEEPING PEOPLE OUT OF BOXING. seriously?

2. Seriously, great memories. A memory is not something everyone shares dude. You think people do not remeber Hatton, gatti, corrales? Does every fighter have to have an ali level memory FFS.

3. you say floyd is doing this, then you say he isn't. which is it?

4. I think its abudantly clear he has done that.

5. Leading by example- WTF?

6. WTF does this even mean? It's like you tried to create something specifically to hold it against Floyd. was sweet pea bad for the sport because he was defensive? was duran bad for the sport because he showed poor sportsmanship and quit? was ali bad for the sport the way he degraded his opponents.

Seriously WTF is wrong with you?

Here's one-you don't write about any of the guys you listed other than Floyd. Why is that?

Was tyson bad for the sport when he bit off holyfield ear?

[Razcal26]

The same people arguing this argue Floyd never took risks. So if he never took risks, why the **** would you then buy a fight thinking he will lose if you already think its an easy fight without risk?

This right here is the crux of the ******ity that plagues Boxing.

Green K.