Why Isn't Crawford vs. Postol a PPV Worthy Fight?

[techliam]

I made an exception for Canelo/Lara. You can consider Pac/Bradley a 1/2 I guess but that's more about what the other fighters not doing anything than Pac and Bradley knocking off numerous top welterweight contenders.

Whilst true, i'm not sure why anyone would remove recognition of a fighter based on the lack of other fighters to do anything... its their own fault. That scenario involves conjecture in that we don't actually know how good Brook, Thurman etc are because they've yet to do anything relevant to the top of the division, at least, not at the level Bradley and Manny have.

Manny and Bradley only filled the vacant lineal, and pretty much consensus spot for the top dog at Welterweight which was left behind by Mayweather. Boxing has an absurd but necessary subjectivity to it. People wouldn't shun this had they not fought before, a logic quite hard to qualify entirely. Crawford/Beltran was an even worse scenario in that Vasquez was removed from the frame due to the universally recognised travesty with Bey. Like I said above though, it was only the RING who didn't recognise the fight.

It was a PPV fight because of Manny, not because of them being the two best in the division at the time. I have a feeling it'd be a PPV event even if the hardcore fans shaped the current PPV zeitgeist, and such overlaps are welcome and somewhat reassuring in some sense..

[al-Xander]

Let's not beat around the bush. Everyone in the business is hurting. Fights have become increasingly expensive to produce. Fighters want astronomical sums when they're asked to fight top fighters. Same fighters who they knew can't draw flies.

What I see happening is that those behind the business are trying to come up with solutions. PPV used to be the last resort for HBO, especially for fights they knew can't draw flies. And it seems it's now the only way to make meaningful fights happen.

Which is probably why Haymon would rather do mismatched fights where the B-side take significantly less with no qualms.

[-PBP-]

Whilst true, i'm not sure why anyone would remove recognition of a fighter based on the lack of other fighters to do anything... its their own fault. That scenario involves conjecture in that we don't actually know how good Brook, Thurman etc are because they've yet to do anything relevant to the top of the division, at least, not at the level Bradley and Manny have.

Manny and Bradley only filled the vacant lineal, and pretty much consensus spot for the top dog at Welterweight which was left behind by Mayweather. Boxing has an absurd but necessary subjectivity to it. People wouldn't shun this had they not fought before, a logic quite hard to qualify entirely. Crawford/Beltran was an even worse scenario in that Vasquez was removed from the frame due to the universally recognised travesty with Bey. Like I said above though, it was only the RING who didn't recognise the fight.

It was a PPV fight because of Manny, not because of them being the two best in the division at the time. I have a feeling it'd be a PPV event even if the hardcore fans shaped the current PPV zeitgeist, and such overlaps are welcome and somewhat reassuring in some sense..

Bradley/Pacquiao part 2 was accepted by everybody because of how good Bradley looked against Marquez. After "losing" to Pacquiao, he bounced back and convincingly beat the guy that put Pacquiao to sleep. That was a necessary fight.

I wouldn't have had a problem with the trilogy had Bradley beaten a Brook, Thurman, Porter, Khan, etc. type but it just seems like Bradley and Pac just pass that WBO title back and forth because Top Rank has them in their pocket.

With that said, whether or not it should be recognized as a 1/2 this is still a PPV worthy fight because it's a fight between 2 elite welterweights. When the best fight the best, fans should have no problem paying for it. I think we've become to accustomed to basing our decisions on what casuals want when we are the one's that know what fights need to be made in what weight classes.

[_original_]

I think we all mean it's not PPV worthy as in it's gonna bomb at the box office. Competitive fights that need to happen aren't always big sellers if neither guy has that superstar quality.

[Larry the boss]

Today's boxing fan be like:

"Fighters today are divas. They don't fight anybody"

"He ducking doe"

"Boxing is dead. No good fights are being made."

"UFC has passed boxing. The best actually fight the best."

"Boxers are cherrypickers. They want the lowest risk for the highest amount of money."

Yet...380,000 fans purchased May/Berto, 400K purchased Pac/Algieri, 800K watched Floyd rematch Maidana, 350K watched Canelo/Angulo, and 500K watched Pac fight Bradley for a 3rd time.

Only the Pac/Bradley triology was a fight between two top 5 contenders in a division. What's wrong with this picture?

Shouldn't the best matchups be on PPV and the mismatches be on free TV? Since 2008, these are the only PPV fights that involved a unanimous 1 vs. 2 matchup in a division:

1. Mayweather vs. Canelo
2. Canelo vs. Lara
3. Mayweather vs. Pacquiao

Is this proof that boxing fans don't care about the best fighting the best but have a casual side of them that just cares about the big names?

Money was shelled out for mismatch after mismatch, year after year, but when we actually get a fight worth watching it's time to watch your budget?

i see what you did there....lol...to answer the thread...because neither are stars at all and it would not even do 100k

[Larry the boss]

Which is the more competitive fight? Canelo/Khan or this?

Do you buy PPVs for the names or the matchups?

Who the hell is buying Canelo/Khan??lol

[-Kev-]

They don't have hugely recognizable names on their resumes.

[Pigeons]

Not necessarily. I'm a Washington Wizards fan living vin Miami. I can't watch Wizards games without league pass. I can't watch Thursday night Football without paying for NFL network. I can't watch Jags games without Sunday ticket for direct TV.

If I want to see the games I want to see, I have to come out of pocket.

OK I'll give you that, but NBA league pass is $50 and you get access to every team for every game. Crawford-Postol is $60-70 for one fight and a likely ****ty undercard.

Thursday Night Football is simulcast on CBS.

Consider it a blessing you can't watch the Jaguars.

[al-Xander]

**** the casuals...I have no problem paying for elite competitive fights like this one.

It'll be the only truly competitive fight on ppv so far this year.

You won't even have a forum like this if there are no casuals, who comprised 95% of the paying public. Most hardcores just stream fights for free.

[Pigeons]

They don't have hugely recognizable names on their resumes.

Add in the fact that Crawford's last fight drew 900K viewers and Postol's last fight drew 600K viewers.

I'm a big Crawford fan, but I hope that PPV does like 25K PPV buys. I want everyone to lose so much money they never even consider something so preposterous again.

Because trust me, if this works, every decent fight will be on PPV.