The donkeys that defended "biznis" decisions as a way of ducking fights killed boxing

[Pac=Duran]

Marketing people for networks and boxing management companies read this board you know and when the "biznis men" started making excuses for the behaviour of guys like Adonis Stevenson and Perter Quillin, then it was open season.

Boxing is in an absolutely shocking state right now.

[Larry the boss]

Boxing has always been about "BIZNESS DECISIONS"...not sure why people act like this is something new..

[Outwest Exp 355]

Oh great Casualfans twin is back.

[Johnwoo8686]

Marketing people for networks and boxing management companies read this board you know and when the "biznis men" started making excuses for the behaviour of guys like Adonis Stevenson and Perter Quillin, then it was open season.

Boxing is in an absolutely shocking state right now.

Yeah the guy in your username is returning as a "biznis" decision

[CaneloMaidana]

Like Manny refusing to fight Crawford, hypocrite.

[NaijaD]

Most people only complain about "Bizniz" decisions when it concerns a fighter they don't like. But the truth is every fight is a business decision, the problem with boxing today is that a lot of the time the best fights are not necessarily the most financially rewarding especially when the weighed up against the risk.... to be succinct: fighters get paid too much for walkover fights against over-matched opposition.

In the previous eras, when you fought bums you made bum money. I remember Nigel Benn talking about his first fight with Eubank on ring side, He said he got paid £400,000 pounds and for his next fight after that he got paid £35,000 against a stiff. In this era that wouldn't happen... take Broner for example, he pretty much gets million dollar paydays regardless of the level of opposition. Floyd and Pac could afford not to fight each other because they were making millions upon millions fighting everyone but each other, In previous years they would have fought much sooner because the fight between the 2 of them would have been far more lucrative than any other option. Networks would have probably put more pressure on them because of this.

That is the problem, OP is slightly misguided.... A lot of the great fights that happened in the yesteryears of boxing would not happen today because of this current flawed model. People often think it's fighter mentalities that have changed but it's not, fighters always fought to get paid but now they don't have to take the biggest challenges to do so.

[CaneloMaidana]

Most people only complain about "Bizniz" decisions when it concerns a fighter they don't like. But the truth is every fight is a business decision, the problem with boxing today is that a lot of the time the best fights are not necessarily the most financially rewarding especially when the weighed up against the risk.... to be succinct: fighters get paid too much for walkover fights against over-matched opposition.

In the previous eras, when you fought bums you made bum money. I remember Nigel Benn talking about his first fight with Eubank on ring side, He said he got paid £400,000 pounds and for his next fight after that he got paid £35,000 against a stiff. In this era that wouldn't happen... take Broner for example, he pretty much gets million dollar paydays regardless of the level of opposition. Floyd and Pac could afford not to fight each other because they were making millions upon millions fighting everyone but each other, In previous years they would have fought much sooner because the fight between the 2 of them would have been far more lucrative than any other option. Networks would have probably put more pressure on them because of this.

That is the problem, OP is slightly misguided.... A lot of the great fights that happened in the yesteryears of boxing would not happen today because of this current flawed model. People often think it's fighter mentalities that have changed but it's not, fighters always fought to get paid but now they don't have to take the biggest challenges to do so.

There's a reason you put Broner who took risks instead of Golovkin. You fall into the fanboy group.

[NaijaD]

There's a reason you put Broner who took risks instead of Golovkin. You fall into the fanboy group.

I'm far from being a fanboy of Golovkin... not that I dislike him but he actually gets avoided because of the problems I explained. Broner turned down how much to face Pacquaio?? EXACTLY.

When GGG turns down that kind of money to fight anyone then get back to me.
GGG vs Canelo should be happening but won't because Canelo can keep fighting whoever and keep making millions. He wouldn't have had such luxury in past eras.

[Eff Pandas]

Until boxing has some non-corrupt or incompetent central power structure business decisions will always be important to making any fight.

Right now boxing is too top heavy. Boxing doesn't put on events. Boxing just puts on main fights. When a boxing card stands or falls on 1 fight of course the financial impact of that 1 fight is super important for all parties from the boxers, the promoters, the managers & the network.

[Motorcity Cobra]

Marketing people for networks and boxing management companies read this board you know and when the "biznis men" started making excuses for the behaviour of guys like Adonis Stevenson and Perter Quillin, then it was open season.

Boxing is in an absolutely shocking state right now.

Even if they did read this board they don't give a damn what we have to say because our numbers are to small. I'm not just talking about NSB. I'm talking about boxing fans in general. They never make decisions based on making us hardcore fans happy. They make decisions that'll make casual fans happy.