I get that, but what about opportunities? With more fighters fighting often, wouldn't there be more fighters at work? I mean, yes, there would be mismatches. There are mismatches now, with months or years in between fights. It's gotten pathetic, man. I started following the sport in the 90s and guys fought 4 or 5 times a year all the time. it made for a more interesting popular sport.
I get that, but what about opportunities? With more fighters fighting often, wouldn't there be more fighters at work? I mean, yes, there would be mismatches. There are mismatches now, with months or years in between fights. It's gotten pathetic, man. I started following the sport in the 90s and guys fought 4 or 5 times a year all the time. it made for a more interesting popular sport.
i dont get the argument.
people should get paid but would we pay to see it ?
They should fight more than twice per year, that's for sure. You likely have 3-4 prime years only resulting in max 8 fights. Just the way it works these days with management, promotion, etc. for elite guys.
How many would stay unbeaten? How many more matches would be made where new stars could rise? Would the "0" really matter that much anymore? Would boxing's popularity rise with more exposure?
Thoughts and opinions?
So HBO is just going to show the same 2 fighters the entire year and that's it?
Comment