Tweet
Of the two rumored dates, June 10 and September 16, June seemed awfully close for several reasons; McGregor is having a baby in May, Mayweather may have ring rust, and McGregor needs to learn to box, and the event, while not serious as a fight, will probably be huge.
This reporter reports a source confirming Sept 16 and several weeks have been reserved for T-Mobile. This has multiple implications for Canelo and Golovkin.
1. June 10 is clear for Golovkin v. Saunders. Even though this is not going to be a ppv, you don't want to schedule two big events on the same day, coverage of one will swamp the other, and people won't be able to schedule to watch both events.
2. This is also good news for Kovalev Ward on June 17. Again, you don't even want to be n the same month as other huge events if possible, Kovalev Ward 2 will be a ppv, and people will send their money either or rather than both.
3. Canelo will get pushed off of Mexican Independence weekend. Mayweather McGregor will be a ****** circus, but everyone is going to want to see that circus. Holding a rival ppv in the same month will be suicide. Honestly, even the best fight that can be made in boxing, Canelo Golovkin, wouldn't win all the boxing fans in an either or choice. Why make half as much money when you can do the ppv in November instead? It sucks for Canelo, but he won't have a choice financially.
GBP and Dela Hoya could use this as an excuse to fight in August I suppose, with the benefit (if you believe they are avoiding Golovkin) of saying Golovkin can't be ready in two months, and kicking that fight till later. Canelo has been fighting the superstar twice a year schedule, and I'm not sure how much he and his promoters would like him fighting on a 3 month rest, especially after that hand injury.
Or they can make Canelo Golovkin for November-December. With all the belts and a contract to sign, i'm sure Golovkin would be willing to wait for whatever the best date is.
Pushing a Canelo fight to November, but not against Golovkin, will get GBP killed in the media, because you no longer have the '3 months is too short' argument. Which wasn't a terribly good argument to begin with. I think they will go with either of the options above personally.
Comment