Tweet
This is what's so ****ed up about waiting until GGG was 35, or Kovalev was 33 and 34, to make the big fights. Matthysse has only been in a handful of tough fights, and he's 34, but he's clearly passed his prime. And yet because those other guys were undefeated, people want to ignore that they are also at the same age where you slow down. It's just biology. Boxing really needs to start making these big fights 4 years earlier, even if they make a little less money, because the product will be better and that will bring in more fans who will spend more money in the future. For example waiting on May-Pac helped that show make a little more money, although it always would have made a ton, but as a result almost every PPV for two years didn't sell at all, and boxing ratings on cable tanked. So how much money did you really make for waiting until the product was stale? You made 100 million more on that night, but sacrificed 200 million the next two years when no one wanted to buy a PPV ever again. And now Pacquiao had nowhere to go after the big fight but Australia because his brand was damaged, and no one wanted to buy Floyd's PPVs anymore either except vs Mcgregor.
If they had made that fight in both their primes, you could have had a great fight, maybe a trilogy, with other big PPVs with each guy in between. You could have generated 3 billion in PPVs between the two building off that historic fight, instead of a one-time 500 million score and then nothing, on top of tanking the entire business for two years.
The boxing establishment should stop being so short-sighted. Make the big fights when the fighters are 30 or below, and then you will be able to make more the next 3-4 years that could become even bigger building off the first big one. But if you wait to make the first big one when the guy is 35, like GGG-Canelo, then how much upside do you really have with GGG after that? How many more big PPVs can you get out of him when he's 36, 37, 38 years old? You could have gotten a ton if he beat Canelo or someone like that when he was 30. So I hope they start thinking about this logically. It's better for the fans, it's better or the sport, and it's better for their pocket books too, ultimately.
If they had made that fight in both their primes, you could have had a great fight, maybe a trilogy, with other big PPVs with each guy in between. You could have generated 3 billion in PPVs between the two building off that historic fight, instead of a one-time 500 million score and then nothing, on top of tanking the entire business for two years.
The boxing establishment should stop being so short-sighted. Make the big fights when the fighters are 30 or below, and then you will be able to make more the next 3-4 years that could become even bigger building off the first big one. But if you wait to make the first big one when the guy is 35, like GGG-Canelo, then how much upside do you really have with GGG after that? How many more big PPVs can you get out of him when he's 36, 37, 38 years old? You could have gotten a ton if he beat Canelo or someone like that when he was 30. So I hope they start thinking about this logically. It's better for the fans, it's better or the sport, and it's better for their pocket books too, ultimately.
Comment