Simple mathematics for BJ. Either sell your belt to Jacobs or GGG/Canelo. Who represents the biggest payday? The winner of canelo/GGG does. He'd be ****** to fight Jacobs before and lose the chance of a much bigger payday.
Comments Thread For: Daniel Jacobs' Manager Hits Back, Roasts Billy Joe Saunders
Collapse
-
-
Comment
-
Jacobs is way too dangerous for Saunders. High risk, low financial reward. Saunders will fight a bunch of bums until he gets a shot at Golovkin or Canelo. It's the softer, safer path. Not absolutely sure who wins that fight but I would bet on Jacobs. Saunders would have a hard time picking at Jacobs for 12 rounds without getting some hard return fire. Jacobs is tall, long, fast, skillful, BIG and powerful....This won't be anything like fighting Lemiuex.Comment
-
Team Saunders is right. They don't need Jacobs at this point.
Jacobs should go for Andrayd. (Don't know why they keep pronouncing it that way, when it's An-dra-de, not Andrayd.)
They're now both HBO fighters.
Charlo1 wants none of Jacobs and he's fighting another nobody next.
And this is what I don't get.
I don't know what makes these clowns think that fights like Jacobs vs Andrade or Charlo vs Andrade or Charlo vs Jacobs aren't draws.
Doesn't make any sense.
They all want Saunders and Cnelo, and pretend to want lil GGG.
These guys can only fight one guy at a time.Comment
-
I agree about Jacobs character. The only thing that slightly irritated me was the weight in issue for the Golovkin fight. Other than that which is minor IMO, he's a stand up guy. Saunders I find irritating. In some ways he's honest but generally he's a jerk.Comment
-
I really think Jacobs should go after Andrade.
It's a decent name for anyone's resume and he's more beatable than the running man Saunders.
Plus the fact that Andrade hasn't been looking good in his last 2 fights which were not even against big names.
Any big boy can beat Andrade at this point.
Go for it team Jacobs before anyone else does.
Waste of time pursuing a Saunders fight.Last edited by rickJen; 12-23-2017, 12:14 PM.Comment
Comment