Comments Thread For: Wilder Would Accept 40% - If Joshua Gets The Same in Rematch

[Robbie Barrett]

Just like only a fool believed Calzaghe was the best in his division during his era. Again, aside from the money you are all still stuck on, from a legacy perspective, provided both keep winning, his legacy would be tainted if he never fought Wilder (except in the UK, where you guys cling on ANY decent fighter that comes from there and label him "the best" even when they refuse to fight anyone outside of the US).

To put it into perspective and to perhaps help you think a bit, let's use Mayweather vs Pacquiao as an example. Had Mayweather not fought him, his legacy would've been tainted and by waiting so long to fight him, he still left a lot of doubt as to who was the best at their prime.

Think beyond the "15+ mil" for a few seconds and realize that the point I was making was about legacy, not their bank accounts.

I never believed Calzaghe was the best. Try again. Calzaghe wasn't recognised worldwide as #1. Joshua is. He already has a better resume than Wilder and Wilder is what 5 years older? So again, Wilder needs Joshua more in legacy too.

Mayweather and Pacquiao were much closer in drawing power than Joshua-Wilder. This is more like Mayweather-Maidana, where Mayweather paid Maidana a flat fee of 5 mil and kept the rest. Or Mayweather-Mosley, where Mosley accepted a 5 mil flat fee. They didn't have a rematch clause saying they get the same deal if they win either.

[bori84]

This is the point a lot of you guys miss. The incremental increase in revenue from doing a fight against, say , David Haye at Wembley, versus wilder at Wembley. Why do you think it is?
At 60/40 Joshua would make more from fighting vs haye

That's a good joke, you're forgetting the US PPV of which Haye would bring none. Again, think about the whole picture, not just what happens in the UK. Good one though...

[Straightener]

Some whoppers in this thread fair play..... How about stfu until Parker is seen too

Arguing back and forth like a bunch of mincers

Embarrassing

[bori84]

I never believed Calzaghe was the best. Try again. Calzaghe wasn't recognised worldwide as #1. Joshua is. He already has a better resume than Wilder and Wilder is what 5 years older? So again, Wilder needs Joshua more in legacy too.

Mayweather and Pacquiao were much closer in drawing power than Joshua-Wilder. This is more like Mayweather-Maidana, where Mayweather paid Maidana a flat fee of 5 mil and kept the rest.

LOL Still stuck on the money I see when, AGAIN, I'm referring to legacy only. Joshua is only recognized as such because he beat an old Klitschko but that will only hold out for so long; Ortiz was actually the best fighter either has fought so stop. TF had already beaten the robotic Ukranian, yet AJ didn't exactly sweep him but I give him credit for digging deep and KO'ing the 40 yr old champ!. Wilder continuing to win will start the same talk as Pacquiao vs Mayweather where there will be a debate as to who is the best.

Solely from a legacy perspective, they need each other just as much.

[JLC]

First sign of compromise although he would be better taking the Whyte fight first in my view (he will pocket good $ for that alone, but also build up fight and bigger & against Joshua)

How is fighting Whyte going to up his profile any ? Whyte is a UK fighter. Do you mean to tell me there’s even 10 UK fans who don’t know who Deontay Wilder is ? UK is a boxing hotbed. They are well aware of who the American undefeated heavyweight champion who has knocked out all of his opponents is. Him speaking up about fighting and showing up at Joshua’s fights will raise his profile more than a win over Dillan Whyte. Him beating Luis Ortiz did more for his profile than a win over Dillan Whyte would have. Let’s stop w the excuses, see if Joshua gets passed Parker, and make this damn fight right now.

[ShoulderRoll]

And Wilder will be making 10x what he's accustomed to at 30%. Joshua will be lucky to make 1.5x. See how this works? Joshua is such a massive draw almost anything offered to Wilder is fair.

If Wilder beats Joshua surely he is then entitled to the higher purse split?

[Butch.McRae]

LOL Still stuck on the money I see when, AGAIN, I'm referring to legacy only. Joshua is only recognized as such because he beat an old Klitschko but that will only hold out for so long; Ortiz was actually the best fighter either has fought so stop. TF had already beaten the robotic Ukranian, yet AJ didn't exactly sweep him but I give him credit for digging deep and KO'ing the 40 yr old champ!. Wilder continuing to win will start the same talk as Pacquiao vs Mayweather where there will be a debate as to who is the best.

Solely from a legacy perspective, they need each other just as much.

I think that people are also forgetting what happens if AJ beats Wilder. His US fan base becomes very real and takes his box office potential even higher. It does seem like the UK fans are stuck in bubble mentally lol

Did they not see Mayweather purses? Lol

[uppercut510]

Personally I still don’t agree. Even if wilder was to win does that mean he’ll start selling out stadiums and selling millions of ppvs and generating purses of £15 million plus per fight? Probably not.

this is where the AJ fans become the biggest clowns

[uppercut510]

And Wilder will be making 10x what he's accustomed to at 30%. Joshua will be lucky to make 1.5x. See how this works? Joshua is such a massive draw almost anything offered to Wilder is fair.

u are the very worst mate... sad

[Randall Cunning]

Joshua has said he wants all the belts this year, and aint had a problem making a deal with any other fighter. Fight doesnt happen it wont be on Joshua.