This is how you guarantee the Bud v. Spence fight.

[Motorcity Cobra]

Never said they were sticklers for rules. WBC rules already say they can make up any rule they want.

What I'm saying is that they're not going to sanction a rival champ fighting a contender in an eliminator and Crawford wouldn't be willing to do it anyway.

So the premise of your thread is flawed. Prompted by examples that don't apply. Stop back pedaling. 99% of your threads are great. This one sucks. Move on.

So are you saying the sanctioning org that created a fake title out of the thin air to benefit them wouldn't benefit from creating a situation that lays a pathway the the biggest WW fight?

[DARTH SILKWORMS]

So are you saying the sanctioning org that created a fake title out of the thin air to benefit them wouldn't benefit from creating a situation that lays a pathway the the biggest WW fight?

They didn't create a title. "Franchise champion" can't be defended and can't be lost. It's just an honor and ultimately meaningless. And again, has nothing to do with Crawford.

What's also so ****** about this thread is that even when GGG fought the interim champion, Canelo just vacated to duck him. When Kovalev fought the diamond champion, he pulled out of the purse bid to duck Stevenson. Even with Linares, the diamond title was meant to lay the pathway for Linares vs. Mikey, but Linares simply refused to do the fight.

This thread is ****** because there's nothing the WBC can do to force the fight and even if they wanted to, they wouldn't do it by ordering a WBO champion to fight a WBC contender.

[Motorcity Cobra]

I

What you're suggesting is that the WBC would allow Crawford to be a contender and fight another contender in an eliminator to try to become the mandatory.

The WBC has never done this. GGG fighting the interim world champion is completely different. Kovalev fighting the diamond champion is completely different. Loma fighting the diamond champion is completely different.

Here you are explaining how the WBC have never done a situation like the one I'm saying. They've also never done a franchise champ before Canelo. So we've established they aren't one that's a stickler for rules.

The WBC has shown a willingness to have other champs face their champs. Face their world champs, their diamond champs and their interim champs.

But yet you pivot back to the WBC rules and what they've never did. Despite already establishing the WBC will make up new rules if they see a benefit to them.

What you're suggesting though makes no sense for Crawford and makes no sense for the WBC. I understand what you're going for. The key would be the diamond title. But that wouldn't happen with Ugas.

.
This is the most head ass statement you've made. According to you it doesn't benefit the WBC or Crawford to make the Spence fight

Log off for real.

[DARTH SILKWORMS]

Here you are explaining how the WBC have never done a situation like the one I'm saying. They've also never done a franchise champ before Canelo. So we've established they aren't one that's a stickler for rules.

They've had plenty of emeritus champions. They just gave it a special name for Canelo because he's an egomaniac and they were afraid of Canelo ditching them again. None of which has anything to do with Crawford. You're desperate. It's sad.

But yet you pivot back to the WBC rules and what they've never did. Despite already establishing the WBC will make up new rules if they see a benefit to them.

It's not a question of rules, it's a question of your examples being so completely different from what you're suggesting. Too desperate.

This is the most head ass statement you've made. According to you it doesn't benefit the WBC or Crawford to make the Spence fight

You're too emotionally invested in the thread. It sucks. Sorry dude. Nobody bats a thousand. Nobody said the WBC or Crawford don't benefit from a Spence fight. I said neither benefits from this idiotic Ugas idea you have.

WBC: Crawford, we order you to face our #2 welterweight contender in an eliminator with a 50/50 split so that if you win, you can face our #1 welterweight contender in a final eliminator with a 50/50 split, and if you win that, we can order you against Spence with a 70/30 split.

Crawford: No thanks.

Thread over. What you're suggesting simply makes absolutely no sense. Sorry to burst your bubble dude. You're better than this.

[Motorcity Cobra]

They've had plenty of emeritus champions. They just gave it a special name for Canelo because he's an egomaniac and they were afraid of Canelo ditching them again. None of which has anything to do with Crawford. You're desperate. It's sad.




It's not a question of rules, it's a question of your examples being so completely different from what you're suggesting. Too desperate.




You're too emotionally invested in the thread. It sucks. Sorry dude. Nobody bats a thousand. Nobody said the WBC or Crawford don't benefit from a Spence fight. I said neither benefits from this idiotic Ugas idea you have.

WBC: Crawford, we order you to face our #2 welterweight contender in an eliminator with a 50/50 split so that if you win, you can face our #1 welterweight contender in a final eliminator with a 50/50 split, and if you win that, we can order you against Spence with a 70/30 split.

Crawford: No thanks.

Thread over. What you're suggesting simply makes absolutely no sense. Sorry to burst your bubble dude. You're better than this.

Anybody that says Crawford vs Spence makes no sense for the WBC or Crawford is a joke. Log off

[DARTH SILKWORMS]

Anybody that says Crawford vs Spence makes no sense for the WBC or Crawford is a joke.

Nobody said the fight doesn't make sense for the WBC. Your (horrible) idea on how to force the fight not making any sense doesn't mean the fight itself doesn't make sense.