Comments Thread For: Eddie Hearn: WBC Franchise Champions Are Bad For Boxing

[Shadoww702]

The franchise title is lame and shouldn't exist, but, there is a difference in the scenerios that Hearn is mentioning. I believe if you are a champion in a division and you're going to unify with another champion in that same division, that should take precedent. I hate not being able to get 1 champion in a division because these organizations get into each other's way. But if you're given a franchise title deliberately so that you can avoid a mandatory and instead hop around different weight classes and pick and choose who you want to fight while still maintaining a title in a division you haven't fought in for several fights, that's straight BS and favoritism, which is what the wbc is known for.

Exactly! If your facing another major belt holder then that should override any mandatory. And same goes for a rematch. I know its not the same as both putting them up but most champions have rematch clauses.

In this case Wilder vs. Fury as Wilder exercised his rematch clause

Winner has option make fight with other belt holder if not possible schedule wise then mandatory up

[VislorTurlough]

Eddie Hearn is bad for boxing

[Silver Spear]

1. Too many belts
2. Promoters are bad for boxing
3. This is a global sport with global athletes competing against each other on a regular basis.
4. Boxing is unique and is not like any of the other major sports where you have a definitive league like say the NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL. Look at soccer/football and see how many different leagues there are but they all pertain to the FIFA.
5. Until boxing has their form of FIFA, which is not something I actually want or prefer, then we are going to have multiple different champs. Look at it this way, if the major MMA organizations had their champions fight once a year but for the most part had their fighters fight in house, that would be similar to what happens in boxing today.
6. Boxings biggest problem today are the promoters and their respective "stable" of fighters and keeping the protected in the interest of generating more hype for a fight.
7. Long list I know but in the end what can we do except boycott fights and I doubt that will ever happen.

[Silver Spear]

Exactly! If your facing another major belt holder then that should override any mandatory. And same goes for a rematch. I know its not the same as both putting them up but most champions have rematch clauses.

In this case Wilder vs. Fury as Wilder exercised his rematch clause

Winner has option make fight with other belt holder if not possible schedule wise then mandatory up

Some organizations put unifications above mandatory fights. Since this is not the case with all major organizations we end up with messy politics and fights the vocal fans do not want to see.

[Oldskoolg]

Eddie Hearn is 110% right on this one. Agreed. But I’m still waiting for news on this “American takeover”.....have I missed it??? Nationalist incels, what gives???

[Shadoww702]

Some organizations put unifications above mandatory fights. Since this is not the case with all major organizations we end up with messy politics and fights the vocal fans do not want to see.

IBF is the worst. They have stripped guys in like 2 weeks of winning the belt.

[57Blues]

From a fast look at the article Fast Eddie is what ? Concerned about the good of boxing, fairness, everyone getting a fair shake. Has he always carried this attitude and backed it up ? Or has he suddenly saw a problem with how HIS fighters are being twisted into fights that F.E. dont like.? I do not know for sure but Eddie is a promoter first a advocate for fairness in boxing somewhere else down the line, fine but if it worked agaist him to be against all these belts would he still be talking this way? I do not know. I have taken the view of boxing that I look at fighters and how they fight in the ring first. And whatever titles they put on them is way down the road as far as I am concerned. A good fight and how that fighter(s) is rated comes further down the road. That said good to see all the people talking about how boxing is run with all these belts and knowing how crooked they are being used. Good article bc it started a good talk on how boxing is run in this ERA of boxing. That part is all for the good. Not to say that boxing has ever strayed from doing honest bussiness in and out of the ring. That would never stand.

[REDEEMER]

IBF is the worst. They have stripped guys in like 2 weeks of winning the belt.

I never knew the IBF of getting a mandatory fight for a fighter who didn’t box in two years ?

[Shadoww702]

I never knew the IBF of getting a mandatory fight for a fighter who didn’t box in two years ?

??? They stripped fury like 10 days after he beat Klitz.

Canelo got like 30 days.

I get Mando's but at least let the guy fight 1 person first and stick to their rules.

Also the IBF usually leaves #1 and 2 empty.

Look at the current IBF mandos???

If your fighting other champs what the issue??

[lopetego]

Being franchise champion means nothing at the end of the day, just an honorary title like the RING

I guess its only purpose is to award the WBC cash cows with another belt and to help them "save face" if they decide to avoid mandatories, even if they're doing it to chase bigger fights

Floyd must be glad the "franchise belt" wasn't around during his times, the WBC would have stripped him and named him franchise champion, instead of letting him avoid his mandatories eternally, like they did