Mayweather Camp Changes Stance: 21 Day Cut Off..

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by PBA, Nov 26, 2011.

  1. PBA

    PBA Well-Known Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,670
    Likes Received:
    5
    ..and pursuing 52-48 split, not 60-40. :huh:oops::think
     
  2. floyd_g.o.a.t

    floyd_g.o.a.t Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    16,735
    Likes Received:
    6
    ???? :blood
     
  3. Bazt3k

    Bazt3k Guest

    Source? Omg mayweather reallu wants this fight now! I know both camps said testing was no longer an issue so i wonder why mayweather changed demands... If memory serves correct first negtiations pac agreed to 14 day cutoff. This fight still wont happen purely because of arum... Though it would be perfect for both fighters to retire after this fight both being legends but one a step above that
     
  4. Relentless

    Relentless VIP Member banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    65,864
    Likes Received:
    16
    they saw pacquiaos last 2 fights.
     
  5. Uncle Rico

    Uncle Rico Loyal Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    39,748
    Likes Received:
    3
    Sounds like bull****. After all the fuss of random testing up until day of fight, why would Mayweather all of sudden go all the way back to 21 days after Pac has said yes to everything? 52-48 seems silly, too.
     
  6. SJS19

    SJS19 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    Messages:
    22,479
    Likes Received:
    14
    52-48 is an ego thing, it's just Floyd saying I am the bigger star.
    If the above is true then I don't see Team Pac being offered any better terms than these.
     
  7. Uncle Rico

    Uncle Rico Loyal Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    39,748
    Likes Received:
    3
    Then Floyd's being awkward again, if true. Pac's finally happy with your original demands, so why change it? Everyone was cool with 50-50, so why go shifting the goal posts?

    I think it's bull****, though. PBA hasn't provided a source or anything.
     
  8. KO Boxing

    KO Boxing Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7,055
    Likes Received:
    4
    Yeah, need a legitimate source on this one.

    If that's the case, I would say that puts Team Pac solely to blame.

    I have my doubts though.
     
  9. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    42,723
    Likes Received:
    269
    Give it to us mother****er

    This content is protected
     
  10. Uncle Rico

    Uncle Rico Loyal Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    39,748
    Likes Received:
    3
    Lol how you figure that out? If it's true, then they're giving Arum another reason to say no.
     
  11. Symphenyceo

    Symphenyceo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Messages:
    11,778
    Likes Received:
    40
  12. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    42,723
    Likes Received:
    269
    It's the difference between making 100million and 96million (for the sake of easy maths)
     
  13. nahkis

    nahkis Robbed Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    1
    Wouldn't be surprised. After the Marquez fight they really do want this to happen now
     
  14. KO Boxing

    KO Boxing Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7,055
    Likes Received:
    4
    In a fight of this magnitude, I don't see 4 percent swing as being a huge factor. Other than the ego's involved.

    But I think it would be a very good compromise with a 21 day cut off rather than up to the fight.

    Take 4 percent less, of let's say $100 million (being generous I think), that's only $4 million difference (when you're talking about $48 million for your team, and a great compromise on the testing issue) that's almost a compromise you can't miss up.

    I still have strong doubts this is true though. Only a LEGITIMATE source will confirm for me.

    But yes, "solely" to blame is a bit harsh. 50-50 and a 14 day cut off, and then I'd stick by my statement.
     
  15. Ilesey

    Ilesey ~ Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    38,201
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    No source = OP ****.