Mayweather Camp Changes Stance: 21 Day Cut Off..

???? :blood

 

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

 

they saw pacquiaos last 2 fights.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

Give it to us mother****er

This content is protected

 

Lol how you figure that out? If it's true, then they're giving Arum another reason to say no.

 

source

 

It's the difference between making 100million and 96million (for the sake of easy maths)

 

Wouldn't be surprised. After the Marquez fight they really do want this to happen now

 

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.

 

No source = OP ****.