Is groves pricing himself out

so eddies hearns says if he does not take a deal he'll just end up with 15%. been offered a 7 figure pay day double what hes ever made

 

Well it may be better to take the 15% (which I thought was 25 for a mandatory). The gate alone on this is going to be massive as they'll be looking at football stadiums, potentially Stamford Bridge or even Wembley.

Not only that but it won't come with a host of terms that Froch or Eddie can force on him.

 

apparently that is only mandatory according to eddie , a rematch does not come under the same rules

 

http://www1.skysports.com/boxing/ne...s-slams-contract-offer-for-carl-froch-rematch

 

No, Froch/Hearn are trying to price GG out..

 

Huh...that's a comment I simply don't understand.

He's been offered a £ million + payday and a shot at 2 major belts at 25 years old. A lot of people seem to think he's got a really good chance of winning - how is he being priced out?

Wait, was that sarcasm?:think

 

Word is that there were a lot of stipulations and options that came with the deal. Meaning they want to promote Groves for an X number of fights if he wins.

Of course Groves won't sign that type of deal. Hearns is trying to pull a quick one.

 

Hearn is pulling a bob arum stunt.
Sign here get x amount but u will have to fight for me for x years and I get x amount of %....

 

The IBF has ordered a rematch due to ignorant referee, man that idiot did not appear to know what he was doing, or did he?

 

The ref was deVOID of his senses:good

 

I agree. The rematch has been ordered to take place within 90 days. I would love to see this fight, but it so appears that USTV will boycott this fight as usual.....................

 

I read something like Groves is appealing to the IBF to be made mandatory again and I think I read it said something like mandatory gets 25%. Dont know if any of that is correct and could be wrong, but if it is correct, Groves would possibly end up with more money and Froch/Hearns having to agree rather than he (Groves) agrees 15% and then ends up mandatory agreeing for far less than he would have got.
I could be wrong about all of this and it was bits I had read from other posters in other threads so would need to be checked out

 

Groves turned down a re match clause in the first fight too because of to many add on s inserted by froch/hearn ,like any return would see groves take small amount of the pot,, same thing this time just hearn suggesting that groves is now the one ducking out , he is still a challenger and maybe a 55/45 split should see it happen, when groves wins, and depending how, any third fight as champ would see him tied to deal that was made in the second fight. Fighters don't get paid what they deserve, they negotiate what they deserve.

 

Wow, that was the gayest **** I've seen on here.

 

are you mad 55/45 split , groves isn't even a house hold name. its not about the odds in the fight