This is a strong argument. Fury himself made reference to it in his press conference. It's unlikely Fury knocks Wilder out so his only route to a win is the scorecards. If they're not playing fair, Fury can't win. So if having ESPN and Top Rank in his corner could lead to fairer cards it would be a smart move.
Usyk and Lomachenko are great to watch. I don't see the comparison. I'm not saying Fury is categorically boring because it's an opinion at the end of the day. But I find his fights very dull because there's so little action. Put it like this; fights like Gatti Ward, Corrales Castillo, Tyson Holyfield and so on are why I like boxing. Back and forth, loads of action. Essentially the type of fight that wins fight of the year awards. I don't see Fury being involved in anything like that. I didn't see much difference between his fight against Klitschko and Klitschko against someone like Ibragimov, and that fight was garbage as well.
From what you post, you dislike him because he’s someone you see as a ‘boring fighter’ and because of a few poorly judged comments/tweets he’s made over the years. Your dislike of him seems too strong for those to be the only causes though. It seems far deeper, almost personal - that’s why people pick up on it.
It's more that I disagree with the way people go on about him. Take some people on here at face value and he's the greatest boxer in the world who transcends the sport, has become a global megastar after the Wilder fight, and he deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as Ali and Mayweather. I find that to be almost comically over the top.
And I’d agree. I think he’s the most talented top heavyweight by far - but he’s vulnerable and thus beatable. He’s not a commercial superstar like Joshua, but I think there’s a positive public mood building towards him because he’s authentic and vulnerable. People generally don’t really like overly polished/corporate invented personalities. I think he’s got the potential to be remembered as a very special fighter. For me, he could beat any of the other top guys provided he’s fit and focussed. I just hope this new deal doesn’t scupper the best fights getting made. If he doesn’t fight or be scheduled to be facing Wilder or Joshua by the autumn he’d go down in my estimations.
I'd question the authenticity to be fair. He seems like a guy who holds back now when he used to go off on one, and I think that's been a word in the ear to dial down all the homophobia and sexism. The new deal he's signed is a case in point. His biggest fanboys on here couldn't wait to start bleating about how this proved he was an immensely popular superstar. Then Arum calls the financial figures bull****, the deal makes getting the biggest fights even harder, there's no announcement of a Wilder rematch and the picture looks far less healthy.
I’m a big fan of his but have little interest in whether an ESPN deal means he’s popular or not. Another criticism of him from me is I feel he let his ego stop a potential Joshua fight this April. I’m not a huge fan of discussing splits etc but if it really was the equivalent of 60/40 then that’s a fantastic deal. There’s no way he can genuinely price himself as on an even keel commercially to Joshua - especially with no belts - and I feel his ego got in the way there.
The deal is worth "an estimated" £80m. That does not mean they gave Fury $80million cash to deposit into his bank account (as you and your pals have interpreted) it means over the course of the deal he can expect to earn $80million. Key words here are 'worth' and 'estimated. This is what 'experts' estimate he can earn over the duration of his contract and thus is the figure circulated in the press.
Without opponents the estimate is essentially meaningless. Tyson doesn't sell tickets, he doesn't sell PPV's and he isn't going to make much money fighting Manuel Charr in front of a few thousand desperately bored Americans. He could make loads of money if he takes the deals for a Joshua fight or the Wilder rematch.
It's an example of a potential opponent which would represent a massive step down in both quality and wider appeal. It would also mean that if we are to take Fury's lineal claims seriously, as opposed to suggesting the whole notion is rather up in the air at the moment, then we'd be faced with the fact that three of the last four challengers to the supposed lineal heavyweight championship were Charr, Pianeta and Seferi.
My guess remains the same regarding this. The whole purpose of this deal from the promotional point of view is for ESPN to have a dog in the fight when the Joshua fight is made. That's it. There is absolutely no way that the people running that company have thought 'let's chuck a fortune at a fat guy who can't punch who can't sell out arenas in his own country.'
Why Manuel Charr? Or have you just plucked a name out of thin air? We know who is on the payroll at Top Rank and it is likely to be one of their crop of heavyweights.
Old TonyHayers was nowhere to be seen in the DeGale/Eubank threads last night. His only concern is to rim Matchroom/DAZN or diss BT fighters.