ESPN wrong about Modern 4 Belt Era

Picking and choosing how they want the 4 belt era champions

 

This is the funniest video of yours that I've seen, and that's saying something!

I hate to nitpick but since it's a nitpicking video, I am fairly certain they announced that the franchise belt would be on the line before Loma vs Lopez (or at least before the result).

Am I wrong? I'm sure there wasn't complete clarity but I think the real hue and cry happened in the leadup.

 

Excellent video Rummy. ESPN needed to be set straight, and Rummy was the man to do it. ESPN exists in their own fact-less, made-up world. ESPN covers sports, ESPN broadcasts sports, but they have no integrity whatsoever when it comes to the history of sports. They manipulate facts, create their own narratives, bend and twist the rules of sports to serve their agendas. Look at what they've done to college football, as an example. ESPN's BS needed to be called out. Rummy, props to you for calling them out on their BS!

 

They are absolutely murdering college football. Turned the whole wild, wonderful season, conference championships, and bowl games into an extended audition for the a four team playoff (not that I favor expansion).

Even the non-playoff NY6 bowls are considered unworthy of any player with a chance at the draft.

It takes time to build up cool traditions like that, the ESPN vampire works much faster!

 

Not only that but ESPN was behind all the conference re-alignment that turned college football into an all-SEC-bore-fest. Before ESPN had a strangehold on the sport, back in the mid-2000s, CFB was wonderful. There was balance between conferences, every season a different team would be #1. Instead of just the Bamas of the world #1 or near the top every pre-season. The fact that the sam teams make the playoff every year end up ranked in the Top 5 is a sign that something is seriously wrong. It was never like that before ESPN got so much influence. Since then it's gotten progressively worse year after year thanks to ESPN to a point now where like you said it's all about the 4-team playoff. The old bowl system was way better because like you said even if you missed making the NC other bowl games mattered more, and sometimes even if you didn't make the NC you could still win a split title. (2003 - USC/LSU for example)

The 4-team playoff selection is heavily influenced by ESPN because all season ESPN sets the guidelines and "playoff probability %" BS, the rankings and scenarios end up being based on their BS. The difference is in boxing ESPN don't control much about what happens in boxing, because they only broadcast a relatively small % of fights. In college football, it's become pretty much an ESPN monopoly so they have an incredibly amount of influence. In boxing they don't have much influence because boxing isn't centrally controlled by any one network like CFB.

FOX has gotten into CFB more in recent years, CBS has some games, but ESPN is still operating in a near monopoly especially when it comes to bowl season. And NIL stuff, sounds great, allowing CFB players to make $$, but practically speaking it's a disaster. ESPN has turned CFB into the NFL minor leagues, now we see players able to transfer to other schools all willy nilly without sitting out a year like they used to do in the old days. I could go on and on when it comes to how ESPN operates and how they're completely destroying College Football which was once my favorite sport.

 

Who cares about undisputed at this point? Everyone with half a brain should know lineal is all that matters.

 

Fantastic rant Rummy!

You gotta love bending the narrative of the abc orgs, promoters and the networks to suit their agenda's.
I don't 100% agree with everything you mentioned (mostly nuances), but by far most of it and completely with the overall theme of it.
More of the ridicilousness of some of the antics surfaced again, and it's utterly confusing for someone not fully in on boxing history.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if they asked some intern to do some research and make the graph, and then just went with it.

 

I remember when Kostya Tszyu won all 3 major belts, didn't need to bother fighting Terron Millet who at the time had the WBO and in reality was probably not even world class. Tszyu was recognised as undisputed and he clearly was the best at 140 at the time.
However when Tim Tszyu fought on showtime recently, Kostya was referred to as the 'unified' champion at 140 pounds. History already being re-written.

 

Forget boxing Rummy! Do voice overs for 1930's gangsters. Your impression had me rolling.

 

You DKSAB! You left out the most important belt in the galaxy of belts...the Aztec Belt!

 

Good video, Rumspringa. Interesting topic. I guess if you're ESPN, you could defend their position by saying that as a question of fact, the WBO existed from X therefore that's when the 4-belt era began. But yes, if you were around back then you would know that you didn't need the WBO belt to be considered 'Undisputed'. Mike Tyson is the obvious example. Later on though you had Roy Jones, Bernard Hopkins & Kostya Tszyu who were all considered 'Undisputed' but none of whom had the WBO belt at the time. Kostya Tszyu used to hire the WBO champ, DeMarcus Corley, as a sparring partner. There were some decent WBO champs around back then who were considered on par with their alphabet counterparts. Michael Moorer at Light Heavy is a case in point. He was considered the equal or better than the likes of Prince Charles Williams (IBF), Virgil Hill (WBA) & Jeff Harding (WBC) at the time. And remember that even though Roy was considered 'Undisputed' at Light Heavy, there were plenty who considered that he should have faced the WBO champ, Dariusz Michalczewski (who was also the 'lineal' champ), to truly be considered as such. So in defence of ESPN, it's not strictly black & white. Tough call on our man George, btw. Not affording him 'Undisputed' status. The reality is that when he beat Teofimo, he was considered as such. When he was matched with Devin Haney the promoters backed off that angle in order to promote the fight as being for 'Undisputed'. To do so, they needed to play up Haney's WBC status. In my view, it's not strictly black & white although I like Rumspringa's take (apart from denying George 'Undisputed' status).

 

Great vid Rummy! Even though the current state of boxing is so sad (it's at an all-time low imo), you got me laughing.

 

Great video Rumski.