British Boxing is regressing without Hearn...

Yes I’m not for or against eddie Hearn in particular. Maybe I’m wrong but in saying it but I feel like we’ve been in an era for years we’re the top fighters regularly avoid each other, or at least avoid each other for too long, I’m not sure a proliferation of ppv has helped this situation. Maybe I’m forgetting what I’ve payed ppv and what’s been free to air over the years (or part of subscription)! But remember great fights like froch v pascal and calzaghe v Lacey on terrestrial telly, when the Hatton bandwagon started to roll were they ppv? Honestly don’t remember.

realise it needs a investment and fighters need paying, but there are many reasons why for years top guys are not fighting each other and don’t think fans hostility towards ppv is the biggest one

 

Hearn should have stayed with Sky if matchroom was simply a uk business.

Whether one agrees with the plan or not remaining on Sky wouldn’t have allowed Matchroom to try and be a global promoter.

 

They probably run darts etc worldwide, but you can't become a worldwide giant in boxing, the sport is too big. Even running the UK would have been impossible without the sky monopoly.

IMO the smart move was completely taking over the UK (relegating frank to mick hennesy level), while doing strategic massive events in the USA, Australia etc.

I remember their first USA cards had a lot of domestic UK guys shipped over there lol.

No one to blame besides eddie, he really brought his own hype and thought he'd be the dana white of boxing.

 

Just look at that heavyweight division....chisoras fought....whyte twice, usyk, fury. Whytes fought joshua, povetkin, parker, fury. Joshuas fought usyk twice, parker, whyte, ruiz. They,ve all been active against other challengers. More active than they,ve ever been. The whole divisions moved forward towards a conclusion. That wasnt happening prior to recent ppv,s. You can name 5 or 10 or 15 top fights over a ten year span that werent ppv. But thats not what the sport needs. Its always needed constant consistant good fights. It needs to be weekly/fortnightly. Otherwise people forget about it. You can probably grow the sport out of constant ppv...but it needs a kickstart and the truth is no one was willing to give it that kickstart....so they relied on the fans to do it.

Look at joyce and dubois. Thats what your going to get going forward. No one with anything to lose wants to touch joyce without ppv. Same with dubois. So what we get is years of watching them beat cheap well overmatched opponents. Waiting on a decent fight which we got when they faced each other. It was years down the line tho. No one has that level of dedication to wait years for what was just a decent fight between two guys that werent even real serious challengers at that point.

The truth is there is no real alternative to ppv at this point. Its either we pay for it and watch good competetive fights consistantly or we reject it and go back to how it was. Waiting years for good fights. A slow moving sport. Too many fighters fighting totally overmatched cheap opponents. Is exactly what we,ll get. We,re already seeing it happen.

Warren seems to already be giving even less value already.

I think hearn has to be held to account for the quality of his undercards going downhill and overpaying his fighters due to him not really picking up the tab. He made a mess of both of they things. But the whole ppv thing is just the reality of the sport. You wont get a sport with consistantly good fights without it as your about to see.

 

We got that when BBC inked a deal with DAZN/Matchroom to broadcast Taylor vs Serrano a few days later.

This will always be a deal which will see the BBC choose Selected fights only.

Plus the BBC and DAZN are only gonna announce details of delayed coverage fights once the original broadcast has been and gone as that could see people unsubscribe going forward if they can watch fights few days later for free.

I am guessing Eubank vs Benn was next considering the BBC were planning to air documentary on fight week.

After what happened with the cancellation of the fight wouldn't be surprised if BBC walk away completely

 

he doesn’t need to become a giant. He needs the business to be profitable.

running a few strategic events in new territories doesn’t achieve much and secondly to run events outside the UK he would still need to find TV deals in those countries to fund such events. That wouldn’t be guaranteed so it made much more sense to sign to a network which provided the deal to fund his expansion plans.

Any such big strategic shows would require fighters from that particular territory to have any kind of impact. Surely those who can draw would be already signed to other promoters?

UFC have the luxury of being the clear market leader without genuine competition even outside the US so negotiating individual tv deals all over the world isn’t an issue.

 

I am from an era where I really enjoyed the free to air cards put on by sky in the early 2000’s. Pre-hair transplant Hearn.

There were a lot of great domestic matchups then, as there wasn’t the same money swilling around. This forced the best to fight the best.

I am more interested in being entertained than a few mediocre fighters getting paid shedloads.

 

I can't believe that in an era where it's easier to be a World Champion than ever before there are millionaire PPV fighters that have never been a World Champion and never been in a World Title fight.

 

Fury v Chisora turd PPV
Eubank v Smith PPV
Catterall v Taylor 2 PPV

Imagine paying close to £70 for these.

 

Shalom justifying Eubank vs smith PPV due to the financial demands of the fighters. If that’s the case they should negotiate better to lower their demands. Supposedly both guys on half a million minimums. Sky should be able to cover that in their budget given they are spending next to nothing on other cards. The azim card last week would have cost about as much as a channel 5 show.

 

The Leeds undercard this weekend cost £300 to put together.

 

I don’t think they could. If Sky would cover the rights fees it wouldn’t be on PPV.

reduce the purses and the fighters will just not fight each other.

 

Loads of the fights you mentioned are just contenders fighting each other, loads of top fights still elude us. The fights that sell anyway arent necessarily the best fights. Its a mixture of how theyre pushed and people preferring heavyweights with 20 losses who flip tables to say worldclass lightweights, think hearn said Loma v campbell was the worst performing ppv.

If PPV is the magic formula for making top fights why do we see so many alluding us in say the lightweight division? Why isnt PPV getting spence crawford nailed down? were are all the top british light heavyweights fightiong each other? In terms of britain i seem to remember just as many british title crackers years ago as much as now. People prefer the alphabet title route and avoiding other brits quite often

I know what your saying about fighters needs paying and without ppv there isnt the money in boxing like other sports, but just not sure i agree with you that the fights have been any better the last ten years because of hearn and PPV. Were i do agree is he drove a boom in say the events being bigger, huge crowds, the boxing becoming a place to be seen etc, (for a select few at least), and a lot of that is good, but dont think it necessarily correlates with better quality of fights than other eras.

 

With all due respect i disagree. Theres never been more consistant boxing on our screens than under eddie hearn. What your asking for is for the sport to go back to a place where people we,re actually interested in funding it. That stopped being the case a good few years before hearn turned up. We cant make people fund it. No one wants to do it because the vast majority end up losing money doing it....or the risk is too big or the investment too much to get a worthwhile return longterm. Thats just the reality of things. The funding years before eddie turned up was getting lower and lower. Sky couldnt justify the level of investment for the return of their viewership.

What people are asking for is for it to go back to how it was. Ppv only for the big fights. The problem is the backers/funding left the building a long time ago.

Half the problem with boxing is the contenders took too long to fight each other. Without that its barely a sport. The biggest fights allude us at times as they always have....but thats not the deal breaker bearing in mind....if they did fight one after the other. We,d have too quick a conclusion. Say fury had fought....joshua/usyk/joyce 3 years ago. What do you do in the afterwards....make him fight wilder again. Theres no one left to fight. I think at least one of them should have happened by now. But the biggest dealbreaker is the contenders not fighting each other. Fans we,re always up for the big fights. The problem is if you had continual the best v the best. The division has a conclusion. What you then get is the klitchko years....them beating up overmatched opponents year after year. People lose interest in that.

Its the contenders avoiding each other thats always been the bigger problem. You need consistant fights between two guys on or around the same level to grow the sport and keep peoples interest.

I,d argue that no time in the last twenty years have the heavyweights been more active challenger v challenger. Whytes fought about 7 or 8 decent to good figjters chisoras done 7 or 8. Parker the same. Joshua similar. Fury similar. Back to back almost. Usyk. Ortiz. Wilder. They,ve all been fighting.

Then look at say pulevs career. Hes only been fighting decent names in recent years. Spent a whole career fighting guys not on his level. Only had about three competetive fights in about a ten year spell. Thats what most of them will do if you stop ppv and try to fund it without it.

At that point theres no growing getting done....its just a case of a dying sport holding on because the really big fights will always pull in a big crowd.

 

Agree Sky could and should cover purses for fights like this that should not be on PPV. Like the did Smith vs Ryder and Shields ve Marshall.

if they don’t take less money then just don’t make the fight. Hardly a grudge match or a title fight. Would prefer in someways to wat h either of them vs Golovkin