Says Glen Johnson. Read the article ESB posted: You know, it's hard to argue with Mr. Glen Johnson... because he's the man Dawson should give a rematch to, and it's Gary Shaw and Dawson himself who know it best.
Well now Calzaghe doesn't have to fight Dawson, he can pick an easy fight for his swansong if he has one.
Every fight that happens these days is a "disgrace to the sport" I.e Pac vs. Hoya, Calzaghe vs. Jones etc etc. I'm glad Tarver is getting another shot. Yeah, ok, I don't know what Dawson and his people are thinking by making this fight, but for Tarver it is good news and a good opportunity. By the way, Glen Johnson is a guy who is worth listening to, I just don't agree fully with him on this.
A rematch clause is a rematch clause but Glen is right as Tarver can't win this as he couldn't win the first one.
Hasn't Glen's people heard of rematch clauses? Yes, it is likely that tarver-dawson II will be shitty, but doubt the rematch clause was contingent on the first fight being competitive. glen's people should be insisting on rematch clauses (even if his frist fight purse is lower) because he often is on the short end of a dubious decision
I'd love to see Glen go to this fight, and sit in the front row with a paper bag over his head. War Road Warrior.
What's pathetic about this is that Dawson did what he felt he should do in order to get the first Tarver fight (drop the WBC belt, pay Diaconu step aside money). And now, all of sudden, its important to defend the belt and honor a rematch clause of a fight that wasn't even close. The fact that Johnson is still out there makes it look even worse.
I agree there are alot better matchups out there and I dont want to see it again, BUT, its a mandated rematch clause, Dawson has to take it or dump his belt. If he has to, why not take the easy payday?
He didn't pay Diaconu no step aside money,if he did he would still have had the WBC belt.Diaconu pushed for the fight and Dawson vacated.