eddie hearns thus far has been smoke and mirrors

he's failed to deliver in any of the recent cards this year, some of the matchups have been pretty disgraceful, he talks all this **** about giving the fans the fights they want to see but then ends up putting **** fights like alcine-rose, hes now pushed for a rematch between bellew and chalimba, who the **** is going to be excited about that even if its a chief support for kessler-froch he says selbys the next big thing in british boxing but then gives him a warm up fight against some one who's area level and look at barker ''oh barkers ready for the world he just needs to fight an italian stiff nobody cares about''
seriously **** him, he comes off as a massive snob in his ifilm interviews too.

 

I like Hearn but I think he was hoping with a good budget his matchmaking would be easy

And it's proved harder in reality

In the last two years he has helped bring us froch-Kessler,froch-bute,frampton-Martinez,frampton-molitor,brook-hatton,brook-jones,broner-rees,golovkin-proska,Sergio-barker,bellew-miranda
Some good undercard bouts Ryder-okane,Matthews-crolla,Rees-Matthews,hope-Proska

And been unlucky with injury brook-Alexander,purdy-jones,Rees-Murray

you add in burns,groves,Campbell.mitchell and whoever else and it will come good

He has had a poor run though

 

I will judge him at the end of the two years, So far i'm alright with what he's doing. He's building a lovely stable of fighters.

Put some good shows and some average shows and things haven't worked out but i think he's going about things in the right way. I like the look of the Burns show Choi vs Simpson has me amped like a mofo!!!. The PPV i think won't be as bad as feared i've sat through many a bad PPV thinking WTF have a i paid £15 for this for. Least there will be some 12 round fights and Ochieng's fight looks interesting.

If in two year it continues at same rate i'd be disappointed but i see the promise there and lord willing he will produce. We need boxing to thrive so people hoping Boxnation fails and Frank fails and Eddie fails are short sighted and not understanding boxing right now is in a promising state talent wise.

 

Eddie Hearn is a very good promoter, otherwise he simply would not have got all the fighters he has to sign for him.

He has a very strong stable of boxers and contained within that stable of boxers will be a lot of ego's, a lot of attempted interference from managers and boxers relatives etc.

Eddie is going to be under a lot of pressure to produce consistently good shows, I for one hope he does because British Boxing needs him to do so. Amongst some of the great shows he will no doubt produce will be some gash ones, I hope people on here and other boxing websites wont criticise him too much.

I honestly believe instead of moaning about it, we should get behind British Boxing especially the likes of Hearn.

 

Ishy said this to me yesterday and I think this sums up the situation perfectly. Hope he doesn’t mind me posting this.

“No one's got any reason to be pro or anti any promoter but I think what's happening on here atm is some people getting pissed off at all the praise Eddie was getting a few months ago (died down a bit now) and playing devil's advocate by introducing an opposing view.

The 'saviour' stuff was getting boring, all a bit of a parody, tongue-in-cheek thing now though. Anyway, some long time posters were fed up of that. Fact is, there's been numerous promoters who've come and promised a lot, pumped money in and ended up being the same as the rest. Golden Boy for example always talked about being different to Arum and Don King but now they're in power they're no different. Nowt wrong with questioning Eddie or any other promoter.

Eddie getting a rougher ride than others - we've both been posting here long enough to know that once people who are regarded as 'different' or 'saviours' prove themselves to be not so different than everyone else then the tide completely turns. Back in the day, you wouldn't see or read ANYTHING negative about Haye. Once he became mainstream the hate started. Eddie started off being the people's promoter but as soon as we got a few average cards ESB reacted as it usually does.”

I did say yesterday that Eddie Hearn is the Barack Obama of boxing. Promised allot, "Change Change Change" but as the poster said delivered allot of smoke and mirrors. But Hearn seems to be getting a rough ride of things right now and some of that is fair and some of it isn't.

Is Hearn different to any other promoter? In some ways he is and in some ways he isn't. He has done some great things like Froch v Bute, some good things like keeping prospects busy, some OK things like getting Rees, Barker, Purdy, Harrison, McCloskey title shots in fights where they heavy underdogs, and some bad things like the wembley card and to many Prizefighters. In general his biggest problem has beem making allot of promises to boxing fans that he was never going to be able to deliver on, especially in such a short period of time.

Some things he gets slated for make absolutely no sense, like the way he has handled Kell Brook where he has actually done a really really good job in building his resume, experience and following, yet seems to get slated by the fans on here because he didn't make a world title fight within 10 minutes of signing him. Another is getting the 20 fight deal with Sky. There seems to be this idea that Hearn orchestrated some master plan to become the only promoter on Sky, which including infiltrating the offices of Maloney & Hatton promotions so that they would continually put on average shows in leisure centers that got low viewing figures. I guess Hearn should have done a bad job at promoting Brook v Hatton so that the arena was empty, and taken easy money and let Froch go to Canada to fight Bute to give Maloney a chance.

Some of the cards have not been great. 90% of hardcore boxing fans hate Prizefighter. But some of them have been quality. You can't really help injuries and they have hit some of the recent Matchroom cards pretty hard. The Frampton & Bellew cards this year was great. Every TV fight was a meaningful one and you can't blame Hearn for Bellew v Chilemba being a stinker. The Rose card is being ripped apart but if you look at it, all of the fights on the card were entertaining and competitive which is what you want it just lacked star power and there were a number of high profile fights on the same time/night which took away the appeal.

How is Hearn different to other promoters?

Most of all He is from a new generation. Frank, Hennesey, Maloney and Hearn Snr are from a previous generation. So Hearn naturally brings something different to the table. You have other promoters doing the same thing. Coldwell, Fearon, Woods and the Hattons. There all bringing new ideas and people who actually attend shows would notice that. But Hearn is the one that's in the spotlight because he has had the most success, and therefore his failures are also highlighted.

He is extremely ambitious, but at the same time financially sensible. I don't think you could say that about any other British promoter in the past 20 years. Yeh it's great to have a card with 4 world title fights but if the promoter has to fold his company 3 weeks later and not pay people thats not great for British Boxing. And that's not just rumors its fact these things have happened. In an interview with Hearn today you heard him talking not about being No.1 promoter in Britain, but rivaling GoldenBoy, Sauerland & Top Rank. That's good for British boxing.

Hearn is also allot more open than other promoters have been in the past. He is active on twitter, he took the time to have an long discussion with me after I ripped him on the Froch v Kessler PPV yesterday explaining to me why certain fights couldn't be made for George Groves. I can't imagine I am the only person he has ever done that with. His interviews with Kugan are also quite refreshing compared to the usual interview with a Promoter.

In general his match making is quite aggressive, forward thinking and logical. Fighters don't really seem to stagnate under Hearn. Prospects are kept very busy, title holders are kept active. Fighters work there way up the rankings by fighting for International titles against ranked opponents. He promotes fighters to be local attractions and works with smaller promoters to build cards that are usually close to being a sell out. He seems to have a different strategy for each of his top tier fighters. Rees for example is near the end of his career, so he needs pay days and to take chances. Brook is at the beginning so you don't take every chance given to you.

He seems to have a positive relationship with fighters managers, trainers and most importantly the fighters. You won't hear a bad word said about Hearn from any fighter he works with. Even when Frank, Hennesey & Maloney were at there best there were always rumblings of discontent.

Where he has really ****ed up in my eyes is the Froch v Kessler PPV. And thats why my opinion of him at the moment is luke warm, where as previously I was really happy with what he was doing. Froch v Kessler is a great fight but its a fringe level PPV main event. Because of that it needed a great under card. I actually want PPV to be a success because I think the hype around it generates interest from the casual fan and the money it brings in can make sure big fights happen in the UK. But the 1 big fight model clearly didn't work in the past in terms of building the sport and the Sky Box Office brand.

Hearn should have secured a quality under card a long time ago to ensure fans get there moneys worth. Froch v Kessler is virtually guaranteed to be a great fight, but what happens if Kessler gets cut in the 2nd round from a head clash and the fight is a No Contest. You will literally be ****ed. 18,000 in the arena pissed off, 200,000 who paid $15 pissed off and phoning up Sky to complain.

But the reality is the issue with British Boxing is not Eddie Hearn & Sky. If there were 3 other promoters doing everything to the exact same standard to Eddie Hearn and working with Channel 5, ESPN & BT Sport boxing would be in a fantastic position in the UK. You need Frank, Hennesey, Maloney to sort themselves out and massivley improves, or Coldwell, Fearon, Woods & Hatton to take a risk and push themselves into a position to rival Hearn. A monopoly would be bad for boxing but it won't be Hearn fault, it will be the fault of every other promoter.

 

Firstly, Alcine VS Rose was a good competitive match-up, Rose got tested and faced someone who is at 'world level'
As for Selby, he's a seriously improved fighter who is being matched well, he just faced Martin Lindsey, he needs to fight different styles and be matched right.
His Australian opponent was outgunned, but who would want to face Selby at short notice? He's a powerful fighter.
On the whole Hearn's biggest problem is making Froch VS Kessler PPV but delivering a **** poor card.

 

Rob I don't think you would be out of line if you gave us the general theme of what Hearn said to you yesterday,if it was regarding the ppv and groves opponent I actually think he would encourage you to share his thoughts with us

As you said he likes to keep in contact with the punters and we will all no doubt be paying for the froch fight

 

that was a good post by rob.

 

Listen with regards to the criticisms for the PPV cards.

Majority of fans are coming to see the top of the bill, for example Froch/Kessler.

The remainder of the time they will be drinking themselves into oblivion.

Its only the hardened boxing fans who will criticise the undercard, and whether you like it or not there aint that many of us.

 

And I agree with the most of what you said,Hearn is pretty wise when it comes to matching his stable.the Rees and brook examples are spot on

I think if matchroom werent involved in boxing the British scene would be less positive

 

Dont make that mistake.

Trust me if Sky ever did fall out with Hearn which is unlikely there is always going to be someone else to step into his shoes.

 

Who would step in with as bright and forward thinking ideas as the hearns

They have improved the coverage of boxing by a mile in a short space of time

And they have good strong cards

Who would replace them at sky and produce the same quality,bear in mind I've heard Hearn say that boxing for matchroom is funded by the other sports they organise.no one else could get away with running at a loss on a show just to create interest in a fighter down the line.no one out of the big 5 other than matchroom

 

I think he's good, so far

What I really like is how he reads boxing forums, twitter and other stuff. If you listen and read what's being said about yourself, and people's general opinions about this and that, you know what people want to make them happy. It not only helps to see it, but you become aware of it if you weren't already.

I wish boxers would do it. Sometimes it may not be good to take everything in seeing as there is a lot of bull**** you may see where posters just spout some bollocks, but if boxers could see past that and listen to what others think of them and address a potential problem the general public have perceived off of you, then you're not only helping yourself, but you're helping your PR. That's what I like about Eddie. He's almost transparent, he reads and he mentions the things that are said. There are lot of questionable things that pop to mind and whenever I seem to see an interview on him, he's always somehow addressed it like he knew that others had been talking about it, and that's because he reads what the public say on here and other places.

I look forward to what he does. I'm sure he's aware of the potential criticism he faces with new fighters consistently joining his stable, but he seems like a guy who will try to deliver, for now.

 

while this is true, Boxing would do well to get away from that kind of situation and the key way would be to have stronger cards.

Also they want to keep the audience at home happy.

 

what!