I recently watched a video covering the Foreman vs Frazier fights. It explained that with the NABF title on the line, which Foreman won beating Lyle, the winner would be in like to face Ali as the mandatory challenger. They even explicitly mention that this was the case in the 70's, that heavyweights who had the title had this status. Is there some truth this? And if so, how on Earth did Foreman not get a rematch after going on a streak beating Lyle, Frazier, Ledoux, etc?
Wow, what a coincidence. I was watching the exact same video today I am not sure, its the first i ever heard of it. IMO Ali is the greatest but i don't think his camp wanted the Foreman rematch post 1976. Foreman himself is to blame for being away for 15 months post loss. And after he came back, he needed a few wins to get his confidence. Had Foreman beaten young, Ali would have had no choice but to fight him.
But if what the video said is true, it doesn't matter that Foreman had a 15 month layoff. The moment he beat Lyle he was the mandatory challenger with the NABF title. The Young fight shouldn't have happened in the 1st place. Beating Lyle and Frazier should have been more than enough. I do agree that Ali and/or his team weren't in any rush to rematch him. Actions speak louder than words. I mean Ali even told Foreman to rematch Norton and beat him and then he'd give Foreman a rematch "because I can't beat him [Norton]". Ali had lost a lot of the hunger and fire and wasn't interested in challenging himself anymore.