PBC is drawing worse ratings than Andre Ward

Yeah but Marco Huck-Glowacki wasn't even meant to be a good fight on paper, it just turned out that way. Not many people were excited for the fight before it happened, even the Cruiserweight division buffs.

There have been a few good fights but often in between heaps of rubbish.

I think the problem is that PBCs matches are all marketed under the same brand, they should separate it a little bit make PBC actually "premier" and then for the "lower quality" matches make it something other.

 

Yet another excellent post!

People hate PBC only because it's Haymon running the show if it was Arum running it they wouldn't stop taking about how great it's for the sport and how glad they're to have boxing back on network TV. But since it's Haymon they bash it. Damn shame people are so hate filled that they let that drive them into bashing so much free boxing on network TV.

 

It's no worse than the Baseball playoffs....games are on MLB network, Fox Sports 1 and TBS. Lots of people don't have FS1 or MLB. And the game times change constantly depending on who is playing. For example they switched the times of the Toronto-Texas and Houston - KC games because Toronto is such a dismal market ratings wise.

I realize it's a business, but putting the games on two channels that have a lot more people watching seems to be a better idea than what's going on now.

 

Lulz. Look at your list. Again, lulz. One more time...lulz.

 

It doesn't matter if it was expected to be a mis-match. It turned out to be one of the best fights of the year. The fact that the match was more competitive than expected is to the credit of the match-makers.

I do agree that the branding could be different for different networks.

 

Wow. You seriously think there is no economic model that drives network television... It holds to the same ratings/advertiser business model that cable television does. Subscriber television's model (HBO, Showtime, et al) simply supplants the advertiser for the subscriber, but someone is always paying the bill, and ratings dictates the price of the bill and the willingness of the advertiser/subscriber to pay it.

Simply put, on network TV, bad ratings equals advertisers fleeing like rats off a sinking ship. The public does "buy" the product on network television in the sense that they tune-in, which boosts ratings, which boosts advertiser prices, via the demand of advertisers to get on the broadcast... so yeah, the only thing you're "reminding" us of is that you're clueless, if not uneducated.

 

Safety comes first!

 

I do like how they post them to their Youtube channels quickly. That's how I catch most of them.

 

Finally somebody thats a true boxing fan!! :happy:happy:happy

 

How many viewers would you consider " good" for a fight between O Connor and Bracero?

 

Yes I just hate the way Beterbiev,Frampton,Santa Cruz,Mares, Figueroa and Stevenson just shoulder roll their way to victories and rely on side to side elusiveness....

 

I am tired of mismatches on TV, would rather watch sparring.........................

 

All these posts and none of you mentioned the crux of the PBC problem: judges writing scorecards before they even watch the fights-- Breazele v. Kassi, Mansour v. Washington, Ishe v. Vanes, Porter v. Broner being 114-112 was absurd.(Broner won 3 rounds max). Mansour even said it was fixed. Giampa had Vanes v. Ishe and Russell v. Lomachenko a draw. Martinez v. Willaims I, one judge had Martinez winning two rounds. Williams v. Lara. Martinez v. Guerrero was bad too. How could I forget Garcia v. Peterson and Herrera.

 

First of all, the PBC was formed in March THIS YEAR. Half the fights you mentioned took place before then. Hell, you list two Paul Williams fights, and he's been paralyzed for years.

(I don't know how a Sergio Martinez fight from 2010 ended up on your list.)

SINCE MARCH, when the PBC was founded, I can name just as many fights where the favorite (who people here insisted would get the nod because they were Haymon fighters) lost/drew on the scorecards in a close fight, too. And it would've been easy for the judges to score for the favorite and nobody would've blinked. Including Jack-Dirrell, Lee-Quillin, Kameda-McDonnell, Arreola-Kassi, Alexander-Martinez.

Find five Golden Boy "name" favorites this year who lost a close decision in a bout designed to be a showcase fight for them? I defy you.

My point is, this guy (Al Haymon) is putting on shows with primarily name fighters with a frequency we haven't seen in YEARS and it's "a good thing."

If you have to go back FIVE YEARS before the thing was even created to find more than a couple bad decisions ... that just further proves what's going on isn't only fine, but it might be better than what we've had lately.

And now he's stacking up a December lineup that will hopefully all take place on the same night - Thurman-Porter, Quillin-Jacobs ...

I think it would be great if PBC aired fights all year, and then the best/winning fighters met at the close of each year on one big show. Maybe that's what he's setting up.

Whatever the case, I'd much rather watch this than have ESPN Friday Night Fights air for six months out of the year - showcasing primarily guys you've never heard of in low-level fights - before disappearing when the major sports seasons kick in, and then waiting around for one HBO card or one Showtime card a month (unless they blew their budgets early, and then you had to wait a couple months at the end of the year for one HBO card).

That's was about it three or four years ago.

Did you forget that already?

These are the glory days of this boxing era. Enjoy them.