sounds like ****** wants no part of Burns-Broner

And? Sparing means jack **** unless you spar together for years. Watch price v Dallas as a quick example of sparring partners coming together.

Mitchell beating Murray means more to me than any of Burns wins and I mean that.

 

Burn's Fana or Broner should be good .Burns Rocky was a quality fight .I think Burns's next fight will be a good one , Fana or Broner .Looking forward to seeing who it is .

 

I THINK RICKY WILL BE EVEN BETTER AT LW,SUIT HIM MORE THAN MITCHELL,CONTINUES TO BE WORLD CHAMP IMO:deal

 

just a quick question..........are you gay?

 

Brummy,Ricky beats Kevin 7 days a week mate,kevins a very good fighter but he knows Rickys a level above.

 

Jinks we would fight Kevin no problem and thats not being flash or anything,ive said even when Ricky and Kevin were to fight at SFW Ricky would win its about styles mate and imo Ricky may well stop Kevin in a 12 rounder.We'd have no issue fighting Kevin or Kasitas @ LW.Lets just wait and see what happens.:good

 

This content is protected

 

funny i was told kevin did a number on burns in sparring.

 

I don't think that this debate on Burns' quality is ever going to come to any conclusion unless he starts fighting genuinely threatening fighters. For my part, I rate Burns, I really do, and I think he could win belts at SFW, and has the beating of Fana and Broner. Billy sees a lot more of Burns' strength in depth than we do, obviously, so I am sure that he has seen things in training that Burns has not had to demonstrate in the ring thus far.

There will also always be fans who think that Burns is overrated, protected, and would be found out were he to step up the level of opposition.

I am somewhere in between the two camps, as I do think that Burns would win those more challenging fights, and would prove some critics wrong, but I also agree that the quality of opposition since he first won the belt has proved very little about him and has not advanced any counter-argument to his critics. They would have been fine as keep-busy fights, I don't begrudge anyone an earner, the fans get to see the fighter out, practise some new moves and all that, but there have to be competitive fights in between if one is going to claim to be a legitimate world champion. We could all name overseas fighters who never leave their own shores and sit on a title while facing soft opposition with something in their record that makes them marketable opponents. Trouble is, it is sometimes tough to take that same criticism when it comes back. Whatever he did later on - and I was a massive fan - Calzaghe was slow to step up and was accused of not risking his belt to keep the paydays coming. There have been others.

To me, Burns is in that position now - I am a fan of his, and think he can do it, but I have no defence to offer against his critics who point to his fights since winning the belt. I just hope that he has used those to make his money, and next year will be allowed to take more risks and show that he has more.

Anyway, apologies for the ramble - I am sure that Billy has seen things that give him such strong confidence in Burns, I am a fan of Burns, but I have to agree that the title defences have been overly-straightforward. I just don't think that these debates will ever get anywhere until he does step it up. Billy will come on saying 'he's great, would beat them all', others will come on saying 'prove it, he just fights bums'... and we are at an impasse until we get him in a tough fight. Hopefully it is in the interests of both sides for this to happen, as everyone will want to prove themselves right!

Sorry to ramble on at such length... hung over.

 

Mitchell beats Burns IMO.

 

good post and hit nail on the head:thumbsup

 

The difference in quality between Mitchell and Burns is just laughable.

 

As my Scottish brethren would say:

Get tae ****.

 

This is all very confusing Billy. you've got the fastest, biggest, strongest super featherweight in the world. you claim you would win a world title up at lightweight, my personal favourite is "Juan Manuel Lopez brings nothing to the table". So could I ask you a simple question. What the **** have your last 3 defences been about?

 

:nono