The argument that American Heavies are "in other sports"

Everything you've just said applies equally well to the UK (most people here don't have SKY or cable). As another poster mentioned, boxing is nowhere near the top sport in the UK; it's certainly not top 5, and it's probably not top 10.

 

No.. this is when your football players fight... go to about 40 secs in for the great part

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxvNxsJzyxI[/ame]

And ours
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEu3GzNDs74[/ame]

 

...but neither of them are british.

.....anyone can blindside someone like that yank did!

footballer turned boxer here though:

[url]http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=368372&cat=boxer[/url]

 

Is sky a premium channel? The point is you have to get basic cable and then shell out for movie channels like HBO/MAX on top of that, let alone paying for PPV. If it was on basic cable more often at the championship level it would probably be a lot better received(FSN/ESPN). Boxing isn't a top ten sport in the UK? Seems like the BBC UK page has a pretty solid grasp on y'alls domestic scene.

 

And yet it's not fair to make this point towards US. Ukraine for example doesn't have jack **** to offer athletes. Our best athletes have to be exceptional so they can move as far away from here as they can.

 

SKY is a satellite service. You have to have at least their basic package (to get the dish and kit), then you have to pay extra to get the sports channels, then you have to pay extra to get the PPVs. In many ways it's equivalent.

The BBC have concentrated on the domestic scene because there's a 'public interest', but their coverage really isn't that great (Bunce's show on BBC London aside). Look how far down the sidebar list on the website Boxing is (13th, and arguably snooker and horse racing which are below it are more popular). Their boxing page gets updated once or twice a week at best.

All I'm saying is that "they're all playing NFL" doesn't wash as an excuse. The British could easily say, "All our feather-to-light-heavyweights are playing football and cricket".

 

I like rugby. My British friend got me in to it recently. But to be honest in terms of atheleticsm NFL is more polished. Just on that highlight, the ball handling technique is pretty atrocious (wrong hand and/or positioning). Simple techniques also ("jumping for ball at the highest point") seems to be not very widely used. I see a lot of them jumping early or late for a ball. Tackling is also is very raw (attack point is high, and incorrect way of taking the legs out). But I don't want to make a big deal on that one since there are no pads. The technique is probably a little different.

Which brings us back to violence level. There is a theory that if a system is biased towards offense ("no pads") the game is actually end up being played more defensively since injuries and fumbles would be easier to create. Players and coaches will end up designing a system to counter such bias. Systems biased towards defense (with pads and helmets) tend to be be played more offensively since there is a natural feeling of invulnerability. This is why until quite recently, in American NFL head to head collision was very common - even praised. You have 2 athletes feeling invulnerable going full force against each other. Flash back to now, they discovered these 'padded' athletes have the highest level of concussion and dementia in all of sports.

Think of MMA, with its legal head kicks, smaller gloves, elbow and knee strikes you would figure the career and health of an MMA athlete would be shorter than a boxer considering none of these are legal.
Guest what, because we "think" boxing is less barbaric with its refined fist only striking, the career of a boxer tends to end before they reach 35. Add the fact that in MMA you only need 2-3 seconds of KD for the fight to be stopped versus 8-10 seconds in boxing, you are asking either a vastly more powerful head shot or much high accumulation of shots. Either way, boxing is more dangerous to your health in the long run than MMA's system.

 

Your arguement is partially true. The other part of the truth though is that the rest of the world is catching up with the US in ALL sports. Basketball is one example. Long gone are 50 point blowouts by the original Dream Team. There's also a reason why presently about 20% of NBA players are foreign born.

 

Kelly Pavlik got a lot of love from all races. The fact is, for whatever reason, he isn't living up to the hype.

 

I thout all of his fans lived in trailer park .

 

Ali and Roy Jones were DEFINITELY GREAT ATHLETES. Some of the best athletes in recent history.

And look how they dominated.

 

There used to be a big difference in popularity of boxing between USA and Europe. It's safe to say that they produced the best champions to this day but to rule out the posibility that boxing would be less americanised in case of a more globalised world is foolish. It was what it was but times have changed, what Americans now call a low point in boxing we Europeans call a high point. Today the likelihood of an American fighter winnig a title is just as great as anbody elses. And it will probably stay that way... Some American posters don't get that:hat

I gotta tell this, I think this is actually a latent black vs. white debate :-(

 

The Answer....3 Cousins....7-0, 6-10 and 6-9. Boxing gets 1 of them...the biggest 1, and the NBA gets the 2 others.

7-0 Pigeon Toed Julius Long....probably career earnings under 1 million.

6-10 Terry Mills....long NBA tenure.... Free Ride to University of Michigan.....George Foreman Look Alike...but Supersized

6-9 Grant Long....another long NBA career. Free ride to Eastern Michigan

There are no boxing scholarships. Boxing gets the pigeon toed kid. He's not that bad...beat Vinny Maddelone before they took it from him for smoking weed. But he is by far not the best boxer in his family. The other 2 were put together much better and much more coordinated.

Boxing is not the way out anymore. The scholarship is. You almost have to be born into a boxing family or have luck to be around a boxing hub to get developed these days.

The death of the club shows in the USA makes it even more less likely to find new skilled HW's. When lots of fights used to go on, there were more opportunities for big guys to go make some bucks fighting. Now days that is an unheard of way to help pay the bills. There is nobody out there doing the local shows anymore.

 

football stifles british boxing god knows how many potentially great boxers played football instead

 

When America wants to, we dominate. Its proven in the olympics! Top athletes around the world! and who always domintates?? United States of ****ing America!