Whatever happened to wiping out your division?

guys would rather chase money nowadays. i wish it wasn't like this and that's one of the reasons i like miguel cotto so much.

 

Fighters would stick around and defend their titles a lot more often if the championship titles actually had any kind of legitimacy... but that process has been so watered down that almost nobody takes championships seriously anymore.

 

exactly. hagler was THE middleweight champion and would not have traded that for anything. **** when the sanctioning cocksuckers tried to take his belts he just laughed at them, knowing he was above them. now we have "titlists" not champions. If I want a titlist I'll play some ****ing golf

 

Sometimes fighters attempt to wipe out their divisions nowadays, sometimes they don't, this has been highlighted in this thread already in some posts. It has always been this way, always, there have always been champions in every era who never fought everyone, there have always been champions in every era who fought everyone, there have always been champions who hardly fought anyone, and there have always been champions who fought most but still had fans at the time wanting a big fight to happen but never did.

Nothing has changed in the grand scheme of things, only the amount of fights a fighter has in general.

 

I totally disagree. It has nothing to do with the titles. Do you think that "title legitimacy" has anything to do with someone like Pac taking a pass on anyone at 140 (Campbell, Bradley, Ortiz, etc.) in search of dried up 147 pounders?

It has nothing to do with the titles, and everything to do with $$$$$. Why fight a Bradley or Nate for $6 or $7 million, when you can fight Cotto or Floyd for $15 million?

And if titles are so "watered down", then why the need to fight David Diaz (for the title) and if he fights Cotto guess what? The title would be on the line in that fight too. Dont you think Pac has a better use for the 3% sanction fees if titles weren't "taken seriously"?


There is so much hypocracy about the titles anyways. The exact same people who preach about how "titles dont mean anything" would be the FIRST ones posting about Pac being a "7 division champ" if he were to beat Cotto.

 

Holding a title and being considered the #1 fighter in your division no longer go hand in hand so that's why fighters no longer have the proud mentality of defending their championships.

 

Knowing as many fighters as I do, I can without question say that you are totally wrong about that. Its only once a fighter crosses a certain financial threshold that the titles mean less than the money..........

 

Back when the titles actually meant something money NEVER meant mroe than the titles because both went hand in hand with each other. When there was one champ per division the greatest money usually meant going through the champ. The menaingless state of the titles have added to the notion that fighters mean more money than championships.

 

We will just have to agree to disagree on this, because it'll be about a 5 hour debate and I'm tired. lol.

 

That's one thing we can agree on because I'm dead ****ing tired as well.

 

Klitschkos are wiping out their division.

 

and i remember larry merchant telling hopkins to his face he fought a meaningless fight and a waste of time and money. hopkins couldn't say anything but he was fighting a mandatory

 

mandatory for 300k or someone else for 1.2million???? tough choice huh???

 

We would have better fights in not for the ABC's forcing mandatories that do not deserve it. Don Kings owns 50% of Valouev, 100% of Ruiz, so we see Ruiz fighting for title again?!

 

KlitschKOs have been doing it. KlitschKOs always try to fight the best. Vitali went to court in order to prevent a mandatory fight with Maskaev. Maskaev is past of his prime.