Why didn't Cooney fight Weaver in 81?

I just can't get past Cooney being such an an abnormally fast starter and dangerous man so early on and Weaver being so abnormally slow starting. Cooney is also a very good finisher. I'm actually talking myself into making Cooney the narrow fave. I have no doubt Weaver is the better overall fighter here both resume based (after he learnt he wasn't an "opponent") and ability wise , but styles make me look toward Cooney.

 

One of histories great performances. I always maintain Jones has the abilities head to head to seriously challenge and many times beat all the great middles and compete and compete well with many great 175's. Jones - Toney was a schooling of the highest order.

 

Tillis was the mandatory, and either Mike had to fight him, or lose the belt.Strange, even though Gerry was the undisputed #1 contender.May have ended up better for him than the Holmes affair.

 

A Cooney/Weaver fight was agreed upon for Ceasar's Palace in Las Vegas in the Fall of 1981. Cooney was to get 5 million and Weaver was to get 3 million. It certainly was a winnable fight for Cooney though I agree with the above posters that if Cooney didn't ice Weaver inside 5 or 6 rounds he would have been stopped later in the fight like he was against Holmes.

Arum stepped in and threatened to sue the WBA made a decision that Weaver had to defend against Tillis and the winner would/could fight Cooney. For some reason The Wacko Twins didn't pursue Weaver after he beat Tillis instead they let Cooney sit on the shelf for months and got the huge 10 million dollar payday against Holmes so from their perspective it all worked out anyway as they only cared about the money not developing Cooney into a better fighter.

Here is the explanation from the Boxing book "Mean Business" about why the Cooney/Weaver fight didn't happen:

 

Ironically I just rewatched Toney Jones yesterday. You can crap all over for Jones' resume for beating up on a bunch of tomato cans but he beat two all time greats pretty effortlessly. And that's more than you can say for a lot of guys that we consider all time greats.

PS wasn't Cooney like a. foot taller than Weaver.

 

Cooney had about five inches on him.Wouldn't really matter, especially if Mike got Gerry beyond round five.

 

I like Cooney early. As noted by JT1, Cooney was a fast starter and Weaver needed rounds to get the wheels turning. I think Big Ger gets him in a corner or on the ropes sometime in the first three rounds and Weaver never gets away.

 

Yes, it could have been much like the Cooney Norton fight unless Weaver survives Cooney’s initial onslaught.
Then Weaver could make it interesting, wearing him down and coming from behind with a KO as he did against Tate and Coetzee.

 

What a crazy ,mixed up sport boxing can be !

 

I would surmise that his management team did want to risk the much bigger payday that a fight with Holmes would generate.

 

I hope nobody was gullible enough at the time to actually think that would happen.

 

That's my thought (I don't know much about the Weaver-Tillis-Cooney issue) Given Cooney's resume, demeanor, and management, he probably did wait for Holmes and the big payday. Despite his left hook talent, he feasted on has-beens, building his resume and...didn't fight for 2 years after Holmes. Given Larry's skills, he did a pretty good job that night and could/should have stepped back into the ring, say, 6 months later and continued his 'championship' path. Not! IMO Gerry is just another blip on the "what could have been list" of fighters.

 

Maybe that allergy thing that James had stifled him. He definitely had the talent to beat Mike. Along with Pedroza-Taylor, one of the biggest tank jobs in the history of title fights featuring the hometown guy as the challenger.

 

I'd give Cooney a sleight edge early by KO,