PDA

View Full Version : Will We Ever See Another Golden Boxing Age Again?


TENNIS_IS_FUN
12-14-2007, 02:10 PM
It saddens me...current fights are horrible, almost becoming like WWE with all the pre-fight drama. The days of Hearns, Hagler, Holyfield....*sigh* Remember when we all knew the name of the heavy weight champ before looking it up on google? The golden ages...

GRANITECHIEF
12-14-2007, 02:11 PM
The new game in town is MMA. Boxing is going the way of the dinosaurs.

raiden031
12-14-2007, 02:26 PM
It saddens me...current fights are horrible, almost becoming like WWE with all the pre-fight drama. The days of Hearns, Hagler, Holyfield....*sigh* Remember when we all knew the name of the heavy weight champ before looking it up on google? The golden ages...

You mean Rocky Balboa isn't still the champion? :oops:

A.J. Sim
12-14-2007, 02:38 PM
Boxing is gone and what remains is a shell of itself. Fight promoters like Don King and Bob Arum who cared more about enriching their own pockets than the sport itself; the fact that most major title fights are on pay-per view and are really expensive instead of being on regular networks (does anyone here remember when boxing was on ABC's Wide World of Sports?); the lack of compelling characters like Ali, Leonard, Hagler, Hearns, Foreman, and Frazier. There was no need to manufacture any intensity or drama between Leonard and Hagler.

There are more reasons as to why boxing collapsed; would take a long time to list them all.

Moose Malloy
12-14-2007, 02:57 PM
lower weight divisions are still exciting. tune into the Manny Pacquiao-Juan Manuel Márquez Superfeatherweight fight in March & the Rafael Márquez-Israel Vázquez Super bantamweight fight (also in March & it is not on pay per view, but on regular Showtime) to see what the sport is still capable of.

None of these guys speak English well, or trashtalk well, so HBO isn't going to devote silly shows to them, but they are true warriors, unlike the fights that got the most buys this year.

Maybe youtube has the last time Marquez fought Vazquez, it was last July, it was an amazing fight.

Plus Pavlik-Taylor was great as well(they fight again in Feb)

Cotto is showing some potential of being an exciting fighter.

And yes, the heavyweight division is a joke.

But part of the reason boxing was so great in the 80s is that other sports still lagged behind it in terms of exposure & money(NBA for one)

Look at Ken Norton, Sr & Jr. In Sr's era boxers made the most money(by far), in Jr's era, NFL, NBA, MLB went through the roof in salaries.

Which would you gravitate towards as a great young athlete, a sport where you can suffer braindamage, or a sport which you can play for many years, & still get payed a ton even if you don't actually play? The best athletes in this country don't care about boxing. They used to.

ollinger
12-14-2007, 03:25 PM
A friend of mine works fights as a doctor and is quite close to the whole scene. He feels the caliber of athlete going into boxing has declined dramatically, as other sports have become more financially competitive.

iradical18
12-14-2007, 07:41 PM
I think it'll be back someday, probably not anytime soon though. All that's needed to save boxing is a charismatic/hard hitting heavyweight.

Feña14
12-14-2007, 08:31 PM
David Haye is going to do some exciting things in 2008 at heavyweight.

I'm not saying it's going to be a golden age or anything but it should make things a bit more watchable.

TENNIS_IS_FUN
12-14-2007, 08:51 PM
David Haye is going to do some exciting things in 2008 at heavyweight.

I'm not saying it's going to be a golden age or anything but it should make things a bit more watchable.

haye is good, but what we really need is a reformation...

btw, haye reminds me alot of Hearns...his guard is low, he flicks the jab and explodes with his right.

I just saw an interview with Haye...im impressed, he actually seems pretty educated by his vocabulary and the way he analyzes his matches. Cheers.

Feña14
12-14-2007, 09:11 PM
haye is good, but what we really need is a reformation...

btw, haye reminds me alot of Hearns...his guard is low, he flicks the jab and explodes with his right.

I just saw an interview with Haye...im impressed, he actually seems pretty educated by his vocabulary and the way he analyzes his matches. Cheers.

Yeah, he's a good lad!

For his fights he picks his own ring girls and has competitions to see which ones will get the job, now that's clever thinking!

TennisandMusic
12-14-2007, 09:26 PM
I once ran into Ken Norton Sr. in a Fuddruckers in San Diego while eating. He signed the back of our receipt, which I still have to this day. Now back to the actual topic...

Deuce
12-14-2007, 09:47 PM
Boxing is gone and what remains is a shell of itself. Fight promoters like Don King and Bob Arum who cared more about enriching their own pockets than the sport itself; the fact that most major title fights are on pay-per view and are really expensive instead of being on regular networks (does anyone here remember when boxing was on ABC's Wide World of Sports?); the lack of compelling characters like Ali, Leonard, Hagler, Hearns, Foreman, and Frazier. There was no need to manufacture any intensity or drama between Leonard and Hagler.

There are more reasons as to why boxing collapsed; would take a long time to list them all.
^ Good post.

No, the 'golden age' will never return.

It's like everything else: style has become more important than substance.
Take any sport - tennis, for example... will we ever have the rivalries and personalities of the past, when Laver, Newcombe, Roach, Connors, Smith, Borg, McEnroe, etc. were at the helm? No.
Will we ever again have teams like in the heyday of the Dodgers or Yankees? No. The intensity has deteriorated consistently since then - to the point where an expansion team like the Marlins (or Florida Panthers in hockey) can win their respective championships.
Everything has become diluted - and it's the oversaturated media attention that is responsible.
The media attention has resulted in larger and larger salaries - with the result of that being players who play for the fame and money, rather than for the love of the sport, as before.
It's really pretty easy to figure out where the problem lies.

There is no such thing as a team anymore. A team is a group of individuals who stick together for many years. Today, half the players don't stay with a given team for more than 2 consecutive years.
And so all we have is an ever-changing group of individuals that play under one name for a year or two, and then half the 'team' changes. How can fans in a given city relate, or pledge their allegiance to an ever-changing group of individuals? It's simply not possible.
Add the fact that entire franchises pack up and change cities at the drop of a hat.
The Indianapolis Colts?! The St. Louis Rams?! This tells us how much value tradition has in sport today - absolutely zero. All style (and profit), and no substance.

Boxing is far from being alone. Every sport has been ruined by fame and money.
You can add music, books, and film, as well.
There will never again be a 'Golden Age' of anything - because style has replaced substance, and quantity has replaced quality.

richw76
12-15-2007, 12:09 PM
lower weight divisions are still exciting. .................
And yes, the heavyweight division is a joke.

The best athletes in this country don't care about boxing. They used to.
100% True to all of the above. Feather weight fighters even in MMA is 250% more interesting to watch. There's this guy Urijah Faber in one of the MMA leagues dude must be 5''6' on stilts but he has had some of the most entertaining and technical fights I've seen.


No, the 'golden age' will never return.

There will never again be a 'Golden Age' of anything - because style has replaced substance, and quantity has replaced quality.

I don't know if I agree completely. But in boxings case. I think it's a combination of a decline in quality athletes that don't mind getting hit in the head, and it's cultural.

If a guy has a ton of heart and fights his <tail> off, and loses people say he sucks and writes him off. The perfect record seems to be overly important.

Also, I think in boxing there's a real perception by fans, that paper champions are almost created by savvy promoters. I don't think boxing is fake usually but the importance of record, and carefully structured fights gives it a WWE quality. Especially at the heavy weight levels were there's more money involved.

35ft6
12-15-2007, 12:28 PM
The new game in town is MMA. Boxing is going the way of the dinosaurs. Even for exciting fighters like Pacman, or marquee matchups like De La Hoya versus Mayweather, boxing just seems like a novelty act now. Remember when you could call the heavyweight champ "the baddest man" alive and mean it? Put an MMA welterweight champ against the heavyweight champ and I put my money on the MMA guy. Yes, different sport, maybe not fair to base it on that, but my point was before a huge part of boxing's appeal was you felt like you were watching the two toughest guys in the world throwing down. I felt that way even while I was studying martial arts. Now, not at all. I remember reading articles by "renegade" martial artists way back when who said a good wrestler could beat a black belt any day, and that even a strong NFL lineman could simply tackle most of the martial artists out there and kick their butts. How right they were. Long live MMA.

I just wonder if we're living in the golden age of MMA. Most of the top guys now have a very solid base in one style now, but already you're seeing guys who've only trained in MMA their whole lives. Like jack of all MMA trades, master of none. It seems like the guys who grew up wrestling and had to learn striking have an advantage over the guys who grew up striking and had to learn grappling, but then there's guys like Anderson Silva. I hope style matchups remain, where it's not just MMA versus MMA, but thai boxing versus wrestling, or judo versus BJJ like we still see now.

GoochMoney
12-15-2007, 12:41 PM
another vote for mma here -

that said, it seems the UFC is already dulling with other organizations like the WEC providing more exciting fights without the WWE type glitz and price tag for PPV.

IMO one of the things that hurt boxing is the various promoters and industry people focused on filling their own pockets...where the UFC had total control for the past 10+ years. the UFC guys seemed to focus on developing the sport and now they are printing money...something to the tune of $50M+ per PPV...forget the TV rights and merchandising.

35ft6
12-15-2007, 12:51 PM
^ UFC is already doing what led to the downfall of boxing -- trying to create the most profitable matchups and not the best ones. Which works for a while but eventually people want quality fights.

richw76
12-15-2007, 01:31 PM
^ UFC is already doing what led to the downfall of boxing -- trying to create the most profitable matchups and not the best ones. Which works for a while but eventually people want quality fights.

Can you say Michael Bisping Vs Matt Hamill. That reminded me of some boxing outcomes. I mean if someone is the champ or has a perfect record the challenger should have to BEAT the other guy, not just survive and win on points, but DUDE HAMILL was robbed because ZUFFA needed a way to market in the UK/Euro regions.

To give them credit they will put a Rampage vs. Chuck Liddell. They obviously spent tons of money trying to market that dead fish. They'll make match ups that have a strong possibility of not having an outcome that is most profitable business wise.