Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Arum disputes claim of Knocz's firing
FightHype Community > BOXING HYPE > Boxing
Pages: 1, 2
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE
In his first public interview regarding the topic, Top Rank Promotions CEO Bob Arum dismissed a widely reported notion that Manny Pacquiao had fired his longtime business advisor, Michael Koncz.

"No, it's all bullsh*t. I know someone who has talked to Manny, and it's all nonsense. It's all a made up story," said Arum. "Up until a few hours ago, when I talked to [Filipino reporter] Ronnie Nathanielsz, who called me after he had dinner with Manny last night, I didn't know what to say. Now I do."

Arum said that Nathanielsz spoke to Pacquiao at length about the rumors, which at least one member of Pacquiao's camp said were true.

"I know who started it, but I'm not going to tell you. I know why they started it. There are a lot of these people are looking to get rid of Michael so that they can feather their own nest," said Arum.

"Ronnie Nathanielz had dinner with Manny last night, and said that Manny laughed it off and laughed up a storm about it," said Arum. "So it's all baloney. Ronnie said that Manny called it 'a bunch of hooey.'"

A partner in Pacquiao's MP Promotions, Koncz has been labeled by others, including some of Pacquiao's own camp members, as being a crook.

"But that's not true. Michael is very valuable and he's a guy who looks out for Manny 100 percent. My feelings about Michael are that he's got Manny's best interest at heart. He accounts for every nickel, and he chases us to make sure that every nickel is paid," said Arum.

"If some of these people who are after Michael came in to replace him, it wouldn't work, because I'm not going to do anything -- particularly at my age -- to jeopardize myself by doing something that is not appropriate," said Arum. "I want to make sure that Manny gets every penny that he's entitled to, and the only way to make sure is to make sure that he has honest representation. Michael has demonstrated to me that he provides honest representation."


RingTV: Arum disputes claim of Koncz's firing

Article that just came out regarding the Koncz rumours. So Arum has jus come out and said it's baloney. Can someone tel me Wtf is going on here?!?!?!?!!
Eighty88Eight
I bet if there was a rumor Leonard Ellerbe had been fired, Ben Thompson wouldn't have been so breathless to post it on his front page (AND take implied credit for it) without confirming whether it was true or not...... oh wait.
gravytrain
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 18 2011, 06:49 PM) *
RingTV: Arum disputes claim of Koncz's firing

Article that just came out regarding the Koncz rumours. So Arum has jus come out and said it's baloney. Can someone tel me Wtf is going on here?!?!?!?!!


what's there to explain? there's always 5 different stories with them.
Cshel86
What's up with all of these unorganized lies???
JONdaCON817
"But that's not true. Michael is very valuable and he's a guy who looks out for Manny 100 percent. My feelings about Michael are that he's got Manny's best interest at heart. He accounts for every nickel, and he chases us to make sure that every nickel is paid," said Arum.

this quote right here tells me that Koncz is a crook. juss because Arum says otherwise... lol

dhoward126
Koncz probably has the same photographer on his payroll as Al Haymon. He's got something on the team and would be more than happy to spill it once the cash flow is gone.
thehype
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 18 2011, 06:49 PM) *
RingTV: Arum disputes claim of Koncz's firing

Article that just came out regarding the Koncz rumours. So Arum has jus come out and said it's baloney. Can someone tel me Wtf is going on here?!?!?!?!!


LOL. Didn't Lem Satterfield actually CONFIRM with a source inside of Pacquiao's camp that Koncz was fired earlier in the day. That must have been an odd conversation for him to have with Arum and Koncz. I wonder if they asked him who his source was.

laugh.gif

Anyway, this might clear up the confusion (READ IT ALL):

KONCZ FIRED? NOT SO FAST SAYS ARUM, BUT THERE'S MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE

Earlier today, the internet was buzzing with news that Manny Pacquiao had fired long-time adviser Michael Koncz. According to a report by Manny Pinol of Philboxing.com, reliable sources informed him that Pacquiao had finally "dismissed Michael Koncz as his business advisor and manager of MP Promotions for a litany of missteps and blunders". Lem Satterfield of RingTV.com would later confirm the report as well, also citing a source in Pacquiao's camp. The shocking news prompted several reporters to reach out to Koncz throughout the day, but there was no official response from any member of Team Pacquiao...until now. According to both Koncz and promoter Bob Arum, the news of his departure was nothing more than a rumor started by certain individuals who are jealous of his relationship with Pacquiao and gunning for his job.

read more

http://www.fighthype.com/pages/content10343.html

JLUVBABY
funny thing is pac has all this turmoil going on in his camp and probably has no idea its going on... like having one of vegas hotels being demolished in the back of you and you have no idea its going on... lol... something is def strange about pacs camp thats for sure... well i hope the guy doesnt wind up like a lot of other fighters which is half broke or broke all the way after all the money he has generated... that would be a sad story cuzz he doesnt seem like the sharpest knife in the drawer and as long as he has a big house a few cars and a little cash to spen while he's fighting he looks content... if he does have true friends in his camp i hope they act fast and he understands what potentially is happening to him...
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (JLUVBABY @ Jul 19 2011, 12:46 AM) *
funny thing is pac has all this turmoil going on in his camp and probably has no idea its going on... like having one of vegas hotels being demolished in the back of you and you have no idea its going on... lol... something is def strange about pacs camp thats for sure... well i hope the guy doesnt wind up like a lot of other fighters which is half broke or broke all the way after all the money he has generated... that would be a sad story cuzz he doesnt seem like the sharpest knife in the drawer and as long as he has a big house a few cars and a little cash to spen while he's fighting he looks content... if he does have true friends in his camp i hope they act fast and he understands what potentially is happening to him...

With the amount of money he's made and invested not to mention his continuing career as a politician i'm sure he won't have to ever worry about going broke..
The Ollie Reed Fan Club
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 19 2011, 04:39 AM) *
With the amount of money he's made and invested not to mention his continuing career as a politician i'm sure he won't have to ever worry about going broke..


If Mike Tyson can go broke then anyone can.
Eighty88Eight
Pac needs to get some honest people in his camp, like Al Haymon, Leonard Ellerbe, Don King, or Richard Shaeffer. With such a glutton of honesty in boxing, you wonder why he'd choose conniving weasels like Michael Koncz and Bob Arum.
Allmenjoi8
QUOTE (Eighty88Eight @ Jul 19 2011, 07:44 AM) *
Pac needs to get some honest people in his camp, like Al Haymon, Leonard Ellerbe, Don King, or Richard Shaeffer. With such a glutton of honesty in boxing, you wonder why he'd choose conniving weasels like Michael Koncz and Bob Arum.


Don King and honesty should never be in the same sentence. Just ask Iron Mike about Don King's honesty. Well to quote Shakespeare "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark." Its actually interesting because May said that Arum brags about Pacman making 20 million a fight but he only walks away with 3 million, maybe his inside people took notice and started adding 2 and 2. Maybe this will be the end of Arum and Pacman....
Cshel86
QUOTE (The Ollie Reed Fan Club @ Jul 19 2011, 05:16 AM) *
If Mike Tyson can go broke then anyone can.

Co-sign
Eighty88Eight
QUOTE (Allmenjoi8 @ Jul 19 2011, 09:44 AM) *
Don King and honesty should never be in the same sentence.


yes, it should, if applied with heavy and obvious sarcasm.
JONdaCON817
QUOTE (Eighty88Eight @ Jul 19 2011, 10:27 AM) *
yes, it should, if applied with heavy and obvious sarcasm.


Lol. Blatantly obvious sarcasm.
The Ollie Reed Fan Club
QUOTE (Eighty88Eight @ Jul 19 2011, 07:44 AM) *
Pac needs to get some honest people in his camp, like Al Haymon, Leonard Ellerbe, Don King, or Richard Shaeffer. With such a glutton of honesty in boxing, you wonder why he'd choose conniving weasels like Michael Koncz and Bob Arum.


Somehow I missed this post. Very funny laugh.gif
Snoop
QUOTE (Eighty88Eight @ Jul 19 2011, 04:27 PM) *
yes, it should, if applied with heavy and obvious sarcasm.

laugh.gif
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (The Ollie Reed Fan Club @ Jul 19 2011, 02:16 AM) *
If Mike Tyson can go broke then anyone can.

Pacquiao's strength and power in the Philippines alone is more than 10x that of Tyson's in America during his prime. We're talking about a man who will probably be running for the presidency in 2020 and will be governor by 2013. not to mention the Philippine's most powerful political figures are in his everyday entourage working alongside him. The difference between Tyson and Pacquiao is that even if Pacquiao were to lose his next few fights or get himself into legal troubles, he has already become so powerful and influential none of that would even matter. Just look how quickly the media brushed aside his alleged affairs and scandal photos rather than demonize him like they did Tyson. I would bet my house on Manny Pacquiao never having to worry about going broke in his lifetime.
The Ollie Reed Fan Club
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 19 2011, 08:45 PM) *
Pacquiao's strength and power in the Philippines alone is more than 10x that of Tyson's in America during his prime. We're talking about a man who will probably be running for the presidency in 2020 and will be governor by 2013. not to mention the Philippine's most powerful political figures are in his everyday entourage working alongside him. The difference between Tyson and Pacquiao is that even if Pacquiao were to lose his next few fights or get himself into legal troubles, he has already become so powerful and influential none of that would even matter. Just look how quickly the media brushed aside his alleged affairs and scandal photos rather than demonize him like they did Tyson. I would bet my house on Manny Pacquiao never having to worry about going broke in his lifetime.



Are you suggesting Manny will become president of the Phillipines and then rape it Marcos style? laugh.gif If so Jinkee will end up with a pretty awesome shoe collection.
The Ollie Reed Fan Club
QUOTE (Eighty88Eight @ Jul 19 2011, 08:44 AM) *
Pac needs to get some honest people in his camp, like Al Haymon, Leonard Ellerbe, Don King, or Richard Shaeffer. With such a glutton of honesty in boxing, you wonder why he'd choose conniving weasels like Michael Koncz and Bob Arum.


Oh and +1 that someone took it seriously. Good job.
Snoop
If Manny becomes president, he will most likely be a puppet president to whatever regime is in power, just like he is a puppet to the Arum regime now.
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (The Ollie Reed Fan Club @ Jul 19 2011, 06:40 PM) *
Are you suggesting Manny will become president of the Phillipines and then rape it Marcos style? laugh.gif If so Jinkee will end up with a pretty awesome shoe collection.

lol nah man i didn't suggest anything i jus said manny will "probably be running", doesn't mean he'll win.


And c'mon, can u ever see lil Pacman will that cute smile run a muck on the Philippines ala Marcos style?

mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 19 2011, 06:57 PM) *
If Manny becomes president, he will most likely be a puppet president to whatever regime is in power, just like he is a puppet to the Arum regime now.

u bitter bro?
The Ollie Reed Fan Club
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 19 2011, 09:01 PM) *
u bitter bro?


He's very bitter. No matter how you dice it Snoop sees no upside for the Pacman laugh.gif
gravytrain
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 19 2011, 10:00 PM) *
lol nah man i didn't suggest anything i jus said manny will "probably be running", doesn't mean he'll win.


And c'mon, can u ever see lil Pacman will that cute smile run a muck on the Philippines ala Marcos style?



the smile is just a distraction. Pac will have a solid gold mansion and need to eat cobra soup all day so he can run through all the bitches in Asia. then when someone accuses him of corruption he'll just smile and "i'm just doing my job, you've to talk to my adviser".
Spyder
QUOTE (Eighty88Eight @ Jul 19 2011, 08:44 AM) *
Pac needs to get some honest people in his camp, like Al Haymon, Leonard Ellerbe, Don King, or Richard Shaeffer. With such a glutton of honesty in boxing, you wonder why he'd choose conniving weasels like Michael Koncz and Bob Arum.

duwdu
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 19 2011, 08:45 PM) *
Pacquiao's strength and power in the Philippines alone is more than 10x that of Tyson's in America during his prime. We're talking about a man who will probably be running for the presidency in 2020 and will be governor by 2013. not to mention the Philippine's most powerful political figures are in his everyday entourage working alongside him. The difference between Tyson and Pacquiao is that even if Pacquiao were to lose his next few fights or get himself into legal troubles, he has already become so powerful and influential none of that would even matter. Just look how quickly the media brushed aside his alleged affairs and scandal photos rather than demonize him like they did Tyson. I would bet my house on Manny Pacquiao never having to worry about going broke in his lifetime.


Hmm, you may have assumed too much. IMHO, life, even in the 3rd world, is very feeble. I don't see Manny being/becoming as deeply entrenched [in the dirty game of politics] as those local pros he met there. Just give him a few years after a loss or series of losses and/or retirement going forward when he would then have to struggle to get from the same pot as the other local champions, and his current popularity would be all but forgotten in the Phil. Nothing has lasted for long there or anywhere else for that matter; It would have been a different scenario if he hadn't dabbled into politics.

P34c3
The CEO
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 19 2011, 09:57 PM) *
If Manny becomes president, he will most likely be a puppet president to whatever regime is in power, just like he is a puppet to the Arum regime now.


Ofcourse...

QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 19 2011, 10:01 PM) *
u bitter bro?


Why would he be bitter?...Top Rank and Team Pacquiao are finally getting raked over the coals in public opinion...they've been takin' a beating the past 2 months...

"Thank God for FightHype."


QUOTE (gravytrain @ Jul 19 2011, 10:28 PM) *
the smile is just a distraction. Pac will have a solid gold mansion and need to eat cobra soup all day so he can run through all the bitches in Asia. then when someone accuses him of corruption he'll just smile and "i'm just doing my job, you've to talk to my adviser".


LMAOO!!

Dude...you're a fucking Diamond Level Poster...too good.
Snoop
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 20 2011, 02:01 AM) *
u bitter bro?

laugh.gif

Tell me what part of that statement isn't true. Pacquiao can't even say on camera that he wants to fight Mayweather, or any other fighter for that matter. If that ain't being someone's puppet, I dunno what is.
Snoop
QUOTE (The Ollie Reed Fan Club @ Jul 20 2011, 02:03 AM) *
He's very bitter. No matter how you dice it Snoop sees no upside for the Pacman laugh.gif

Oh no, I think he's a wonderful singer/actor.

laugh.gif
Hotsauce
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 09:36 AM) *
laugh.gif

Tell me what part of that statement isn't true. Pacquiao can't even say on camera that he wants to fight Mayweather, or any other fighter for that matter. If that ain't being someone's puppet, I dunno what is.


"talk to my promotor"
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 07:36 AM) *
laugh.gif

Tell me what part of that statement isn't true. Pacquiao can't even say on camera that he wants to fight Mayweather, or any other fighter for that matter. If that ain't being someone's puppet, I dunno what is.

Because you're taking two completely irrelevant aspects about Pacquiao (ie: his boxing and political career) and are scrutinizing his political career based merely on your opinion and what you dislike. The Boxing biz and Politics are two completely different things. If criticizing a mans future before it even unfolds because you dislike his demeanor isn't a sign of bitterness, than I don't know what is. Watchu know about Pacquiao's current and future political agenda anyway?!?!?
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (duwdu @ Jul 20 2011, 06:10 AM) *
Hmm, you may have assumed too much. IMHO, life, even in the 3rd world, is very feeble. I don't see Manny being/becoming as deeply entrenched [in the dirty game of politics] as those local pros he met there. Just give him a few years after a loss or series of losses and/or retirement going forward when he would then have to struggle to get from the same pot as the other local champions, and his current popularity would be all but forgotten in the Phil. Nothing has lasted for long there or anywhere else for that matter; It would have been a different scenario if he hadn't dabbled into politics.

P34c3

I feel like in developing nations such as the Philippines the rich will stay rich and the poor will often stay poor. In western society we're always fortunate because of the so-called possibility of living out the American dream. With Pacquiao growing up in immense poverty and witnessing nothing but that in everything that surrounded him, I don't think he'll even think twice about splurging all his money away like many pro athletes in America do. I know the dude reached billionaire status in the Philippines based on his fights alone a few years ago, and combine the money he's made from sponsorship, endorsements, investments as well as his now cushy job as a politician, the dude is probably swimming in dough and has enough advisers around him to ensure he's handling his assets well.
Snoop
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 20 2011, 03:55 PM) *
Because you're taking two completely irrelevant aspects about Pacquiao (ie: his boxing and political career) and are scrutinizing his political career based merely on your opinion and what you dislike. The Boxing biz and Politics are two completely different things. If criticizing a mans future before it even unfolds because you dislike his demeanor isn't a sign of bitterness, than I don't know what is. Watchu know about Pacquiao's current and future political agenda anyway?!?!?

No, I'm basing my opinion on how sports figures historically have been voted into office for their public popularity, and used by the party representing them. I'm basing my opinion on Pacquiao's inability to voice any opinion of his own regarding his career. If he hasn't learned any semblance of autonomy in his career inside the ring, what makes you think he will in an arena that involves way more money, power and public pressure? Seriously, what makes you think he WON'T become a puppet politician other than the lameass reasoning of, "Well, you never know..."

mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 11:43 AM) *
No, I'm basing my opinion on how sports figures historically have been voted into office for their public popularity, and used by the party representing them. I'm basing my opinion on Pacquiao's inability to voice any opinion of his own regarding his career. If he hasn't learned any semblance of autonomy in his career inside the ring, what makes you think he will in an arena that involves way more money, power and public pressure? Seriously, what makes you think he WON'T become a puppet politician other than the lameass reasoning of, "Well, you never know..."

At the end of the day politics is a popularity contest. And as history shows, Politics is a forum for the elite in society; not just the political elite, but the economic and social elite as well. And let's be real, name another democracy where the politicians make choices independent of public and economic pressures? When you think about it, all politicians in democracies are puppets. Politicians NEED the public backing and support of its citizens, as well as the major corporations and members of legislature in order to stay in power. Politicians do the will of and answer to the majority, and if they don't, they better be damn good at manipulating the public into accepting their views. You pretty much killed your own argument becuase the fact that he IS good at answering to and staying loyal to those he works for will make him even better at his job as a Congressman when he must answer to the wants and needs of the people in Sarangani lol.

With that said, you're entitled to your opinion, but I just don't see how it makes any sense to measure his potential success as a politician based on how you view his demeanor as a boxer.
Snoop
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 20 2011, 07:18 PM) *
At the end of the day politics is a popularity contest. And as history shows, Politics is a forum for the elite in society; not just the political elite, but the economic and social elite as well. And let's be real, name another democracy where the politicians make choices independent of public and economic pressures? When you think about it, all politicians in democracies are puppets. Politicians NEED the public backing and support of its citizens, as well as the major corporations and members of legislature in order to stay in power. Politicians do the will of and answer to the majority, and if they don't, they better be damn good at manipulating the public into accepting their views. You pretty much killed your own argument becuase the fact that he IS good at answering to and staying loyal to those he works for will make him even better at his job as a Congressman when he must answer to the wants and needs of the people in Sarangani lol.

With that said, you're entitled to your opinion, but I just don't see how it makes any sense to measure his potential success as a politician based on how you view his demeanor as a boxer.

Actually, YOU just killed your own argument with that convoluted trite of contradictions.

So basically, politicans are all inherently puppets, and Manny Pacquiao will be an excellent politician because he is already "answering to and staying loyal to those he works for". Wait, wait, you wouldn't be basing that off his ring career would you? Because "I just don't see how it makes any sense to measure his potential success as a politician based on how you view his demeanor as a boxer."

laugh.gif

But wait, if politicians are all inherently puppets, what was wrong with my initial statement?

"If Manny becomes president, he will most likely be a puppet president to whatever regime is in power, just like he is a puppet to the Arum regime now."

dntknw.gif
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 12:32 PM) *
Actually, YOU just killed your own argument with that convoluted trite of contradictions.

So basically, politicans are all inherently puppets, and Manny Pacquiao will be an excellent politician because he is already "answering to and staying loyal to those he works for". Wait, wait, you wouldn't be basing that off his ring career would you? Because "I just don't see how it makes any sense to measure his potential success as a politician based on how you view his demeanor as a boxer."

laugh.gif

But wait, if politicians are all inherently puppets, what was wrong with my initial statement in the first place?

"If Manny becomes president, he will most likely be a puppet president to whatever regime is in power, just like he is a puppet to the Arum regime now."

dntknw.gif

How did I kill my own argument? YOU'RE the one who said it is TRUE that Pacquiao is a puppet, and then you questioned how he could have succcess as a politician when he has to answer to public pressures. Your post implied that Pacquiao being a puppet in politics is somethign that u see negatively and I basically took what you said and turned that around on you and said that if anything, what you've said will make him an even better politician. and with that said, it's still wrong to base one person's success in one career based on a completely irrelevant career.
Snoop
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 20 2011, 08:38 PM) *
How did I kill my own argument? YOU'RE the one who said it is TRUE that Pacquiao is a puppet, and then you questioned how he could have succcess as a politician when he has to answer to public pressures. Your post implied that Pacquiao being a puppet in politics is somethign that u see negatively and I basically took what you said and turned that around on you and said that if anything, what you've said will make him an even better politician. and with that said, it's still wrong to base one person's success in one career based on a completely irrelevant career.

"Your post implied..." in other words, you assumed. I said he will most likely become a puppet to whatever party is in power. That's IT. I said nothing about being "successful" or "being a good politician", just that he'd become a puppet. But if you think a puppet politician is the definition of a good politician, sure, whatever. It just doesn't conflict with my initial statement. After all, didn't you just say that "all politicians in democracies are puppets"? So really, WTF is the problem?

dntknw.gif

And on the contrary, how someone behaves in one career is a very good indicator of how they will be in another. Why do you think the occupational past of a presidential candidate is a factor in elections? Either way, based on what we know, there is more evidence to suggest that he would be more likely to become a puppet than not. Unless of course, you have something else to offer? Cuz otherwise you're still just saying, "Well, you never know..."
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 01:00 PM) *
"Your post implied..." in other words, you assumed. I said he will most likely become a puppet to whatever party is in power. That's IT. I said nothing about being "successful" or "being a good politician", just that he'd become a puppet. But if you think a puppet politician is the definition of a good politician, sure, whatever. It just doesn't conflict with my initial statement. After all, didn't you just say that "politicians in democracies are puppets"? So really, WTF is the problem?

dntknw.gif

And on the contrary, how someone behaves in one career is a very good indicator of how they will be in another. Why do you think the occupational past of a presidential candidate is a factor in elections? Either way, based on what we know, there is more evidence to suggest that he would be more likely to become a puppet than not. Unless of course, you have something else to offer? Cuz otherwise you're still just saying, "Well, you never know..."

The original point I was making was that you can't base someone's career in one field and say that is how they will be in another. And yes, your post DID imply that Pacquiao would be a puppet in the negative sense and your most recent post solidified that so I don't know what you're trying to argue there. You then went on to say that if Pacquiao can't speak for himself but continues to speak for others, than how can he be successful as a politician when he has to answer to public pressures? Well fuck, think about it. As a congressman he's the people's representatives of whatever region he's representing and therefore he is the VOICE OF THOSE PEOPLE. And in that sense, if it's what he's good at (as is what you're saying about Pacquiao being a good puppet), than wouldn't that make him a good politician? and that is where your argument when down the shitter
Snoop
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 20 2011, 09:08 PM) *
The original point I was making was that you can't base someone's career in one field and say that is how they will be in another. And yes, your post DID imply that Pacquiao would be a puppet in the negative sense and your most recent post solidified that so I don't know what you're trying to argue there. You then went on to say that if Pacquiao can't speak for himself but continues to speak for others, than how can he be successful as a politician when he has to answer to public pressures? Well fuck, think about it. As a congressman he's the people's representatives of whatever region he's representing and therefore he is the VOICE OF THOSE PEOPLE. And in that sense, if it's what he's good at (as is what you're saying about Pacquiao being a good puppet), than wouldn't that make him a good politician? and that is where your argument when down the shitter

And my point is that you can, or at the very least, make predictions on their performance in other careers, as it has been done in political elections throughout history. But again, why don't you actually come up with something that would indicate he wouldn't be a puppet politician? Or are you still clinging onto the hope that "Well, you never know..."

Oh wait, all politicians are puppets politicians right? So if politician = puppet politician, and Pacquiao = politician, then Pacquiao = puppet politician

So I ask you again, WTF are you disagreeing about?

mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 01:19 PM) *
And my point is that you can, or at the very least, make predictions on their performance in other careers, as it has been done in political elections throughout history. But again, why don't you actually come up with something that would indicate he wouldn't be a puppet politician? Or are you still clinging onto the hope that "Well, you never know..."

Oh wait, all politicians are puppets politicians right? So if politician = puppet politician, and Pacquiao = politician, then Pacquiao = puppet politician

So I ask you again, WTF are you disagreeing about?


...Jesus Christ, All I'm saying is that your negative depiction of Pacquiao as a puppet and your views on why Pac wouldn't be a good politician don't add up. I never brought up anything saying that Pacquiao was a puppet in the first place you did, but I merely used what you had to say against you. if he were a puppet like you say, then all your points against him being successful would actually make him a GOOD politician. And ask yourself, aren't most, if not all, politicians in democracies puppets and must answer to a higher authority anyway? System of checks and balances my friend. Or in Canada's case...a dependence on party support in order to remain in power. My argument started because I was saying that you can't measure the potential of his career as a politician if you're only basing it on his boxing career since there are SO many more variables that go into becoming a politician and u never know, Pac might be smarter than we all think and learn a thing or two between now and 10 years down the road when he's deeper into his career.
Snoop
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 20 2011, 09:26 PM) *
...Jesus Christ, All I'm saying is that your negative depiction of Pacquiao as a puppet and your views on why Pac wouldn't be a good politician don't add up. if he were a puppet like you say, then all your points against him being successful would actually make him a GOOD politician. And ask yourself, aren't most, if not all, politicians in democracies puppets and must answer to a higher authority anyway? System of checks and balances my friend. Or in Canada's case...a dependency on party support in order to remain in power. My argument started because I was saying that you can't measure the potential of his career as a politician if you're only basing it on his boxing career since there are SO many more variables that go into becoming a politician and u never know, Pac might be smarter than we all think and learn a thing or two between now and 10 years down the road when he's deeper into his career.

No they wouldn't, because you made the faulted allusion that Pacquiao being spoken for by his promotional team is somehow comparable to him representing the people of his country. IF you wanted to make the same comparison, him speaking for the masses of the Philippines would be like him speaking/making decisions for the masses of the boxing public. But clearly, he hasn't been doing that, otherwise we wouldn't keep seeing him in shitty fight after shitty fight since Cotto. (Unless of course, you thought Clottey, Margarito, Mosley and now JMM were/are all formidable opponents laugh.gif)

Him, acting on behalf of Top Rank, would be equivalent to him acting on behalf of the current Filipino government, meaning that all the current social disparities facing the country would be perpetuated with his faux position as [insert political office title].

And AGAIN, potential political performance have been evaluated based on performances in their previous careers throughout the history of elections. Why don't you address this point before continuing on your undirected diatribe.

I'll give you this: there is always the capacity of change. There is always the chance that Pacquiao will surprise us all and become the most super awesomest president that the country has ever seen, but unless you have something that would suggest that, you're still just saying, "Well, you never know..."
Hops
I was LMAO at you snoop. It political career's performance can be based on previous careers, then Pac would be a genius politician. He would ally himself with some analogies of Bob Arum and cherry pick on political opponents. I'm sure he's already doing that.
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 01:45 PM) *
No they wouldn't, because you made the faulted allusion that Pacquiao being spoken for by his promotional team is somehow comparable to him representing the people of his country. IF you wanted to make the same comparison, him speaking for the masses of the Philippines would be like him speaking/making decisions for the masses of the boxing public. But clearly, he hasn't been doing that, otherwise we wouldn't keep seeing him in shitty fight after shitty fight since Cotto. (Unless of course, you thought Clottey, Margarito, Mosley and now JMM were/are all formidable opponents laugh.gif)

Him, acting on behalf of Top Rank, would be equivalent to him acting on behalf of the current Filipino government, meaning that all the current social disparities facing the country would be perpetuated with his faux position as
[insert political office title].

And AGAIN, potential political performance have been evaluated based on performances in their previous careers throughout the history of elections. Why don't you address this point before continuing on your undirected diatribe.

I'll give you this: there is always the capacity of change. There is always the chance that Pacquiao will surprise us all and become the most super awesomest president that the country has ever seen, but unless you have something that would suggest that, you're still just saying, "Well, you never know..."

No. Him speaking for the Philippine people in politics and speaking for/making decisions for the masses of the boxing public are completely different and why your argument doesn't work.

He got elected as a Congressman to represent the Sarangani region and make political decisions which would best satisfy his constituency. The more successful he is at doing so will determine whether or not he gets re-elected or moves up to a higher position. Now, you say Manny is a puppet meaning he says and does whatever Bob Arum tells him to. He doesn't question his authority, and while many including yourself are angered by this, he puts his full trust into what Arum wants him to do. While you can't please em all, at the end of the day Bob Arum is responsible for helping launch manny pacquiao into superstardom. Now, as a Congressman Pacquiao doesn't have one person he's responsible for representing and answering to, but the entire Sarangani region. if he's a puppet in boxing which wuold then convert to him being a political puppet like you say, then wouldn't his commitment and ability to answer to and stay loyal to the people that determine his success make him a good Congressman? All I did here was take what you had to say AGAINST manny and say why it wouldn't work which is where I found fault in your argument.

You can't say Pacquiao being lined up for shitty fights will determine his lack of success in politics. You just can't, it doesn't make sense. It's ultimately upto his promoters and even if Manny did want to make the fights the people want, it is up to Bob Arum to amke that decision and as we all know, Arum could give a fuck what the people want.
Snoop
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 20 2011, 11:04 PM) *
No. Him speaking for the Philippine people in politics and speaking for/making decisions for the masses of the boxing public are completely different and why your argument doesn't work.

He got elected as a Congressman to represent the Sarangani region and make political decisions which would best satisfy his constituency. The more successful he is at doing so will determine whether or not he gets re-elected or moves up to a higher position. Now, you say Manny is a puppet meaning he says and does whatever Bob Arum tells him to. He doesn't question his authority, and while many including yourself are angered by this, he puts his full trust into what Arum wants him to do. While you can't please em all, at the end of the day Bob Arum is responsible for helping launch manny pacquiao into superstardom. Now, as a Congressman Pacquiao doesn't have one person he's responsible for representing and answering to, but the entire Sarangani region. if he's a puppet in boxing which wuold then convert to him being a political puppet like you say, then wouldn't his commitment and ability to answer to and stay loyal to the people that determine his success make him a good Congressman? All I did here was take what you had to say AGAINST manny and say why it wouldn't work which is where I found fault in your argument.

You can't say Pacquiao being lined up for shitty fights will determine his lack of success in politics. You just can't, it doesn't make sense. It's ultimately upto his promoters and even if Manny did want to make the fights the people want, it is up to Bob Arum to amke that decision and as we all know, Arum could give a fuck what the people want.

No. That's a possibility, but not the only possibility. You're just choosing to make it the only one for the sake of your argument. But you know what? This is all pointless because all politicians are puppets anyways.

laugh.gif

QUOTE
And AGAIN, potential political performance have been evaluated based on performances in their previous careers throughout the history of elections. Why don't you address this point before continuing on your undirected diatribe.

Go ahead. Keep avoiding the question.
The Ollie Reed Fan Club
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 07:20 PM) *
No. That's a possibility, but not the only possibility. You're just choosing to make it the only one for the sake of your argument. But you know what? This is all pointless because all politicians are puppets anyways.

laugh.gif


Go ahead. Keep avoiding the question.



I agree look how it is coming out in England as to the level of grovelling ALL the major party leaders had to do to Murdoch and News Corp.

As to Manny's boxing career I'll throw something out there. You know what, I don't think he cares too much for it anymore. I think he is happy to fight whomever they put in front of him and take the cash. He knows it gives his countrymen great pleasure and it sure doesn't hurt his popularity in the Phillipines. I'd almost go so far as to say he is now using the tailend of his boxing career to keep his profile and popularity high so that he can have a run at the Presidency sooner rather than later. And if that is the case then it's very cunning.

The monies accrued have also helped fund his costly politcal campaign. To me it's clear that this is where Manny's true ambitions lie.
SmartyBeardo
Dusty the Organ Grinder best have his quacks, numbers and contracts in a row.
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 04:20 PM) *
No. That's a possibility, but not the only possibility. You're just choosing to make it the only one for the sake of your argument. But you know what? This is all pointless because all politicians are puppets anyways.

laugh.gif


Go ahead. Keep avoiding the question.

smh you keep failing to see what's wrong with your own argument and instead choose to pick out one or two sentences out of what i'm taking from your own argument and using it against me as if it was my original point lol. I'm merely trying to explain to u using what you told me why i don't think ur argument would work. You were the one who said Pacquiao is a puppet and answers to and does whatever his bosses say he does. Well, in politics his bosses are the Sarangani people. If what you're saying is true, then that would make him a damn good congressman.

And yes, previous positions are judged and looked at WHEN THEY ALREADY HAVE BACKGROUNDS IN POLITICS, since there is already past information to measure the type of decisions they make and how they may shape their future political agenda. Do you honestly think that the majority of people solely based Schwarzenegger, Reagan, (potentially) Donald Trump, and Manny pacquiao's potential as politicians on their previous careers during their elections? There past careers and name value alone allowed them to run and gain media exposure, BUT there monetary resources and personal ties and support are what propelled them to their career as politicians.. not because people compare their past careers to their predictions of how they may perform in politics. and if success in previous careers are looked at to determine potential political careers like you say, then you can expect Manny to be a damn good politician because I doubt many would consider his boxing career and rise to fame in boxing anything of a failure. You may disagree on that, but 80+ million Filipinos back where he's currently in government would beg to differ.
Snoop
QUOTE (mexi-cutioner @ Jul 21 2011, 06:09 AM) *
smh you keep failing to see what's wrong with your own argument and instead choose to pick out one or two sentences out of what i'm taking from your own argument and using it against me as if it was my original point lol. I'm merely trying to explain to u using what you told me why i don't think ur argument would work. You were the one who said Pacquiao is a puppet and answers to and does whatever his bosses say he does. Well, in politics his bosses are the Sarangani people. If what you're saying is true, then that would make him a damn good congressman.

If you really believe his bosses will be "the people", then you are more naive than I previously thought. Of course, theoretically, politicians are public figures serving the public, but in reality, they answer to a hierarchy of power who, believe it or not, do not always act in the best interest of the masses. So if Manny is answering to anyone, it would be those in power, not the people. At the very least, the scenario I just laid out is just as possible as the one you laid out (actually more probable if we're going to base it on anything), so it actually doesn't hurt my argument in any way, which is something YOU'RE failing to see.

All I said in the beginning is that he'll most likely be a puppet for whatever regime is in power. Here's how we can end the discussion.

Me: "If Manny becomes president, he will most likely be a puppet president to whatever regime is in power, just like he is a puppet to the Arum regime now."

You: "When you think about it, all politicians in democracies are puppets."

That's it. If you want to talk about whether or not he'd be a good politician, it's another discussion. But why don't you start by telling me what you see that would suggest that he would be a good one? Otherwise, again, you're still clinging on to that sorryass hope that, "Well, you never know..."

QUOTE
And yes, previous positions are judged and looked at WHEN THEY ALREADY HAVE BACKGROUNDS IN POLITICS, since there is already past information to measure the type of decisions they make and how they may shape their future political agenda. Do you honestly think that the majority of people solely based Schwarzenegger, Reagan, (potentially) Donald Trump, and Manny pacquiao's potential as politicians on their previous careers during their elections? There past careers and name value alone allowed them to run and gain media exposure, BUT there monetary resources and personal ties and support are what propelled them to their career as politicians.. not because people compare their past careers to their predictions of how they may perform in politics. and if success in previous careers are looked at to determine potential political careers like you say, then you can expect Manny to be a damn good politician because I doubt many would consider his boxing career and rise to fame in boxing anything of a failure. You may disagree on that, but 80+ million Filipinos back where he's currently in government would beg to differ.

Yes, because those are standup quality examples of American politicians.

laugh.gif

Previous careers in other fields isn't everything (please tell me where I said it would be SOLE factor in predicting a career), but if it's all a voter has in determining a candidate's character, it will be what people will go off of.
mexi-cutioner
QUOTE (Snoop @ Jul 20 2011, 10:26 PM) *
If you really believe his bosses will be "the people", then you are more naive than I previously thought. Of course, theoretically, politicians are public figures serving the public, but in reality, they answer to a hierarchy of power who, believe it or not, do not always act in the best interest of the masses. So if Manny is answering to anyone, it would be those in power, not the people. At the very least, the scenario I just laid out is just as possible as the one you laid out (actually more probable if we're going to base it on anything), so it actually doesn't hurt my argument in any way, which is something YOU'RE failing to see.

All I said in the beginning is that he'll most likely be a puppet for whatever regime is in power. Here's how we can end the discussion.

Me: "If Manny becomes president, he will most likely be a puppet president to whatever regime is in power, just like he is a puppet to the Arum regime now."

You: "When you think about it, all politicians in democracies are puppets."

That's it. If you want to talk about whether or not he'd be a good politician, it's another discussion. But why don't you start by telling me what you see that would suggest that he would be a good one? Otherwise, again, you're still clinging on to that sorryass hope that, "Well, you never know..."


Yes, because those are standup quality examples of American politicians.

laugh.gif

Previous careers in other fields isn't everything (please tell me where I said it would be SOLE factor in predicting a career), but if it's all a voter has in determining a candidate's character, it will be what people will go off of.

Okay Snoop then what politicians in democracies aren't puppets? Like I've said 329843209458239048x fucking times, I never brought up the puppet idea, YOU brought it up and I then used it against you but you're so hardheaded that you choose to read my posts based on how YOU prefer to see it, not in the way that it is being laid out to u. You say Pacquiao is a puppet entailing it's a BAD thing and i'm saying you can't base your opinion on his potential politicial success on his previous career alone which is what you were doing. And you were saying him being apuppet is negative because he makes choices not in his own independent self-interest, but decisions that would make those he works for happy and to me that sounds like it could entail a GOOD democratic politician, not a bad one. And yes, Pacquiao answers to the higher ups, but he is accountable to the people he represents. His job is to provide the people with what they wants to the best of his ability NOT merely the higher ups. if he were to answer to the demands of the higher ups more than his people, it would gain him favor among the heads of the state, but he would be deemed a political failure by his people and more than likely voted out of office.

And you're the one that said that previous careers are used to measure potential success in office, and if that's what you're saying than Pacquiao, Schwarzenegger, Trump and Reagan would have all been as successful politicians as they were in their previous careers, but that isn't and may not be the case since you CAN'T COMPARE THE TWO AS THEY'RE COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT FIELDS!!!! Those men all made it into politics not because they were successful celebrities, but because their careers as celebrities allowed them to attain the monetary resources and connections necessary to succeed in an election
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.