Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Ideas for Reducing if Not Eliminating The Role of The Promoter in Boxing?
FightHype Community > BOXING HYPE > Boxing
Jack 1000
Boxing's only true house cleaning is that these power brokers of boxing are getting up their in age. Especially Arum, Sulaiman, and King. When they die. maybe, just maybe it might help boxing loosen its monopoly base of one fighter and one promoter tie-ins. The only problem still might be Delahoya's Golden Boy having a monopoly over boxing.

Maybe with them gone, boxing could start new. I wonder how effective it would be if fighters could promote themselves, without a promoter? Smaller guys would unfortunately likely still need a promoter. However, do Manny and Floyd need one? They can promote themselves because they make so much money and could finally work toward fighting each other.

How can boxing limit a promoter's power?

Jack
daprofessor
this is a great topic. i've thought about this before. i don't believe the answer is to get rid of the promoter or eliminate their roles. boxing needs to be promoted. i think they had it right in the old days. they allowed the chips to fall where they may so that if a fighter lost...the winners career doesn't get put on hold for stopping the house fighter. the winner keeps going. as it stands right now...hbo is guilty of force feeding us champions and trying to manufacture stars. that's why we see a lot of questionable decisions or straight up robberies. it's bad for the sport. showtime does this far less. it's why we always see upsets on showtime. they don't sign a fighter to a contract. if he's good...they bring him back. if he upsets the favorite...he's definitely coming back. on hbo...that's not always the case. look at pirog. the guy should be back on hbo...but he's m.i.a. ppl criticized don king because no matter who loss, he always won. he'd be in the favorites corner at the beginning of the fight...and if then the opponents corner if he upset the favorite. no matter what...the show went on. he had options on fighters just in case they beat his fighters. there are downsides to that as well...but he understood that the show had to go on. i don't believe arum or gbp understand that. they seem to be more vindictive when it comes to someone upsetting their house fighter.
Jack 1000
QUOTE (daprofessor @ May 22 2012, 02:03 PM) *
this is a great topic. i've thought about this before. i don't believe the answer is to get rid of the promoter or eliminate their roles. boxing needs to be promoted. i think they had it right in the old days. they allowed the chips to fall where they may so that if a fighter lost...the winners career doesn't get put on hold for stopping the house fighter. the winner keeps going. as it stands right now...hbo is guilty of force feeding us champions and trying to manufacture stars. that's why we see a lot of questionable decisions or straight up robberies. it's bad for the sport. showtime does this far less. it's why we always see upsets on showtime. they don't sign a fighter to a contract. if he's good...they bring him back. if he upsets the favorite...he's definitely coming back. on hbo...that's not always the case. look at pirog. the guy should be back on hbo...but he's m.i.a. ppl criticized don king because no matter who loss, he always won. he'd be in the favorites corner at the beginning of the fight...and if then the opponents corner if he upset the favorite. no matter what...the show went on. he had options on fighters just in case they beat his fighters. there are downsides to that as well...but he understood that the show had to go on. i don't believe arum or gbp understand that. they seem to be more vindictive when it comes to someone upsetting their house fighter.


Agree!

And I propose elimination of the long-term contract with any promoter or network. You fight for the best deals against the best fighters on say no more than a 1-2 fight deal. If the fight or fighter is good, you go for the deal that brings the matches the fans want to see. Now, that may not necessarily mean brings the most money. But the fights that the fans want to see.

Jack
pesticid
The amateur organization has to run pro boxing and has the same format for pro boxing so everybody fights everybody.
Jack 1000
QUOTE (pesticid @ May 22 2012, 03:48 PM) *
The amateur organization has to run pro boxing and has the same format for pro boxing so everybody fights everybody.


But no head-gear or computer scoring bullshit, or round-reductions!

Jack
bnoles4life
EXCELLENT TOPIC!!!! While this may be blasphemous to say (on this forum), but MMA's, specifically UFC's current model isn't a bad one. The only problem w/ that, is ONE promotion company can be just as disastrous as the current "free for all" model boxing currently has. Personally, I would like to see boxing model the 4 major sports (at least in the U.S.) and form a conglomerate. It's under ONE brand, to include unified rules in all STATES. Meaning, you can do "x, y, z" in Mississippi, but can only do "x & y" in California. Cut that bullshit out. The "conglomerate" schedules the fights, based on a transparent criteria (not some crazy by-law they conjured up during lunch) and the negotiations can be conducted by the fighters' manager and/or agent (obviously, w/ input from the fighter).

With this power, the conglomerate would take a "piece" off the top of the revenue for, not limited to:

Operational expenses
Fighter medical
Fighter pension
Incidentals

The fighter and his manager/agent, would work out training camp expenses (travel, food, lodging, etc.).

This clearly will NOT happen, but it's one way to minimize the power of the "promoter".
pesticid
QUOTE (Jack 1000 @ May 22 2012, 04:50 PM) *
But no head-gear or computer scoring bullshit, or round-reductions!

Jack


Agree and I am not sure if it's after the olympics but amateur boxing is going to be without headgear anyway and the scoring will be by using the 10 point system so it will be perfect.
BoxingStill#1
QUOTE (daprofessor @ May 22 2012, 03:03 PM) *
this is a great topic. i've thought about this before. i don't believe the answer is to get rid of the promoter or eliminate their roles. boxing needs to be promoted. i think they had it right in the old days. they allowed the chips to fall where they may so that if a fighter lost...the winners career doesn't get put on hold for stopping the house fighter. the winner keeps going. as it stands right now...hbo is guilty of force feeding us champions and trying to manufacture stars. that's why we see a lot of questionable decisions or straight up robberies. it's bad for the sport. showtime does this far less. it's why we always see upsets on showtime. they don't sign a fighter to a contract. if he's good...they bring him back. if he upsets the favorite...he's definitely coming back. on hbo...that's not always the case. look at pirog. the guy should be back on hbo...but he's m.i.a. ppl criticized don king because no matter who loss, he always won. he'd be in the favorites corner at the beginning of the fight...and if then the opponents corner if he upset the favorite. no matter what...the show went on. he had options on fighters just in case they beat his fighters. there are downsides to that as well...but he understood that the show had to go on. i don't believe arum or gbp understand that. they seem to be more vindictive when it comes to someone upsetting their house fighter.


I agree also.... especially with the king in different corners after fights..

Arum is notorious for this also,..ex: Cotto Marg 1... and rest assured if Bradley pulls the upset here he would have gained a new potential cash cow..

Idk if a fighter is actually capable limiting his promoters roll. The real problem a fighter needs advertisement, and advertising cost big $$$. Begining a career as a professional boxer is honestly a tough thing and you absolutely needs some type of sponsorship. Local fighters often solicit at around the way businesses, firehouses, and other organizations in hopes of gaining financial help. In return the fighter would create a booklet that would go along with the list of fights with the advertisements throughout the booklet. This is a useful way to gain interest is there isnt a promoter involved.

Thats just one reason why I think a promoter will always be present because people just dont have the means to sell themselves..

If your a sucessful fighter with a highly marketable name like (pac, floyed, delahoya, ect) and you retire.. whats the SMARTEST career to persue? Continuing fighting after your prime has proved to be horrible for you legacy in the long run I think. Boxing is all you know. And Promoting is the best way to make good profit. So why not? Thats another reason why there will always be promoters

In a perfect world every fighter could find his own way and make thier own matches and gain all the profit..... well, I feel it would never happen..

I feel they CAN be limited somehow... I will try and think of something and get back to the thread..
BoxingStill#1
QUOTE (bnoles4life @ May 22 2012, 04:55 PM) *
EXCELLENT TOPIC!!!! While this may be blasphemous to say (on this forum), but MMA's, specifically UFC's current model isn't a bad one. The only problem w/ that, is ONE promotion company can be just as disastrous as the current "free for all" model boxing currently has. Personally, I would like to see boxing model the 4 major sports (at least in the U.S.) and form a conglomerate. It's under ONE brand, to include unified rules in all STATES. Meaning, you can do "x, y, z" in Mississippi, but can only do "x & y" in California. Cut that bullshit out. The "conglomerate" schedules the fights, based on a transparent criteria (not some crazy by-law they conjured up during lunch) and the negotiations can be conducted by the fighters' manager and/or agent (obviously, w/ input from the fighter).

With this power, the conglomerate would take a "piece" off the top of the revenue for, not limited to:

Operational expenses
Fighter medical
Fighter pension
Incidentals

The fighter and his manager/agent, would work out training camp expenses (travel, food, lodging, etc.).

This clearly will NOT happen, but it's one way to minimize the power of the "promoter".


This is actually genuis.. lol...

Now, in laymens terms so the kiddies can understand
daprofessor
QUOTE (pesticid @ May 22 2012, 04:48 PM) *
The amateur organization has to run pro boxing and has the same format for pro boxing so everybody fights everybody.


which amateur program? they're all flawed imo.
daprofessor
QUOTE (bnoles4life @ May 22 2012, 04:55 PM) *
EXCELLENT TOPIC!!!! While this may be blasphemous to say (on this forum), but MMA's, specifically UFC's current model isn't a bad one. The only problem w/ that, is ONE promotion company can be just as disastrous as the current "free for all" model boxing currently has. Personally, I would like to see boxing model the 4 major sports (at least in the U.S.) and form a conglomerate. It's under ONE brand, to include unified rules in all STATES. Meaning, you can do "x, y, z" in Mississippi, but can only do "x & y" in California. Cut that bullshit out. The "conglomerate" schedules the fights, based on a transparent criteria (not some crazy by-law they conjured up during lunch) and the negotiations can be conducted by the fighters' manager and/or agent (obviously, w/ input from the fighter).

With this power, the conglomerate would take a "piece" off the top of the revenue for, not limited to:

Operational expenses
Fighter medical
Fighter pension
Incidentals

The fighter and his manager/agent, would work out training camp expenses (travel, food, lodging, etc.).

This clearly will NOT happen, but it's one way to minimize the power of the "promoter".



all mma/ufc did was attempt to reinvent the wheel. nothing that they do is new or foreign to boxing. the one promoter thing would be very bad for the fighters.
Jack 1000
QUOTE
EXCELLENT TOPIC!!!! While this may be blasphemous to say (on this forum), but MMA's, specifically UFC's current model isn't a bad one. The only problem w/ that, is ONE promotion company can be just as disastrous as the current "free for all" model boxing currently has. Personally, I would like to see boxing model the 4 major sports (at least in the U.S.) and form a conglomerate. It's under ONE brand, to include unified rules in all STATES. Meaning, you can do "x, y, z" in Mississippi, but can only do "x & y" in California. Cut that bullshit out. The "conglomerate" schedules the fights, based on a transparent criteria (not some crazy by-law they conjured up during lunch) and the negotiations can be conducted by the fighters' manager and/or agent (obviously, w/ input from the fighter).


+5! Yes! 5 stars! It is that good of an idea.

Even the Uniform Rules of the ABC (Association of Boxing Commissions) are not universally respected. You can't have Texas, the WBC, for example flip-flopping on the use of 4th and 8th round open scoring because the WBC requests it. Whether "public" or "private" it's a violation of the Unified Rules. It should matter how influential a promoter or sanctioning body is, or who the fighters are. No open scoring. Open scoring violates ABC bi-laws, so stop trying to fuck with ABC bi-laws Texas and the WBC by bringing it into fights when state commissions should have the free right to reject it at anytime. That's just one example.

California sometimes using unified rules and sometimes using their own state rules. Remember the bullshit with Paul Williams-Kermit Cintron? Rules have to be uniform and universally applied by a regional and respected governing body for boxing. You can't have XYZ allowed everyone, but Texas and California only allow X and Z.

And make sure that HBO/Showtime or whatever PPV outlet has communicated with the commission the rules and regulations that will be used during the fight! Many times they assume Unified Rules are in effect when they are not! And make sure the FIGHTERS know the rules and their corners! For example, Marco Rubio was never informed, or claimed that no one said that Texas approved private open scoring after the 4th and 8th round for the corners only in his fight with Chavez Jr. He assumed (correctly) that open scoring is prohibited in USA jurisdictions. (And in the UK as well.)

Chavez not having to take a post-fight drug test. The WBC and Texas each blaming the other for this violation.

Jack
daprofessor
QUOTE (Jack 1000 @ May 22 2012, 07:34 PM) *
+5! Yes! 5 stars! It is that good of an idea.

Even the Uniform Rules of the ABC (Association of Boxing Commissions) are not universally respected. You can't have Texas, the WBC, for example flip-flopping on the use of 4th and 8th round open scoring because the WBC requests it. Whether "public" or "private" it's a violation of the Unified Rules. It should matter how influential a promoter or sanctioning body is, or who the fighters are. No open scoring. Open scoring violates ABC bi-laws, so stop trying to fuck with ABC bi-laws Texas and the WBC by bringing it into fights when state commissions should have the free right to reject it at anytime. That's just one example.

California sometimes using unified rules and sometimes using their own state rules. Remember the bullshit with Paul Williams-Kermit Cintron? Rules have to be uniform and universally applied by a regional and respected governing body for boxing. You can't have XYZ allowed everyone, but Texas and California only allow X and Z.

And make sure that HBO/Showtime or whatever PPV outlet has communicated with the commission the rules and regulations that will be used during the fight! Many times they assume Unified Rules are in effect when they are not! And make sure the FIGHTERS know the rules and their corners! For example, Marco Rubio was never informed, or claimed that no one said that Texas approved private open scoring after the 4th and 8th round for the corners only in his fight with Chavez Jr. He assumed (correctly) that open scoring is prohibited in USA jurisdictions. (And in the UK as well.)Chavez not having to take a post-fight drug test. The WBC and Texas each blaming the other for this violation.

Jack


excellent point!!! kirkland/molina is another example!!!
Jack 1000
QUOTE (Jack 1000 @ May 22 2012, 06:34 PM) *
+5! Yes! 5 stars! It is that good of an idea.

Even the Uniform Rules of the ABC (Association of Boxing Commissions) are not universally respected. You can't have Texas, the WBC, for example flip-flopping on the use of 4th and 8th round open scoring because the WBC requests it. Whether "public" or "private" it's a violation of the Unified Rules. It shouldn't matter how influential a promoter or sanctioning body is, or who the fighters are. No open scoring. Open scoring violates ABC bi-laws, so stop trying to fuck with ABC bi-laws Texas and the WBC by bringing it into fights when state commissions should have the free right to reject it at anytime. That's just one example.

California sometimes using unified rules and sometimes using their own state rules. Remember the bullshit with Paul Williams-Kermit Cintron? Rules have to be uniform and universally applied by a regional and respected governing body for boxing. You can't have XYZ allowed everyone, but Texas and California only allow X and Z.

And make sure that HBO/Showtime or whatever PPV outlet has communicated with the commission the rules and regulations that will be used during the fight! Many times they assume Unified Rules are in effect when they are not! And make sure the FIGHTERS know the rules and their corners! For example, Marco Rubio was never informed, or claimed that no one said that Texas approved private open scoring after the 4th and 8th round for the corners only in his fight with Chavez Jr. He assumed (correctly) that open scoring is prohibited in USA jurisdictions. (And in the UK as well.)

Chavez not having to take a post-fight drug test. The WBC and Texas each blaming the other for this violation.

Jack


Correction-Above post should say "It SHOULDN'T matter how influential a promoter or sanctioning body is." (Not should.) It has been corrected.

Jack
bnoles4life
QUOTE (daprofessor @ May 22 2012, 05:08 PM) *
all mma/ufc did was attempt to reinvent the wheel. nothing that they do is new or foreign to boxing. the one promoter thing would be very bad for the fighters.



True story and thus why I said the "one promotor" would be jus' as disastrous as multiple promotors. However, where they do differ (read: are better than boxing) is in many of their match-ups make sense. Moreover, their mandatories are actually exercised. Rankings actually matter in MMA/UFC. In boxing, the champ may fight the #6 ranked fighter in his division....wtf is the #1 ranked fighter in the division doing? Washing his hair? Doing taxes? Don't get me wrong, everything that glitters isn't gold, but dayum...enough already.


Lastly, their version of Floyd vs. Manny (Silva/Sonnen) has already happened and the rematch is set for this summer. IMO, this should shame the hell outta boxing.
Cshel86
Where there's contenders, competition, and money involved...there will ALWAYS be a high chance of monopoly. The questions is, whose going to be #1 and at what cost? There will always be a promoter, fighter, manager, family member, co-worker, etc., that will either be covertly or overtly aggressive in their intentions to be #1.

Of course you have the overtly aggressive promoters like Arum, who make it painfully obvious that they're "out to win" and have no shame in doing so. He's controlling, manipulative, and shows disdain when he's figured out by the public.

Then you have guys like GBP and DiBella Promotions who are covertly aggressive promoters who are "out to win", but they come off as "wanting to give the fans what they want" just to win the approval of the public, but I'm sure they'd do the same as Arum if they were in his position.

Hotsauce
i remember sugar ray leonard saying u never hear the word contender in boxing anymore
Franchize
Just a suggestion. The first thing that needs to happen, for the sport in general is the need for some type of uniformity. A unifomed governing body could:
1. Eliminate some of these alphabet belts thus not allowing promoters to market their undeserving fighters as "world champions"
2. Install a universally adopted code of ethics, rules and penalties. This consequently disallows promoters to wash stuff under the table when their fighters get caught
3 .Have a set of judges that are voted in by said governing body
4. Determine and enforce mandatories
5. Establish penalties for unfair practices by promoters
6. Develop workshops for fighters, much like the NFL rookie symposium, that fighters attend to become more business savvy and more aware of the financial aspect of the fight game .

I think until boxers become more business savvy, there wil always be someone there to take advantage of them, whether it's a promoter or not.
daprofessor
QUOTE (bnoles4life @ May 23 2012, 09:42 AM) *
True story and thus why I said the "one promotor" would be jus' as disastrous as multiple promotors. However, where they do differ (read: are better than boxing) is in many of their match-ups make sense. Moreover, their mandatories are actually exercised. Rankings actually matter in MMA/UFC. In boxing, the champ may fight the #6 ranked fighter in his division....wtf is the #1 ranked fighter in the division doing? Washing his hair? Doing taxes? Don't get me wrong, everything that glitters isn't gold, but dayum...enough already.


Lastly, their version of Floyd vs. Manny (Silva/Sonnen) has already happened and the rematch is set for this summer. IMO, this should shame the hell outta boxing.


mma/ufc turnover is much higher than in boxing. it takes several years to develop talent in boxing. boxers don't usually get to the olympics or the professional world championship level with minimal experience. what ppl do not realize is there are large amounts of money spent to get the fighters to the highest levels. so in most cases the ppl who spent that money are looking to get a return on their investment. that's where/why we get match ups that are put on hold...or don't happen when they're supposed to. the issues with boxing (all of its sanctioning/governing bodies...the mandatories and how they even get to be in that position....the networks and how they steer their guys to the "top" so rapidly....the boxing media...who often gets used as a tool to steer everyones opinion on everything) is ten fold. mma/ufc is one organization that is very small in comparison to boxing and doesn't have to deal with the complexities because it is so new and small in comparison.

i know who silva is...never heard of sonnen. what happened to silva vs gsp being the floyd vs pac of mma?
daprofessor
QUOTE (Franchize @ May 23 2012, 11:11 AM) *
Just a suggestion. The first thing that needs to happen, for the sport in general is the need for some type of uniformity. A unifomed governing body could:
1. Eliminate some of these alphabet belts thus not allowing promoters to market their undeserving fighters as "world champions"
2. Install a universally adopted code of ethics, rules and penalties. This consequently disallows promoters to wash stuff under the table when their fighters get caught
3 .Have a set of judges that are voted in by said governing body
4. Determine and enforce mandatories
5. Establish penalties for unfair practices by promoters
6. Develop workshops for fighters, much like the NFL rookie symposium, that fighters attend to become more business savvy and more aware of the financial aspect of the fight game .

I think until boxers become more business savvy, there wil always be someone there to take advantage of them, whether it's a promoter or not.


the minute a fighter/promoter/manager feels that the new system doesn't benefit them or discriminates against them...there will be someone branching off to do their own thing...and we'll be right back where we started. boxing is a world wide sport. our world isn't governed by one entity....i seriously doubt boxing will ever be governed by one entity either.
daprofessor
QUOTE (Hotsauce @ May 23 2012, 10:55 AM) *
i remember sugar ray leonard saying u never hear the word contender in boxing anymore


i remember ray leonard being a big part of what was wrong with boxing.
Franchize
QUOTE (daprofessor @ May 23 2012, 05:03 PM) *
i remember ray leonard being a big part of what was wrong with boxing.

I remember him having more stipulations for the Hagler fight than Floyd could dream of.
Franchize
QUOTE (daprofessor @ May 23 2012, 05:00 PM) *
the minute a fighter/promoter/manager feels that the new system doesn't benefit them or discriminates against them...there will be someone branching off to do their own thing...and we'll be right back where we started. boxing is a world wide sport. our world isn't governed by one entity....i seriously doubt boxing will ever be governed by one entity either.

Uniformity doesnt have to mean you have to have a dictatorship. Countries have different forms of currency but theres a way of determining which ones are worth more. There should be an agreed upon set of rules, regulations and penalties to consider yourself a pro fighter. If it only extends to the US, fine...but then whoever doesnt comply, foreign or not, cant box on American soil.
daprofessor
QUOTE (Franchize @ May 23 2012, 07:45 PM) *
I remember him having more stipulations for the Hagler fight than Pac could dream of.


fixed. smile.gif
daprofessor
QUOTE (Franchize @ May 23 2012, 07:59 PM) *
Uniformity doesnt have to mean you have to have a dictatorship. Countries have different forms of currency but theres a way of determining which ones are worth more. There should be an agreed upon set of rules, regulations and penalties to consider yourself a pro fighter. If it only extends to the US, fine...but then whoever doesnt comply, foreign or not, cant box on American soil.



and that's where the problem lies...ppl do not want to be dictated to and there is always someone who will feel the rules are unfair or should not apply. it's nice to have options.

look at sturm. the guy comes to u.s. soil and is blatantly robbed when he fought dlh. can u blame him for not wanting to ever come back? he's been sitting on that title in germany for quite some time now.
Franchize
QUOTE (daprofessor @ May 24 2012, 12:31 PM) *
and that's where the problem lies...ppl do not want to be dictated to and there is always someone who will feel the rules are unfair or should not apply. it's nice to have options.

look at sturm. the guy comes to u.s. soil and is blatantly robbed when he fought dlh. can u blame him for not wanting to ever come back? he's been sitting on that title in germany for quite some time now.


Yea but that's because there wasn't a proper governing body. If you have a neutral body with nothing to gain, you lessen these bogus scorecards. Much like with VADA and drug testing. Is it going completely quell the dilemma? probably not. But I'll take my chances over judges with no real horse in the race. Same thing with the situation with Magarito getting a license to fight. It shouldnt be as simple as being able to go to another state.
daprofessor
QUOTE (Franchize @ May 24 2012, 02:38 PM) *
Yea but that's because there wasn't a proper governing body. If you have a neutral body with nothing to gain, you lessen these bogus scorecards. Much like with VADA and drug testing. Is it going completely quell the dilemma? probably not. But I'll take my chances over judges with no real horse in the race. Same thing with the situation with Magarito getting a license to fight. It shouldnt be as simple as being able to go to another state.


ur right. sometimes the pessimist in me takes over. laugh.gif it has to start somewhere. vada is a great example of that. i'm not totally sold on it because of the voluntary thing...but i believe it works to a certain extent. maybe ppl will be shamed into doing the right thing? but then i remember guys like bob arum, margarito, texas boxing commission....and plenty of others have absolutely no shame. laugh.gif
mgrover
i think someone should take bob arum outside and put a bullet in his head, and that's that. after that you can watch the world of boxing open up. The walls separating top rank fighters and golden boy fighters will fall. The minor boxing promoters like Lou DiBella all seems like fairly stand up guys just trying to get the best for there fighters. Sure some need to retire, good ol Don King.
Cheesey1
Since I like hearing the sound of my own voice, I'll say it again (well I guess "since I like reading my own thoughts" is more accurate).

The FIFA model (soccer) is the best model for boxing. There's an international governing body, which co-ordinates with and supercedes every local body from CAF (in Africa) to UEFA (in Europe) and MLS (North America), as well as the Asian football body.

Of course some changes will need to be made e.g. obviously you don't have teams in boxing, but IMO the general concept would work. FIFA isn't perfect and they've had their fair share of corruption issues, but overall, the FIFA model is a clear success.
bnoles4life
QUOTE (Cheesey1 @ May 25 2012, 09:11 AM) *
Since I like hearing the sound of my own voice, I'll say it again (well I guess "since I like reading my own thoughts" is more accurate).

The FIFA model (soccer) is the best model for boxing. There's an international governing body, which co-ordinates with and supercedes every local body from CAF (in Africa) to UEFA (in Europe) and MLS (North America), as well as the Asian football body.

Of course some changes will need to be made e.g. obviously you don't have teams in boxing, but IMO the general concept would work. FIFA isn't perfect and they've had their fair share of corruption issues, but overall, the FIFA model is a clear success.


Good post, Cheesey!!!! That's exactly the direction I was going, though admittedly, FIFA didn't come to mind. Boxing, particularly in the U.S., would operate under ONE governing body, but with a component in each state (or at least one that desires one...I mean, not many fights in Montana).

Oh yeah......it ain't easy.....
Cshel86
QUOTE (mgrover @ May 25 2012, 08:15 AM) *
i think someone should take bob arum outside and put a bullet in his head, and that's that.

Kinda harsh...but 'nuff said!
Cheesey1
QUOTE (bnoles4life @ May 25 2012, 07:25 PM) *
Good post, Cheesey!!!! That's exactly the direction I was going, though admittedly, FIFA didn't come to mind. Boxing, particularly in the U.S., would operate under ONE governing body, but with a component in each state (or at least one that desires one...I mean, not many fights in Montana).

Oh yeah......it ain't easy.....

Thanks man.

.....bein' Cheesey.
dhoward126
Don't know if this has been said, but a boxing union as well as a boxing commissioner like Roger Goodell (or even better...Roger Goodell) would make that shit turn quick.
bnoles4life
QUOTE (dhoward126 @ May 28 2012, 12:11 AM) *
Don't know if this has been said, but a boxing union as well as a boxing commissioner like Roger Goodell (or even better...Roger Goodell) would make that shit turn quick.



Danny....while it hasn't been put in those exact terms, but many of us agree having ONE central figure (read: board, body, etc.) would be a HUGE...no, GARGANTUAN step in the direction of reform.
sduck
I think by this point, the only way to remove Promoters is if a single promoter monopolizes on its competition. Where a promoter gets to the point where hes controlling and managing almost all the fighters. The only other option I see is if the promoters join together, but I don't see that happening.
Cshel86
Roger Goodell for President! The Boxing President that is! That motherfucker doesn't care how talented you are or how much money you bring to the sport, he'll sit your ass down. Im sure he'd do a nasty number on these promoters, and bring some kind of stability.
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.