'Boxing monopoly': Pros and Cons. Do you want one?

[boliodogs]

I am totally against it. I think the quality of boxers would go way down. Pro boxing is a hard way to make a living but the chance to make lots of money is there for a talented boxer so they fight. If the money they can make is reduced a huge amount they won't continue to fight. I am all for the boxers getting maximum dollar. They deserve it. That guy Dana White seems to be in total control of his sport. He pays his superstars peanuts compared to what top pro boxers make. He tells his best fighters who they will fight and when they will fight and how much they will be paid and there is nothing they can do about it other than quit the sport. I don't want pro boxing to become like that and I don't think it ever will.

[Barcham]

Definitely NOT. Boxing is not a sport that is suited to the MLB, NHL, NFL, NBA etc... style of league or control. It is an International sport with fighters coming from all over the world. It does not even function the same style as team sports do as there is no 'season' for boxing and no local 'teams' and boxers do not fight multiple times per week, lucky if they fight more than twice per year in most cases.

The most that I would ask for would be ONE major body to oversee the sport and control things like drug testing and to ensure the officials are qualified and actually know and enforce the rules of the sport. Maybe a WORLD BOXING COMMISSION and one local body for North America, another for the EU and one for Asia. Keep the state commissions as extensions of that major governing body. But enough of state commissions with their own interpretation of the rules of the sport. Have one top level body that can oversee and override any decision.

As for the sanctioning bodies, they should be permitted ONE title per division and ONE Interim or mandatory challenger declared per division. That's it, that's all. They should be forced to enforce their mandatory rules NO MATTER who the champion happens to be. All titles should be defended a minimum of TWICE per year with one defense being against their mandatory.

There is much that needs cleaning up, but a UFC style league is not the right way to do it in my opinion.

[Tom Cruise]

I am totally against it. I think the quality of boxers would go way down. Pro boxing is a hard way to make a living but the chance to make lots of money is there for a talented boxer so they fight. If the money they can make is reduced a huge amount they won't continue to fight. I am all for the boxers getting maximum dollar. They deserve it. That guy Dana White seems to be in total control of his sport. He pays his superstars peanuts compared to what top pro boxers make. He tells his best fighters who they will fight and when they will fight and how much they will be paid and there is nothing they can do about it other than quit the sport. I don't want pro boxing to become like that and I don't think it ever will.

Its interesting though. Obviously UFC fighters arent making huge money in comparison to the globally popular Boxing stars are. But they are making much more money than they would have been if the UFC never existed and MMA was still a minor sport.

If boxing had the same drive and abition that Ufc has had over the last 10 years i feel confident that fighters would see some benefits, whether those benefits would be in line with how much the sport grows is a different matter.

[Eff Pandas]

the sanctioning bodies in their current form are a joke, that's for sure. a monopoly would be preferable in theory but it really depends on the organisation behind it being essentially benevolent and having the boxers' and the fans' best interests at heart

100%. The biggest pro of a centralized power in boxing would be one world champion & one top ten list for each division. Its completely insane we got about 6 alphabet group "world" champions & up to 40 "top ten" guys in each weight division.

[Eff Pandas]

Definitely NOT. Boxing is not a sport that is suited to the MLB, NHL, NFL, NBA etc... style of league or control. It is an International sport with fighters coming from all over the world. It does not even function the same style as team sports do as there is no 'season' for boxing and no local 'teams' and boxers do not fight multiple times per week, lucky if they fight more than twice per year in most cases.

Soccer isn't a international sport? MMA isn't an international sports? Baseball, football, hockey & basketball aren't international sports? Nearly every sport is an international sport to some degree. Football might be the worst example of the things I've mentioned cuz I'm not sure that American football is popular anywhere like it is in the US, but nearly every other sport is highly international & still usually have one or several leagues in different countries.

You do got a valid argument with the season thing, but thats not a deal breaker. MMA doesn't have a season either, but they got one major league that has centralized power. A league isn't so much about a season as having a centralized power structure that can make beneficial decisions for the sport as a whole. One of the biggest negatives for any sport without a league is its like a country with a bunch of warlords. You got 6 major players trying to run things that are best for their particular regime & those are seldom the same. Therefore you got guys trying to pull things 6 different ways & thats never gonna be productive for the sport as a whole.

[jas]

Hell no

Unless it's me controlling things because I think I'm actually a good match maker

[Eff Pandas]

I am totally against it. I think the quality of boxers would go way down. Pro boxing is a hard way to make a living but the chance to make lots of money is there for a talented boxer so they fight. If the money they can make is reduced a huge amount they won't continue to fight. I am all for the boxers getting maximum dollar. They deserve it. That guy Dana White seems to be in total control of his sport. He pays his superstars peanuts compared to what top pro boxers make. He tells his best fighters who they will fight and when they will fight and how much they will be paid and there is nothing they can do about it other than quit the sport. I don't want pro boxing to become like that and I don't think it ever will.

I'm not sure how the quality of boxer goes down. I think it stays the same & the quality of matchups goes WAY up. If you had the top 500 boxers from the elite level to the promising up & coming guys all under one Elite Boxing League it would be great. Those top guys would still make millions. The top up & coming guys in this league would probably make more than they would make right now as things stand. So Pacquiao, Mayweather, Cotto & Canelo would probably be making less, but most guys would be making more.

I guess from a lb for lb outlook more guys would make more, but they would also fight harder guys would be a net negative for fighters. Again though from the outlook of whats best for the sport guys fighting competitive matchups each time out is better for boxing than Mayweather vs Berto (assuming that happens), GGG vs Monroe (although good performance by Monroe), Kovalev vs the guy who's heart is gonna get pulled out of his chest & eaten tonight & all the other top guys fighting lesser opposition that happen all the time.

[Eff Pandas]

Agreed...and yes it will be Ideal to have one single champion per division,but imagine if someone like Haymon or White are the ones deciding who gets it?..It happens with UFC,after a 5-2 record they sometimes get a chance at the belt and people claim its because the competition is so good,I disagree but that is another topic.Lomachenko I really like the guy,but to have a shot at the belt EVEN after he lost is crazy to me,it doesn't matter if he has 1,000 amateur wins,you should wait in line..Once again a Monopoly in no way is good,is some sort of dictatorship.

I distrust & dislike Arum like many here distrust & dislike Haymon, but I'd rather have their be a elite boxing league with Arum as its first CEO &/or "dictator" as you say, then have there be the cluster**** of promoter/tv channel/advisor "warlords" like we got now moneygrabing in the sport. Nearly every sport has a so called "monopoly" or "dictatorship" going on. Its a good thing. If you got people pulling things in one direction for the betterment of their sport its always gonna be better than having people pulling things in 6+ directions for their own version of whats better for the sport & that usually involves what makes them the most money. That sounds like the US congress & their favorability ranking is like 13%.

[Barcham]

Its interesting though. Obviously UFC fighters arent making huge money in comparison to the globally popular Boxing stars are. But they are making much more money than they would have been if the UFC never existed and MMA was still a minor sport.

If boxing had the same drive and abition that Ufc has had over the last 10 years i feel confident that fighters would see some benefits, whether those benefits would be in line with how much the sport grows is a different matter.

How do you know that? Maybe someone else would have come along and moved MMA into the mainstream. Maybe it would have developed on it's own with help from boxing promoters and managers. MAYBE Haymon would have gotten involved in MMA instead of boxing!

The thing is that UFC started out with modest payrolls, they are still very modest in comparison to boxing. PBC has started out with payrolls that are MUCH HIGHER than UFC or even existing purses in the boxing world. They should have started out with modest payrolls, building them up as they went along. This would have kept costs down and given them room to build and grow. As it stands now, what do you do when you start out paying fighters double or more than their real market value? You have already cut your own throat.

[Eff Pandas]

I also don't think it's possible. One of the reasons UFC is so big is that MMA as a big spectator sport is so new it was easy for Big time boxing has been around for a few hundred years.

For the best fights to happen, they're going to have to work together. And that isn't likely.

I think when something has reached such a low point you can do a lot of things despite how long its been around.

A guy signing 200+ fighters isn't normal ****. A guy pulling 8 or w/e TV deals isn't normal ****. I think a lot of the stuff Haymon is doing right now is some takeover type ****. If he can or can't finish the job is up for debate & will be decided over the next several years, but I think if Haymon doesn't do it someone else will learn from his mistakes & do it better next time.

Boxing has such a low barrier for entry, there is a billion+ at stake each year & its a huge cluster**** with 6 champions right now its ripe for a takeover, restructuring & resurgence by someone smart enough to do that.