Quote Originally Posted by Ron Swanson View Post
Quote Originally Posted by TitoFan View Post
Geeeez..... tough crowd here as always. Let the Thurman's and Pacquiao's fight for crying out loud. Contrary to popular belief, not EVERY fight in boxing can be the Best Against the Best. If it was, we'd run out of fights to make pretty quickly. I'm not a fan of marinating, especially since Fishnets was the one who coined and made that term famous. But the polar opposite, where no one is given a break to fight no one but the very best, is a bit naive and at best unrealistic. I myself look forward to this fight. Spence and Crawford will be there waiting at the end.

What’s naive is to pretend anyone is asking everyone to fight the best NEXT. Name 1 fight in boxing that is scheduled, hell I’ll be generous and add what has happened so far this year, where the number 1 guy fought or is fighting the number 2. It doesn’t happen, so nobody is demanding the best fight the best always. The sport loses ground every day in America because Thurman has hid from Spence for years, because hiding in plain sight is so common. Because if that hiding and his opponents hiding is mentioned, boxing fans are so broken that they say it is naive to want best vs the best. UFC has no issues finding opponents, they must have such a deep pool, no wait it’s not 1/100th of boxing’s. If the best do fight the best the excitement for the next guy grows, then the next. Fight the best SOMETIMES.

It wasn’t that long ago it happened in boxing, FFS Pacquiao did it, this era can too. Don’t be broken by the nonsense.

You must dislike the WBSS. For that matter, you must dislike any type of playoff bracket in sports. Why bother, right? Just pick the consensus #1 and #2 and to hell with the rest. We save on games... we save on time... we save on drama. Hey... we would ALL like Crawford-Spence on a weekly basis. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way. Huge fights need to be....... "worked up to". Strange concept, I know... but it's what playoffs are based on. There's only one #1 and only one #2 in any division (save the alphabet complications). Don't know about you... but it's ok by me if #1 fights #4 while #2 fights #3, on the way to having #1 against #2 (if nothing goes awry in the process).

Thurman? Yeah... he's a ducker. But not everyone who doesn't IMMEDIATELY attempt Mt. Everest while eschewing all other peaks is a ducker. UFC is a shitty example. Remember, they're the relative new kid on the block to boxing... and they can't afford to be farting around with #3's and #4's. They need to sell and they need to sell now.

Pacquiao? Yeah... he did it alright. That's why he's a bonafide ATG. No qualms on that.

Difference here is... I prefer the traditional working your way to the top. You obviously prefer start at the top and pick up the chips from there. Meh..... different strokes and all that.